Advertisements

Analysis: Who really owns the ‘Big Four’ banks in Australia?

who-owns-the-big-4-banks.jpg
Who really owns the Big Four banks? Photo: Credit Card Compare

Australia’s ‘Big Four’ are not merely big, they’re massive.

Their combined assets stood at $2.86 trillion in 2013 – or roughly twice the size of Australia’s national income. They also annually make up four of the five largest Australian companies by market capitalisation, together representing more than a quarter of the market, with control of 88% of residential mortgages and 80% of deposits according to the IMF.

However, it’s not just banking they control: the Big Four also own 53% of life insurance premiums, and account for 57.3% of retail investment funds through bank-owned platforms, undeniably proving just how much power and influence these organisations have.

Despite this, through continued media programming and educational indoctrination, it seems nobody begs to ask the question: if they own so much of Australia’s economy, who owns the Big Four? In the following feature, Ethan Nash examines.

CONNECTIONS:

According to a 2012 report by the International Monetary Fund, ‘major banks are highly interconnected, as they are among each other’s largest counterparties.’

But that connection is far from direct. Part of it has to do with banks borrowing from each other, rather than owning large parts of each other.

Related: Australian banks financing companies accused of land grabs, child labour and more

A study of the Australian bank network by the Reserve Bank of Australia found that more than half of outstanding authorised deposit-taking institutions ‘exposure’, in this sense, is to the Big Four. Because they have so much of the money of the entire system already, when they need to temporarily borrow, there’s few other banks they can go to, so they have to go to each other. That’s a very cozy relationship.

CUSTODIANS:

In 2013, General Maddox from Real News Australia launched a piece on the issue of bank ownership in Australia – specifically addressing the component of custodian ownership gathered from public information. To this notion, it was discovered that the same four names could be seen as the top four shareholders in each of the four banks, but surprisingly, it’s not each other.

According to the Big Four’s annual reports for 2013, here’s who owns ordinary shares:

HSBC Custody Nominees (Australia) Limited: 16.91% of Westpac; 16.83% of NAB; 18.48% of ANZ; 14.80% of CBA

JP Morgan Nominees Australia Ltd: 12.75% of Westpac; 12.03% of NAB; 14.40% of ANZ; 11.57% of CBA

National Nominees Limited: 9.93% of Westpac, 10.14% of NAB; 11.76% of ANZ; 8.5% of CBA

Citicorp Nominees Pty Limited: 4.94% of Westpac; 4% of NAB; 4.15% of ANZ; 4.47% of CBA

‘Custodians’, by definition, hold customers’ securities for safekeeping, in addition to offering other services such as account administration and collection of dividends and interest payments, for a fee.

They are not active participants in decision-making. It would be wrong to imply that by having a 17% stake in Westpac, for example, HSBC also has 17% of the vote: as a custodian, HSBC only processes the proxy votes of the customers for whom it holds the shares – and these customers could be large sovereign wealth funds, or a board member of Westpac, or a family-owned business in Sydney. Discrepancies in proxy voting do occur, and many uneducated investors aren’t even aware they can cast votes. But in principle, HSBC, in a custodian role, acts only as the messenger, not the decision-maker.

As a wholly owned subsidiary of HSBC Bank Australia Limited, the custody nominees business held more than $700 billion in assets. It is not only in the Big Four. The sheer size of its investment capital means that it frequently shows up among the top 5 shareholders for a large number of Australian companies. In fact, HSBC, JP Morgan, National Nominees and Citicorp all frequently show up together among the top 5 or top 10 shareholders. They simply represent a very large pile of money, all of which has to be parked somewhere.

Realistically, often when consumers who choose to bank with smaller, more independent banks, they may – in fact – be banking with one of the ‘Big Four’. See a info-graphic demonstration here.

RABBIT HOLE: THE FACELESS?

On a different note, however, that 17% stake HSBC’s custodian arm has in Westpac could, in theory, represent just one person – or four big investors – buying through a variety of mutual funds, each of which has HSBC as their custodian.

