Did they say that, ie that they had been miscalculating their adherence to current capital rules - or did they warn that tighter lending and probably higher costs would follow the RBNZ's proposed higher capital requirements?
They admitted that their ‘model’ wasn’t liked by the RBNZ
One main point they noted was that their calculation re Agriculture loans was way out of kilter with what other banks (and banking industry experience) considered prudent.
”When investors are euphoric, they are incapable of recognising euphoria itself “
I have been looking for my first home to buy and that's exactly I am getting a lot! Cheap? there is always a catch to it...
It is tempting for first home buyers to take bigger risks to save for deposits that have grown in size over the years by far more than the after tax increase in incomes.
They are on the wrong side of the systemic lift in house prices that is the result of the shift to a low interest rates.
"This increases the minimum capital ANZ must hold for operational risk by around 60 per cent, to $760 million, the Reserve Bank said."
60%, that is massive. If our main banks are prepared to act like this, how can the Reserve Bank say that there is no need for an investigation equivalent to the Royal Commission in Australia? Why, because the RB asked the banks if they were doing anything dodgy but they said no and the RB said OK, no inquiry necessary.
Sorry ordinary people, you are just here to be abused because these rules and regulations are in place to protect you and so by default, you are the ones being abused.
Bookmarks