Friday, July 5, 2013
By NEIL HARTNELL
Tribune Business Editor
nhartnell@tribunemedia.net
The Bahamian commercial banking is facing an estimated 169 per cent increase in its total tax burden to $43 million, Tribune Business can reveal, a development that could result in further lending and economic contractions.
Calculations shared with this newspaper by a Bahamian banker, on condition that they remained anonymous, noted that under the pre-existing asset-based fee structure, the Government earned around $16.05 million in revenue from the commercial banking industry in 2012.
Now, with the addition of a 3 per cent Business Licence fee levied on a bank’s interest and fee-based income, the banker’s calculations showed this would have increased the Government’s 2012 tax take by more than $27 million.
Describing this ‘more than doubling’ of the industry’s tax contributions as “an enormous burden”, the banker said it was likely to further reduce commercial bank “lending appetite”.
This, in turn, would inhibit lending to businesses for expansion and investment, they suggested, further harming the Bahamas’ economic growth and recovery prospects.
Noting that Bahamian commercial bank returns on equity capital were the lowest in the region, the banker said the individual banks might respond by increasing consumer fees and charges - as Scotiabank (Bahamas_ has already done - or cutting overhead, such as staff numbers.
“The idea that nothing is going to change is foolishness. It’s amazing to me,” the banker said of the Government being seemingly oblivious to the reaction to its tax increases.
“Everybody is going to have to do something. The banks are going to have to go back to the drawing board and say: ‘How are we going to make up for this?’.”
Acknowledging that the Government was “desperate for revenue”, the banker added: “They’ll force the banks to review their expense structures and what they do.
“We’re in a period of retrenchment, not expansion, and forced austerity will have an impact on the economy”.
The banker also pointed out that the 3 per cent Business Licence fee, due to being simply applied ‘across the board’, was a regressive, “not progressive”, tax.
They explained to Tribune Business it would have a “disproportionate” effect on the smaller Bahamian-owned banks, all of which are publicly traded, as their relative lack of economies of scale meant they would be “hit much harder”.
A perfect example is Bank of the Bahamas International. Under the new tax regime, its 2012 net income of $1.213 million would have been dwarfed by a $3.243 million total tax burden, plunging it - and its Bahamian shareholders - into a multi-million dollar loss if preventative action was not taken.
And, ironically, Bank of the Bahamas International is 51 per cent majority-owned by the Government, via a combination of the Treasury and National Insurance Board, making this a classic case of ‘shooting yourself in the foot’.
Based on the calculations sent to Tribune Business, these are the existing and new commercial bank tax payments based on each institution’s 2012 results.
CIBC FirstCaribbean - From $3.75 million to $9.734 million
Commonwealth Bank - From $1.8 million to $7.072 million
Scotiabank (Bahamas) - From $3.75 million to $8.383 million
FINCO - From $1.2 million to $3.289 million
Bank of the Bahamas - From $1.2 million to $3.244 million
Fidelity Bank - From $600,000 to $1.708 million
Royal Bank of Canada (estimated) - From $3.75 million to $9.734 million
As a percentage of average annual net income between 2007-2012, the banker’s calculations show the new industry tax burden would account for 65 per cent of Bank of the Bahamas’ annual net income.
It would also have eaten up an average 55 per cent of Fidelity Bank’s net profits, and 27 per cent and 21 per cent,, respectively, of Scotiabank (2011-2012 only) and FINCO’s bottom line.
But the commercial bank industry is unlikely to elicit much sympathy from the Bahamian public, though, given the widely-held notion - fostered by politicians - that the sector has made enormous profits “on the backs of the Bahamian people”.
There is also fairly widespread agreement that the commercial banking sector - especially the three Canadian-owned banks, Royal Bank of Canada, CIBC FirstCaribbean and Scotiabank (Bahamas) - has been ‘under-taxed’.
The real danger, though, may not be the imposition of a 3 per cent Business Licence by itself but the context in which this is taking place.
Burdened by $1.285 billion in total loan arrears, with more than one in every $5 lent in default (some $681 million is mortgage arrears), the banking industry has also been squeezed by $408 million in enforced loan loss provisions.
Added to this is the further uncertainty created by the Government’s proposed Mortgage Relief Plan and Homeowners Protection Bill, the latter of which threatens to fundamentally alter the banks’ risk-reward calculation on mortgages - and not for the better.
Any further pull back in lending would deprive the Bahamian economy of much-needed revival juice, in the shape of liquidity and credit, while also depressing the vital housing, real estate and construction industries.
Summing it all up, the banker said in a written note to Tribune Business: “I am not sure that the boffins at the Ministry of Finance did their analysis using individual bank size and results. The implications are evident - the new tax is 169 per cent over what the banks were paying.
“This enormous burden is on top of the massive provisions banks are booking for delinquent loans. The policymakers are focused on the money banks make, but they fail to take into account how much the banks make based on the risk capital that they have deployed.
“The percentage return on equity capital is lower than elsewhere in the Caribbean.”
Data provided to Tribune Business shows that the average return to bank shareholders between 2007-2012 has varied between a low of 5.92 per cent for Bank of the Bahamas International, and 29.15 per cent for Commonwealth Bank. These returns, this newspaper was told, are likely to “get worse” with the new tax regime.
The banker added: “The stark choices the banks have is to reduce their risk appetite (lend less) and reduce expenses (people account for 50 per cent of overhead).
“International banks will move their overseas assets that they currently book in the Bahamas to other jurisdictions. More importantly, the Bahamas needs funding for economic recovery to take place. Instead, the Government of the Bahamas will force austerity to prevail, with a domino effect on employment and real estate asset prices.”
Comments
honeyp says...
I think that this is a bunch of BS by the banks because they are the biggest backside rapest in the country! The Government is just trying to finally tap into the leakage!
Posted 5 July 2013, 1:37 p.m. Suggest removal
YoungWisdom says...
I guess won't you mind when they increase your service fees by an additional $5 and increase loan interest rates by an additional 3% or worse. Also lay off some bankers just to pay the government their monies so the government can once again mismanage it and then the cycle continues again. Sometimes people need to stop being so ignorant and stop looking at one side and look at the whole economic picture. The problem is the government and their greed and mismanagement, always has been. If they had the proper laws and regulations from long time, we wouldn't be in this mess. But you have a nice day and enjoy giving the government more of your hard earn money, or whatever is left of it......
Posted 5 July 2013, 1:53 p.m. Suggest removal
honeyp says...
The banks never needed a reason to do that in pass! They just did! Their predatory banking practices should be criminal!!! It should be mandatory for all additional fees to be approved and justified by Central Bank before they are implemented!
Posted 5 July 2013, 3:13 p.m. Suggest removal
B_I_D___ says...
Brilliant!!
Posted 5 July 2013, 2:09 p.m. Suggest removal
USAhelp says...
Wont miss it till it gone thsn we wont need banks at all people wake up your children will be the ones that will suffer
Posted 6 July 2013, 9:36 p.m. Suggest removal
Log in to comment