For those who understand the long and complicated history of Europe and the establishment of the banking system by families like the Rothschilds, it is possible that this could be a very wealthy group of individuals or families behind the curtain. Unfortunately, with how the system has been designed, it is practically impossible to track down the identities of those underlying shareholders through the various financial structures that hold shares for each other and on behalf of each other.

But can these hidden shareholders control what Westpac does?

The company points out that as of October 3, 2013, there were no shareholders who had a ‘substantial holding’, i.e., in which “they or their associates” have control of 5% more of the vote. NAB states the same. Westpac explains that shareholders such as HSBC Custody Nominees (Australia) Limited (16.91% of total shares) ‘may hold shares for the benefit of third parties’ – the definition of their role as custodians. Furthermore, Westpac states it is ‘not directly or indirectly owned or controlled by any other corporation(s) or by any foreign government.’

But the top 20 registered shareholders held 52.42% of Westpac’s ordinary shares – and that’s a controlling stake. The word ‘nominee’ or ‘custodian’ pops up in 11 of them. There’s an independent wealth management group, a closed-end fund, an investment management firm, and so on. Who is behind the actual shares would be, again, practically impossible to determine.

But the same names show up among the top 20 for each of the Big Four banks, with some variation.

The interconnection between the four banks may be even more pervasive, if even less direct. ANZ’s CEO, since 2007, has been Mr. M R P Smith – who has been with HSBC for most of his 30-year career prior to joining ANZ. Since 1978, Mr Smith has held ‘a wide variety of roles in Commercial, Institutional and Investment Banking, Planning and Strategy, Operations and General Management’, according to ANZ’s annual report, including as director of HSBC Australia Limited from 2004-2007, immediately before he became CEO of ANZ. In 2008, ANZ also hired its group managing director of human resources and chief risk officer from HSBC, and in 2011 plucked its new global natural resources head from HSBC.

Whoever it is that owns the Big Four banks, one thing is clear: if the same four custodian companies own similar chunks of each of the big four, there’s indication that the shareholders behind them do not want one bank to succeed at the expense of another. The optimal scenario is if all of them win together, and maintain their dominant position, of course.

Credit: creditcardcompare.com.au

FOLLOW US:

FOR MORE TOTT NEWS, PLEASE FOLLOW US ON FACEBOOK OR SUBSCRIBE TO THE WEBSITE!

SUBSCRIBE TO THE TOTT NEWS YOUTUBE CHANNEL HERE!

RELATED CONTENT:

Collusion for Illusion: http://realnewsaustralia.com/2013/07/01/collusion-for-illusion/

Who Do You Really Bank With? [Infographic]: http://www.creditcardcompare.com.au/who-do-you-really-bank-with-infographic/?_ga=1.27866940.1673697072.1455319566

Australian banks financing companies accused of land grabs, child labour and more: https://tottnews.com/2014/07/17/australian-banks-financing-companies-accused-of-land-grabs-child-labour-and-more/

Australia: 2012 Article IV Consultation—Staff Report: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2012/cr12305.pdf

banner

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Categories: Features

4 Comments on “Analysis: Who really owns the ‘Big Four’ banks in Australia?”

  1. Edward Black
    March 14, 2016 at 9:00 PM #

    I mentioned this to my bank manager. He said the Big Four are known in the trade as The Killers. He took it very well, didn’t seem to mind at all. Bring into Australia another bank which has a good reputation – if such a breed exists!

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. XJO: The Big Four Banks. | Trade Charting - April 4, 2016

    […] up a significant percentage of the XJO index and, as such, are attractive trading entities for superannuation and investment funds etc. There are some reports noting that due to this large market presence that they are simply too […]

  2. XJO: The Big Four Banks. - www.forextell.com - April 4, 2016

    […] up a significant percentage of the XJO index and, as such, are attractive trading entities for superannuation and investment funds etc. There are some reports noting that due to this large market presence that they are simply too […]

  3. XJO: The Big Four Banks - Forexsites - April 4, 2016

    […] up a significant percentage of the XJO index and, as such, are attractive trading entities for superannuation and investment funds etc. There are some reports noting that due to this large market presence that they are simply too […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: