How ironic that in a week
in which Hong Kong was again named the World's freest economy, the
Government was again talking about delaying the abolition of minimum
commissions to protect the inefficient small broker cartel. So much for
letting the market pick winners. If the Government believes in free
markets, it must allow brokers and clients to negotiate their rates. |
Commission Deregulation: No More Delays
13th November 2002
Yesterday the right-wing US think tank, the Heritage Foundation, again labelled
Hong Kong the World's Freest Economy - a huge irony for an economy which lacks
any competition law to restrain anti-competitive prices.
One perfect example surfaced again this week, when stockbrokers were seen lobbying
the Government and the Securities and Futures Commission to further delay the
abolition of minimum commission rates, now due to be scrapped on 1-Apr-03. The minimum commission rate is set by the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Ltd (SEHK),
which has a legally-protected monopoly on the operation of a stock exchange in
Hong Kong and is owned by Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Ltd (HKEx). Rule
534 sets the minimum at 0.25%.
Deregulation was first announced
by HKEx on 17-May-00, giving almost 2 years' notice that the rule would be
scrapped with effect from 1-Apr-02. In that announcement, HKEx Chairman Charles
Lee Yeh-kwong (Mr Lee), who was also a member of the Government's
Executive Council, said:
"The liberalisation of brokerage commission rates... we
believe, is in the interest of the investing public, the brokerage industry
and the economic well-being of Hong Kong"
The Government, which despite owning no shares in HKEx, appoints
a majority of its board, issued a press
release on the same day hailing the move, stating:
"The removal of the minimum commission rule will not only
enhance the competitiveness of Hong Kong's securities industry, but also help
to strengthen our position as a regional and international financial centre,
and bring direct benefit to the investors."
In January this year, caving in to pressure from small brokers who threatend to march
their employees through Central ahead of the Hong Kong Chief Executive's
re-selection, the Government sheepishly delayed
the move for a year, leaving it to brokers to relay the news to the press.
Finally the HKEx board issued an announcement
on 20-Feb-02, stating:
"the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong and the Hong Kong
Futures Exchange will amend their rules and contract specifications so
that abolition of minimum commissions will be implemented on 1 April
2003." (emphasis added)
So there you have it - the HKEx has already announced the rule
change - all they have to do is put it in the rule book, and get the SFC to
approve it. What is HKEx waiting for? Directions from government, of course. Mr
Lee was quoted
in this morning's Standard:
"Our board of directors has not received any proposal to
change the minimum brokerage fees yet...I think it is a political issue at the
end of the day".
Mr Lee, you don't need a "proposal to change the minimum
brokerage fees" - your board has already resolved to scrap them - or
have you forgotten? Of course, Mr Lee has ignored what the HKEx board announced
in Feb-02, and has tacitly admitted that it is the Government that calls the
shots, not the HKEx board.
Meanwhile Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Fred
Ma Si-hang, who is fast earning the title of "Mr U-Turn", stated
as recently as July this year that it was not possible to continue the minimum
commission policy "as protection for brokers", but on 8-Nov-02
he said:
"The brokerage industry has reflected their difficulty to
the government and to the [SFC]...the government will be open-minded when
studying their proposals"
Capitalism with HK Characteristics
Deng Xiao-ping must be laughing in the great politburo in the
sky. Having spent the twilight of his life trying to ease the PRC out of central
planning and into the market economy, if he were around today, he would see a
Hong Kong government indulging in protectionism, intervention and central
planning. The mainland markets, incidentally, have already deregulated brokerage
rates on 1-May-02.
It is entirely true that Hong Kong has too many brokers, and that over
400 of them handle less than 20% of the market volume. If forced to compete,
many would simply close down, having failed to merge or invest in new technology
for competition. All they are doing now is dragging their feet, collecting a
little more profit before they close. They were paid off handsomely when the
HKEx was formed, receiving millions of dollars worth of shares in HKEx, and have
now had 3 years to prepare for competition.
Periodically, one of them collapses, and often the proprietor
disappears taking tens or hundreds of millions of dollars of client assets with
him. That's the problem with small brokers - the owner is basically his own
compliance officer, and you depend on him to segregate his assets from yours,
which he often finds hard to do when the bailiffs are knocking on the door.
Apart from orderly closures, there are already 3 broker collapses involving
alleged fraud this year, including one which ironically was announced
on 24-Jan-02, the day after deregulation was delayed.
The costs to the community of the brokerage cartel go beyond the
excess commissions and broker defaults. The SFC would need fewer resources to
supervise 50 brokers than 500, allowing them to spend their finite income on
other enforcement areas such as prosecuting those who abuse minority
shareholders. Hopefully, the removal of sole proprietor or mom-and-pop
brokerages and concentration on the regulation of larger brokers with better
compliance systems would result in fewer thefts of client assets when a broker
closes down.
The Government must cease acting in the interests of a small
sector of the economy and start acting in the public interest. For sure, brokers
will lose jobs, but that is what makes a free market efficient. The moment the
government starts setting prices in any sector to protect jobs, we are on the
path to central planning, and China has shown since 1949 that does not work.
The HKEx's commercial position
Let's compare two conflicting beliefs attributed to the board of
HKEx. In response
to a question in the Legislative Council on 14-Nov-01, the Government stated:
"The Board [of HKEx] considered that the liberalisation
of brokerage commission would not necessarily result in a reduction in income
for the brokerage industry, as the free negotiation of commission should
stimulate trading, which will ultimately benefit the industry as a whole."
Now if the free negotiation of commission will stimulate
trading, then that also increases the HKEx's trading fee income (0.005% on each
side of a trade) and the settlement fee income (0.002% on each side), and hence
increases its profitability, since its variable costs are nearly zero (a few
more units of electricity for the computers, perhaps). However, contradicting
this statement, on 20-Feb-02, the Board said:
"in the current market condition, deferral of abolition
of minimum brokerage will have no impact on the trading revenue and
profitability of HKEx".
Of course, the first statement was right, and the second wrong.
Basic economic theory will tell you that when transaction costs decline, the
propensity to transact will increase. Arbitrageurs eking out small profits from
trading will find more profitable opportunities to trade if fees are lower, and
investors will switch positions more often.
So it should be clear to any independent director of HKEx that
deregulated commissions will increase profitability of HKEx. However, as we
said, a majority of its directors are appointed by the Government, not by
shareholders.
Wide spread tables reduce volume
While we are on the subject of the profitability of the HKEx,
let's note that it has failed to make any changes to its ridiculously wide spread
table, which also inhibits transactions, but helps brokers to profit from
trading the spread. Indeed, in the Oct-02 issue of HKEx's magazine, Exchange,
CEO Kwong Ki-chi inadvertently supports our argument, stating:
"in the Hong Kong stock market, the bid-ask spread is
largely a function of the spread table, i.e. the price increment"
That implies that the gap between the best bid and offer is
being restrained by an artificially wide spread table which determines the
minimum increment in prices. If you narrow that table, then the spread will come
down, and volumes will increase.
So let's not hear any complaints about declining revenues and
volumes at HKEx or SFC (which receives a transaction levy) until they sort that
one out.
Break the cartel
HK is one of the last remaining markets with minimum
commissions, and it is time to bring this to an end. Further delay would further
reduce the credibility of the Government's goal to make Hong Kong a world-class
market, or even a regional centre. As for those brokers who
say "let's wait until the market picks up" - forget it - we never saw
them volunteering to deregulate during the last bull run. They have a choice:
compete or close. It's a free market, isn't it?
© Webb-site.com, 2002
Sign up for our free newsletter
Recommend Webb-site.com to a friend
Important notice: All material on this site, except
where otherwise accredited, is copyright to Webb-site.com.
Media and researchers are welcome to quote from articles on this site, provided that such
quotation is attributed to Webb-site.com. The
information in this site should not be relied upon by any person in making any investment
decision. No responsibility or liability is accepted by Webb-site.com or any person
related to it for any loss arising from or in reliance upon the whole or any part of the
contents of this site. Persons who are in any doubt about an investment or potential
investment should take professional investment advice. From time to time parties associated with Webb-site.com may
own long or short positions in securities issued by or related to companies or governments
on which we comment.
Back to top
|