logo
Keeping your nest egg safe: is it time to increase the level of protection?

Keeping your nest egg safe: is it time to increase the level of protection?

Irish Times13-05-2025

Savers in Northern Ireland could soon find themselves not just earning a better rate of return on their savings but also receiving a higher level of protection than their peers across the Border if changes afoot in the UK come to pass.
At the moment, savers with
AIB
NI can avail of rates of as much as 4 per cent AER on savings that are protected through the UK's Financial Services Compensation Scheme up to £85,000 – pretty much on a par with the level of €100,000 offered in the Republic as part of the EU scheme.
Listen to Better with Money, our new personal finance podcast
Listen |
15:23
But the UK is considering strengthening that protection. Under proposals put forward by the
Bank of England
, savers could have deposits of as much as £110,000 (€128,000) protected. This represents an increase of some 30 per cent on the current level of £85,000, and would mark the first time the level has changed since 2017 when the UK was part of the EU scheme.
The Bank of England has suggested the change is needed to keep protection in line with inflation to 'give consumers confidence that their money is safe if their UK-authorised bank, building society or credit union fails'.
READ MORE
Sam Woods, deputy governor for prudential regulation at the UK central bank, said: 'Confidence in our financial system is an essential foundation for economic growth. We want to support confidence in our banks, building societies and credit unions by raising the amount that people can keep in their account which is covered by the deposit guarantee scheme to £110,000 per person, so all that money is safe even if the firm fails.'
A consultation is set to follow and, if adopted, the new rules will come into force on December 1st, covering both retail and SME customers.
But should Irish savers be looking for a similar increase?
Irish case
In Ireland, savers are protected through the Deposit Guarantee Scheme up to €100,000 per person, per bank or financial provider, if those institutions are unable to repay your deposit. If a similar rate of increase to the UK was adopted, this would jump to €130,000.
Of course, it's not as straightforward in Ireland.
Post-Brexit, the UK is free to set its own agenda: as part of the European Union, Ireland must follow the EU's guidance on this. And, under the EU Deposit Guarantee Scheme Directive, protection schemes have been harmonised across the bloc at the level of €100,000.
The scheme has been effective. Since its introduction back in 1994, depositors have not suffered any losses on holdings of less than €100,000. The scheme is obliged to pay out within seven days of an institution failing.
In Ireland, depositors have claimed through the scheme in relation to liquidations at IBRC; Berehaven Credit Union; Rush Credit Union; Charleville Credit Union and Drumcondra and District Credit Union.
And it continues to offer protection for most savers – according to the European Banking Authority (EBA), the current level of €100,000 fully covers the majority of European savers. Figures from end-2023, for example, show that 96 per cent of eligible depositors in the European Economic Area would be paid back the full amount of their deposits at any failed bank.
'Only a relatively small share of consumers hold deposits above this level, meaning few savers would see direct benefits from a higher limit,' Eoghan O'Hara, the country head of
Raisin
Ireland notes.
The EBA simulated the impact of increasing the level of protection to €150,000, but found that it would have a 'very limited impact on the proportion of fully covered depositors since the level of full coverage is already very high'.
As such, the EBA suggested that a potential increase in the €100,000 limit would have a 'positive' but 'limited' impact on financial stability and consumer protection.
It would also be costly as more protection means more funding. While Ireland's deposit protection scheme is administered by the Central Bank, it is credit institutions covered by the scheme that actually fund it.
It remains under review, however.
The issue for savers is that, at a time of continued inflation, €100,000 is not worth what it used to be. According to the CSO's inflation calculator, €100,000 in March 2015 now has an equivalent of about €123,500.
Irish savers may also have a lower choice of savings options, given the lack of competition in this space and the departure of so many providers in recent years – although they are covered for savings in other EU banks.
The level of protection may be more relevant to Irish savers, given how much of our wealth is tied up in deposits. Latest figures from the Central Bank show that household deposits stand at about €143 billion.
Irish households also have a strong savings rate. In the last three months of 2024 for example, Irish households saved almost 14 per cent of their disposable income – slightly below the euro zone average, and Germany, which has a savings rate of almost 20 per cent – but ahead of countries such as Denmark, Italy and Spain.
Raisin Ireland is a pan-European savings platform that offers Irish savers the chance to put their deposits with a host of European banks, including Germany's Aareal Bank and Sweden's Klarna, that they might otherwise not have access to.
O'Hara says the issue of protection for savers is a 'central topic' for the platform, and that 'any steps that give consumers more protection and strengthen financial security across Europe' should be encouraged.
'It's important to continually assess the protection level in line with savings behaviour, inflation and broader financial trends. We would also support any changes that help to promote a fair and fully competitive rate environment for savers right across Europe,' he says.
Global comparison
But what kind of protection do savers outside of the EU benefit from? While those in the UK may enjoy a greater level of savings protection if those current proposals do come into force, those in the so-called crown dependencies (Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey) benefit from a lower level of just £50,000.
Farther afield, the amounts can be higher. Australians have protection of about €140,000; the Swiss about €107,000 and, in the US, deposit protection is as high as about €217,000.
But not everywhere has one – in New Zealand, for example, a new scheme is set to be introduced only in July of this year, following a recommendation from the International Monetary Fund. It will protect savings of up to NZ$100,000 (€52,800)

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Nine-figure payouts to Ryanair and Starbucks CEOs are controversial, but Michael O'Leary can point to results
Nine-figure payouts to Ryanair and Starbucks CEOs are controversial, but Michael O'Leary can point to results

Irish Times

time15 hours ago

  • Irish Times

Nine-figure payouts to Ryanair and Starbucks CEOs are controversial, but Michael O'Leary can point to results

Michael O'Leary has hit his target. Ryanair 's share price stayed above €21 for 28 days, earning him a €125 million bonus if he stays until 2028. The deal has its critics. 'Morally questionable,' said Luke Hildyard of the High Pay Centre, a UK think tank. Others argue such payouts reward luck more than leadership, with cheap oil, index inclusion and billions in share buybacks all helping lift Ryanair's stock. O'Leary might counter that Ryanair shares have more than doubled since the deal was struck in 2019, comfortably outperforming rival airlines. Contrast that with Starbucks , where Brian Niccol was handed a reported $113 million sign-on package last August to replace embattled CEO Laxman Narasimhan. Shares soared 25 per cent on the news, adding $21 billion in market value. READ MORE [ Corporate tax receipts drop 30% as Trump's tariffs bite Opens in new window ] Since then, Starbucks has slashed head office jobs, trimmed menus and promised a return to its coffeehouse roots. But the results remain bitter. Margins and profits are down. Competition remains fierce in China. The stock tanked after last month's earnings miss and has now given up almost all of its Niccol bump. Niccol may yet prove his worth – his turnaround of Chipotle is textbook stuff – but the caffeine hit investors got from his arrival has faded fast. O'Leary, never one to miss a jab, might well look at Starbucks and say: at least I had to do something to get my millions.

Analysts ring alarm bells over private credit risks
Analysts ring alarm bells over private credit risks

Irish Times

time15 hours ago

  • Irish Times

Analysts ring alarm bells over private credit risks

Ask financial regulators what keeps them up at night, and the growth of private credit would probably be among the top answers. A report published this week by Moody's Analytics underscores just why non-bank lending is such a cause for concern in the current climate of volatility. Notably, the report echoes some concerns raised by the Central Bank of Ireland in a recent study published in May. With traditional lenders having largely retreated from the commercial property stage here since the crash, non-bank lending has become an important source of funding for the sector in the Republic. Typically, these lenders set up here as special-purpose entities, often backed by international players involved in some capacity in private credit markets. Operations of this type now provide most of the new lending to commercial property developers, according to the central bank's Kitty Moloney and Padraic O'Gorman, authors of last month's report. That's a relatively small part of the Irish economy as a whole, but one with historic baggage since the 2008 crisis. READ MORE The trouble, Molony and O'Gorman note, is that by its globalised nature, the private credit sector is more vulnerable to international shocks than traditional banks. It's a sector characterised by a high risk of 'capital flight', meaning these entities are more likely to cut bait in times of crisis, with significant knock-on effects for the Irish property sector. How to manage your pension in these volatile times Listen | 37:00 It's all the more perturbing given Moody's characterisation of global private credit as a potential 'locus of contagion' in any future financial crises. In the report, researchers from the ratings agency found that the opacity of the international private credit sector is one of its more troubling aspects. They warned that gaps in the data and 'limited information on loan covenants, true portfolio valuations, and the overlap of fund investors' constitute a 'serious issue' for regulators. Similarly, the central bank said that 'many analytical gaps remain as the market is still quite opaque'. Consequently, it's difficult to be precise when analysing the private credit sector and its reach. This lack of information, Moody's warned, coupled with the increasing involvement of traditional banks in the private credit market, is a 'common theme' between the current moment and the situation that prevailed in the lead up to the 2008 crisis. Worrying indeed, particularly at a time of high anxiety across markets and the wider global economy.

LIV Golf shows what happens when a niche sport goes to war with itself – rugby should take note
LIV Golf shows what happens when a niche sport goes to war with itself – rugby should take note

Irish Times

time16 hours ago

  • Irish Times

LIV Golf shows what happens when a niche sport goes to war with itself – rugby should take note

This R360 stuff is interesting for the thunder that isn't rolling. Normally, when you come across a sport being sized up for attack by an outside disrupter, you can't move for sirens wailing and cannons firing in opposition. That doesn't quite seem to be the case with rugby in this instance, which raises the fascinating question of why that might be. It feels like a little more than just the usual rugby confidence in itself, although that is certainly part of it. World Rugby hasn't said anything about the proposed breakaway league spearheaded by former England international Mike Tindall. There hasn't been a peep out of any of the unions. None of the players' bodies have chirped up, either in support or in high dudgeon. Since nothing is yet official and all anybody has to go on is a strategically leaked business pitch and a year-old podcast rumination by Tindall, it's maybe no surprise that everyone is holding fire for now. But somewhere in the silence lies the uncomfortable truth that has set this thing in motion in the first place. Rugby is in a precarious place right now. Nobody can say with any confidence what it's going to look like in, say, a decade's time, but it probably won't look like this. Particularly in England, where three Premiership clubs have gone to the wall in recent seasons and seven of those remaining are losing money. READ MORE England is one of the great rugby nations on the planet and it is struggling to make the sport a viable business. Same goes for Wales , where the WRU is reducing its funding to two of the four regions. Same Down Under , where Rugby Australia recently announced a loss of $36.8 million (a shade under €21 million) for 2024 – and had the chutzpah to pass it off as good news because the Lions tour and next year's World Cup will bring in the bucks. So much jam tomorrow. Into this world, the arrival of an idea that is apparently attracting new sources of funding can't be dismissed out of hand. Especially when some of the people interested are reportedly established owners from the big, sexy, moneymaking leagues – the NFL, the Premier League, Formula 1. These are the lads with a proven record of turning existing sports into spun gold. If they think they have a way of making rugby viable, there's probably more rugby people than you think who are willing to give them a hearing. Instinctively though, it feels like the whole idea has two glaring issues. One, rugby is too small for a breakaway league to work. And two, rugby players aren't famous enough to build a breakaway league around. They're both variations on the same problem, but let's take them in order and use the most recent sports league disruptor as a case study. [ 'Crampgate' tells us rugby's code of dignity counts for little when lucrative online views are at stake Opens in new window ] Bryson DeChambeau celebrates his birdie putt on the 18th hole with a record 58 to win the LIV Golf Invitational - Greenbrier at The Old White Course in August 2023 in White Sulphur Springs, West Virginia. Photograph:The first LIV Golf tournament took place this week in 2022. Since then, LIV has unquestionably gone on to establish itself as a player in the golf ecosystem. Whatever future the game has, LIV and its players will have to be dealt with, one way or the other. It's maybe no surprise that some of the people involved in R360 have worked on LIV. Plenty of commentators pooh-poohed LIV from the start and didn't envisage it lasting the course. That it's still here at all will be proof enough for some of those involved that a successful template exists and that rugby is ripe for its application. But the reality is that LIV has been a disaster for golf , simply because golf is far too niche a sport to be going to war with itself. By breaking away from the PGA Tour , LIV is running an unprofitable sports league that is bringing in pitiful broadcasting money and is only surviving because there's a bottomless well of Saudi oil cash to feed it. Rugby is played seriously in nine countries on the planet. In only two of those is it the number one sport – arguably only in one, given that football at least has parity in Wales these days. Rugby's problems stem from the fact that there are already not enough people who want to pay to watch it, be that in person or on the TV. Slicing the sausage even thinner makes it highly unlikely that more people will suddenly think it's worth shelling out for. That's especially true when you take the second lesson from the LIV disaster. LIV's signature achievement has been to slough off most of the interesting players away from the PGA Tour and hide them in a league that nobody watches. Jon Rahm , Bryson DeChambeau , Brooks Koepka , Phil Mickelson , Patrick Reed – these are (in some cases, were) some of the best players in the world and some of the most watchable. But they may as well be bog-snorkelling for their dime now, for all that anybody tunes in to see them. And yet, whatever LIV's problems, at least the idea of following individual sportspeople is already established in golf. People don't follow rugby players. They follow rugby teams. The international game is the financial engine of the sport not because Antoine Dupont plays for France and Sam Prendergast for Ireland, but because millions of people are invested in the outcome regardless of who is the blue nine and the Ireland 10. [ Craig Casey to captain Ireland for summer Tests against Georgia and Portugal Opens in new window ] [ Tiger Woods son Charlie fires 66 to clinch first career AJGA title Opens in new window ] Let's say – and this is entirely for argument's sake before anyone's lawyers get twitchy – that Dupont and Prendergast are R360 players in a couple of years' time, taking each other on in São Paulo, LA and Barcelona. Are you watching? Maybe. Do you care who wins? Not a chance. If it means that neither of them is playing for Ireland or France, will it stop you watching the Six Nations? Even less of a chance. Rugby will change in the coming years. It has to. But the R360 proposal seems to want to (a) chop an already small sport into even smaller pieces and (b) build a new entity around a group of players who are pretty much interchangeable to all but the sport's most engaged devotees. LIV Golf gets away with it because the Saudis seem comfortable emptying barrels of money into it indefinitely. Hard to imagine R360's backers aspiring to their munificence.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store