UK TAXPAYERS still have years to wait before recouping the money they put in to save Royal Bank of Scotland at the height of the financial crisis, nearly a decade after it was bailed out by the UK Government, analysts have warned.
Its position is in stark contrast to Lloyds Banking Group, owner of Bank of Scotland, where the government’s shareholding has been steadily cut to less than five per cent in the years since its bailout.
Laith Khalaf, senior analyst at stockbroker Hargreaves Lansdown, said: “We’re still a long way from the point at which RBS is a fully private bank in the way that Lloyds is almost now.
“RBS is a long way behind in terms of its recovery programme, but it probably had a lot more problems to start with as well.”
State-backed Royal Bank looks to have lifted a major barrier on its road to recovery following proposals submitted by the Treasury to the European Commission, under which the bank would no longer have to sell its 300 Williams & Glyn branches.
The bank, which was ordered to offload the branches as a condition of its £45 billion bailout in 2008 and 2009, is now proposing to spend £750 million on measures to boost competition in the UK banking sector, as an alternative to selling the network. That comes after Royal Bank incurred £1.8bn of costs in its ultimately doomed attempts to sell the branches and launch them as a standalone bank.
In total, the Williams & Glyn issue is expected to cost Royal Bank up to £2.55 billion.
While analysts expect the EC to accept the proposals, despite reports it could lead to be clash between Europe and the Treasury, experts warn there are many more hurdles to clear for the bank.
Analysts said yesterday that it will be some years before Royal Bank will return to private hands. Should those forecasts prove correct, the bank will have spent at least a decade in public ownership before the government’s stake is sold off.
Mr Khalaf said the prospect of the government selling shares in Royal Bank is remote because its share price remains 50 per cent below the break-even point for the public’s investment. The break-even point for the UK government’s stake in Royal Bank is around 497p per share. Last night the share price closed down nearly three per cent at 251.8p.
Mr Khalaf said: “Realistically, for shares to double in price from where they are today is going to take some considerable time.
“If the government wanted to, it could sell its shareholding in the next few weeks, but it would have to do that at a massive loss. The share price needs to climb quite significantly before the Chancellor is going to be minded to offload those shares.”
He added: “We’re still a long way from the point at which RBS is a fully private bank in the way that Lloyds is almost now. RBS is a long way behind in terms of its recovery programme, and it probably had a lot more problems to start with as well.”
Michael Hewson, chief market analyst at CMC Markets, said that even if the European Commission accepts the Treasury’s proposals over Williams & Glyn, there are still major issues for the Royal Bank leadership to face.
He cited the expected multi-billion dollar fine from the US Department of Justice over the mis-selling of mortgage-backed securities, legal action from shareholders over the bank’s rights issue of 2008, and the possibility of further investigations into the activities of the bank’s Global Restructuring Group in the wake of the financial crisis. The bank announced in January that it had set aside a further $3.8bn (£3.1bn) ahead of the expected fine from the US authorities over the mis-selling of mortgage-backed securities. Chancellor Phillip Hammond cited the US investigation and the Williams & Glyn disposal as two of the biggest barriers to the privatisation of Royal Bank before Christmas.
Asked whether he thought Royal Bank, which remains 72 per cent owned by UK taxpayers, will remain in public hands for some years to come, Mr Hewson replied: “I would say so.”
“Now that Williams & Glyn has been put to one side, that’s good. We don’t have to worry about that. But that is not to say we don’t have to worry about a whole host of other factors.
“[The] first factor [is] the US Department of Justice. They need to settle that, and settle it at a level that allows them to start to think about drawing a line under the legacy issues.
“As it is, this year we are going to see another loss, [and] there is potential that we could see another loss next year as well, because ultimately we don’t know what the level of the fine will be, so they may have to make extra provision for that.”
Analysts said they had some sympathy with the bank’s leadership given the extent of the legacy issues they have had to work through. Graham Campbell, chief executive of Edinburgh-based Saracen Fund Managers, said: “It has been a long, long slog. The untangling of Williams & Glyn has been such a huge diversion for management, and it’s an incredibly difficult task.
“The recovery of RBS has been going for eight years now. This is hopefully the final leg of it.”
Highlighting the complexity of the problems the bank’s leadership have faced, Mr Campbell added: “It’s been frustrating for investors, but also I feel for [the] management.”
A spokesman for Royal Bank of Scotland said: “The timing of any future share sale is a matter for the UKFI (UK Financial Investments) and the Treasury. If agreed this proposal [to the EC regarding Williams & Glyn] would deliver an outcome on our EC State Aid divestment obligations more quickly and with more certainty than undertaking a difficult and complex sale and would provide much needed certainty for customers and staff.”
Mr Hammond said in January that the Treasury viewed the government’s stake in Royal Bank as a “long-term asset.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article