View more on these topics

MM leader: A way forward on regulatory costs?

Natalie Holt website

We are in a world of record FCA fines. Only last week we saw Lloyds Banking Group hit with a £117m penalty for unfairly rejecting payment protection complaints, and last month international regulators fined five banks a massive £3.7bn in total over foreign exchange rigging, including a £248m FCA fine against Barclays.

Add the Libor fines into the mix, and you get to some pretty eye-watering sums. The scale of the misconduct over recent years has meant we almost become immune to yet another headline about bank wrongdoing.

But make no mistake – these are significant amounts we are talking about. Money Marketing calculates that over £2.9bn has been collected in FCA fines over the last two years or so. So where does all that money go?

It is a simple question, but one the Treasury seems unable or unwilling to answer. The Treasury has been on the receiving end of FCA fine money since April 2012, a time conveniently chosen to coincide with the £59.5m fine handed to Barclays for manipulating Libor.

The Treasury knew a good thing when it saw one. As fines rocketed, the regulator deducted its enforcement costs and passed the remainder to the Treasury. Financial services firms (though obviously, not the ones who had been fined) used to see penalties allocated to the regulatory budget, pushing down their regulatory costs. But not anymore.

So it is interesting to note the Treasury cannot tell us what it spends all this money on. It can tell us when it suits them, for example, generic amounts allocated to the NHS and military charities. There is no denying these are worthy causes.

But by our estimates, it cannot account for a whopping £1bn of FCA fine money it has received. The Treasury’s argument is that it goes into a central pot, and they do not keep track of what happens after that (or at least, it cannot tell us). But if the Treasury is not keeping track of the money, who is?

There are questions about accountability and how transparent the Treasury is being with the money it receives. But it is an issue worth challenging the Government on given the spiralling regulatory bills advisers are contending with.

The FCA’s funding review of the Financial Services Compensation Scheme represents an opportunity for advisers to force the issue of FCA fines and how they are spent into the open. Advisers do not want to be a regulatory cash cow, particularly when the Treasury cannot definitively say how almost £3bn is spent.

Natalie Holt is editor of Money Marketing



Down the plughole: Where has all the FCA fine money gone?

Mark Sands and Tessa Norman The Treasury is facing calls to revisit the way it handles FCA fines amid mounting concern about a lack of transparency in the current system. Historically, excesses in fine revenue were directed back to firms to reduce overall regulatory costs. However, regulatory fines handed out since April 2012 have passed […]


FSCS chief invites suggestions for ‘fairer’ funding model

Financial Services Compensation Scheme chief executive Mark Neale has invited firms to submit suggestions for “fairer” alternatives to the lifeboat scheme’s funding model. In his latest blog post on the FSCS website, Neale says he recently received a call from an IFA who expressed “anger” that he was having to fund the rising cost of […]

FCA interior 620x430

FCA explains cap-ad thinking but admits FSCS costs won’t fall

The FCA has set out why it is changing the way advisers’ capital adequacy requirements are calculated but says limits would have to be set much higher to significantly reduce Financial Services Compensation Scheme levies. The regulator published a consultation paper yesterday on new capital adequacy rules which would require advice firms to set aside […]

FCA logo glass 620x430

FCA hits Lloyds with record £117m fine over PPI complaints

The FCA has fined Lloyds Banking Group a record £117m for failing to properly handle payment protection insurance complaints. The fine, issued against Lloyds Bank and Lloyds subsidiaries Bank of Scotland and Black Horse, is the largest ever retail penalty issued by the regulator. The bank is now reviewing or automatically upholding around 1.2 million […]

10 September thumbnail

Johnson Fleming set to hold auto-enrolment support webinar

Two years since the process of auto-enrolment began, the looming re-enrolment deadline provides the perfect opportunity to assess whether the support you have in place, which may well have been hastily selected at the start, is fit for purpose. Johnson Fleming is holding a webinar on 10 September at 11:00 to discover the key issues and concerns you should consider when thinking about your current support options.


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 4 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. There are some serious issues with democracy if fines are being used to subsidise taxation. The policy of deterrence adopted by the FSA originally has resulted in ever increasing levels of fines being levied against the largest companies in our sector. One is tempted to speculate whether we have yet reached a level where behaviour will change.

    Regardless of that, the IFA community has taken huge steps to change. If that change is to mean anything, then the whole issue of FCA fees and FSCS levies needs a root and branch review. We cannot continue to fund the costs of those who adopt business practices and models which are inherently risky. The vast majority of IFAs are engaged in relatively low risk activities and have made the huge changes required by regulators. It’s time for us to reap some form of reward for that.

  2. Julian Stevens 11th June 2015 at 4:41 pm

    Were it so minded, the Treasury could tell us what all this money’s being spent on. How can the Treasury not know how public money is being spent? It’s claim that it can’t tell us is a plain lie.

  3. Andrew Phillips 12th June 2015 at 11:05 am

    A damned lie and a disgraceful outrage. So far so SNAFU. Everyone should be on this. Well done MM & Natalie.

  4. If the question has been asked and no answer forthcoming, then is it not possible to simply refer the matter to the Shadow Cabinet? They would have a field day I’m sure and rightfully so!

Leave a comment