This article is from the source 'independent' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/fund-manager-neil-woodford-sells-hsbc-stake-over-fears-of-fine-inflation-9703608.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Fund manager Neil Woodford sells HSBC stake over fears of 'fine inflation' Fund manager Neil Woodford sells HSBC stake over fears of 'fine inflation'
(about 14 hours later)
Fund manager Neil Woodford today sold his stake in HSBC, citing concerns about "fine inflation" in the banking industry. It was during a 26-year stint at Invesco Perpetual that Neil Woodford earned his reputation as a tough, straight-talking fund manager.
Woodford, who quit Invesco Perpetual to set up his own venture last year, warned investigations into the manipulation of market benchmark rates and foreign exchange markets could land HSBC with “significant financial penalties” and prevent it from growing its dividend. A £1,000 investment in his Invesco Perpetual High Income Fund back in 1988 would have been worth £25,349 by the time  Mr Woodford handed over control to his successor, Mark Barnett, in March, but it was his willingness to wade into high-profile corporate battles that really set him apart from most of his contemporaries.
He said: “I started to build a position in HSBC for some portfolios in May last year and I included it in the portfolio of the Woodford Equity Income Fund at launch. The activist, who quit Invesco to launch Woodford Investment Management, has been instrumental in a number of boardroom overhauls and also played a leading role in a shareholder revolt against the failed merger between BAE Systems and EADS.
"In recent weeks, however, I have started to become more concerned about one particular risk: that of "fine inflation" in the banking industry. When he speaks, the City takes notice, so yesterday‘s disclosure that he had sold his stake in HSBC because of “fine inflation” was always going to make a splash.
Mr Woodford warned that investigations into the manipulation of market benchmark rates and foreign-exchange markets could land HSBC with “significant financial penalties” and prevent it from growing its dividend.
In a blog post, he said: “I started to build a position in HSBC for some portfolios in May last year and I included it in the portfolio of the Woodford Equity Income Fund at launch [in June]. In recent weeks, however, I have started to become more concerned about one particular risk: that of ‘fine inflation’ in the banking industry.
“Banks have attracted many fines in the post-financial crisis world as regulators and policymakers have cracked down on past and ongoing wrongdoings in the industry. The size of the fines, however, appears to be increasing.”“Banks have attracted many fines in the post-financial crisis world as regulators and policymakers have cracked down on past and ongoing wrongdoings in the industry. The size of the fines, however, appears to be increasing.”
About 2.68 per cent of Woodford’s Equity Income Fund was invested with HSBC, amounting to about 10 million shares, a sub-1 per cent stake in the lender, worth nearly £65 million. About 2.68 per cent of Woodford’s Equity Income Fund was invested with HSBC, amounting to about 10 million shares, a sub-1 per cent stake in the lender, worth just £65m.
His warning is likely to reverberate across the sector with bumper fines handed out recently. Shares in HSBC fell 6.5p to 645.6p as HSBC declined to comment. However, his warning is still likely to reverberate across the sector with a number of bumper fines handed out since the financial crisis.
Last month, Bank of America agreed to pay a record $16.7 billion (£10.1 billion) fine for misleading investors about the quality of loans it sold. Last month, Bank of America (BoA) agreed to pay a record $16.7bn (£10.1bn) fine for misleading investors about the quality of loans it sold, while HSBC itself paid a $1.9bn penalty for failing to prevent Mexican drug cartels laundering money through its bank accounts in 2012. Other high-profile cases include BNP Paribas’s recent $9bn settlement with US prosecutors for breaking sanctions against Cuba, Iran and Sudan.
In 2012, HSBC paid a $1.9 billion penalty for failing to prevent Mexican drug cartels laundering money through its bank accounts. Mr Woodford continued: “HSBC is a conservatively managed, well-capitalised business with a good spread of international assets. As chief executive, Stuart Gulliver has done a great job over the last four years, making a very complicated organisation much simpler to understand. It is still a huge and complex business, however. Its 2013 Annual Report & Accounts document runs to around 600 pages, many of which are dedicated to the risks that it faces.”
Woodford continued: “HSBC is a conservatively managed, well-capitalised business with a good spread of international assets. As chief executive, Stuart Gulliver has done a great job over the last four years, making a very complicated organisation much simpler to understand. But is Mr Woodford right? Should investors be afraid of “fine inflation”?
“It is still a huge and complex business, however. Its 2013 Annual Report & Accounts document runs to around 600 pages, many of which are dedicated to the risks that it faces.” In a recent study, Roger McCormick, a former law professor at the London School of Economics, found that the 10 worst-hit banks, including BoA, Lloyds, RBS and HSBC, had paid about £160bn in fines from 2008-13 for misconduct of various kinds, including mis-selling payment-protection insurance (PPI), manipulating rates and failing to observe anti-money-laundering rules. 
On the fines being paid by banks, he added: “I am concerned that these fines are increasingly being sized on a bank’s ability to pay, rather than on the extent of the transgression.” He said: “The numbers speak for themselves, but I don’t think the banks are out of the woods yet.
In a recent study, Roger McCormick, a former law professor at the London School of Economics, found the 10 worst-hit banks, including Bank of America, Lloyds Banking Group, Royal Bank of Scotland and HSBC paid just under £100 billion in fines between 2009-13. “In 2014, we’ve seen some pretty horrific fines being levied on the banks and it’s fair to say that there’s still quite a bit in the pipeline with issues like foreign-exchange markets still be resolved. The picture is complicated because the conduct costs relate to different things in different countries. PPI, for example, is a phenomenon pretty much confined to the UK, it seems, whereas in the US there have been mis-selling problems with other financial products.”
In its Financial Stability Report in June, the Bank of England warned “costs related to past misconduct” remained a drag on bank profits. Not everyone is as downbeat as Mr Woodford on the sector’s prospects and yesterday another leading fund manager, Richard Buxton, the head of equities at Old Mutual Global Investors, told The Independent he doesn’t plan to sell his stake in HSBC.
“HSBC remains my biggest position and I’m also a holder of Barclays and Lloyds,” he said. “Of course, it is highly likely that banks will be subject to further fines for historic behaviour, but it is highly unlikely that in the case of these banks it would require raising of additional capital.
“It will defer a return to better levels of profitability and dividend payment, but does not take away from the underlying case for investing in them, for the patient, long-term investor”.
HSBC shares fell 4.5p to 647.5p yesterday as Mr Woodford said he would focus on other financial investments like insurer Legal & General.
Although only time will tell  whether he was right to cash in his HSBC stake, there’s little doubt that “fine inflation” is a serious concern for the banking industry.