NZ's Willis Sought Meeting on Bank Capital Before Orr Quit RBNZ
(Bloomberg) -- New Zealand Finance Minister Nicola Willis sought a meeting with former Reserve Bank Governor Adrian Orr to discuss bank capital requirements in the weeks prior to his sudden resignation, documents released under the Official Information Act show.
Willis also sought advice on her powers to direct the central bank on prudential policy, according to the documents released Wednesday in Wellington.
Bloomberg requested all correspondence between Willis's office, the RBNZ and the Treasury Department in the month before Orr's departure on March 5. The emails and documents released add further fuel to suggestions that Orr resigned amid pressure from Willis for the bank to loosen bank capital requirements, which she has said are pushing up borrowing costs.
Orr is yet to speak publicly about the reasons for his decision to leave less than half-way through his second five-year term. Since he left, the RBNZ has announced a review of the tougher bank capital rules that Orr championed.
Willis requested a meeting with Orr on Feb. 7 'to discuss bank capital settings,' according to emails from her office dated Feb. 3.
The RBNZ responded that Orr was on leave that day and was also 'involved with our forecast week preparations' ahead of the Feb. 19 Monetary Policy Statement.
Willis's office then asked for a meeting on Feb. 5, which was rebuffed, before proposing Feb. 10.
This prompted Orr himself to reply that it would be inappropriate for him to meet with the minister during a period in which he was chairing deliberations on monetary policy.
'The monetary policy week is sacrosanct to the Monetary Policy Committee's independence and deliberately so to protect the Minister — amongst other parties — and NZ's financial reputation,' Orr wrote in an email on Feb. 4. 'This makes meetings during this period difficult, unless urgent and necessary. Please understand I am here to assist but need to act appropriately.'
Orr furthermore said bank capital was a 'wide and long running topic' and there were many in the RBNZ who could assist. 'I am fine to discuss post MPS, or via a written briefing, or via staff outside of the MPC if more urgent,' he said.
Willis was undeterred, and continued to ask for a meeting 'this week or next' to discuss bank capital settings.
Orr replied on Feb. 5, saying he 'won't be able to meet with the Minister to discuss bank capital issues until post the MPS deliberations' but noted he planned to see her on Feb. 17 or 18 for their regular discussions ahead of the rate decision.
He said that the RBNZ board chair and deputy governor should attend any meeting on bank capital, and proposed Feb. 24, which was confirmed by Willis's office later that week.
On Feb. 13, Treasury wrote to the minister's office regarding a question she had about using section 68B under RBNZ legislation.
It said that section gave the government the power to direct the RBNZ on prudential policy, but was replaced by the Financial Policy Remit in 2021.
'Section 68B was rarely used in practice — referred to as 'nuclear option' — whereas the FPR is always in force, which normalizes having Government policy as a regard in prudential standards and strategic intentions set by the RBNZ,' Treasury said in an email that was partly redacted.
Further documents show the RBNZ's five-year funding agreement was also a topic of interest for Willis during February. Willis later announced a less funding for the bank than it had sought from the government.
Not all of the documents requested were released to Bloomberg, and there was no disclosure of what was discussed at the Feb. 24 meeting.
Nine days later, Orr resigned.
More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
3 hours ago
- Mint
BYD Unleashes an EV Industry Reckoning That Alarms Beijing
(Bloomberg) -- The price war engulfing China's electric vehicle industry has sent share prices tumbling and prompted an unusual level of intervention from Beijing. The shakeout may just be getting started. For all the Chinese government's efforts to prevent price cuts by market leader BYD Co. from turning into a vicious spiral, analysts say a combination of weaker demand and extreme overcapacity will slice into profits at the strongest brands and force feebler competitors to fold. Even after the number of EV makers starting shrinking for the first time last year, the industry is still using less than half its production capacity. Chinese authorities are trying to minimize the fallout, chiding the sector for 'rat race competition' and summoning heads of major brands to Beijing last week. Yet previous attempts to intervene have had little success. For the short term at least, investors are betting few automakers will escape unscathed: BYD, arguably the biggest winner from industry consolidation, has lost $21.5 billion in market value since its shares peaked in late May. 'What you're seeing in China is disturbing, because there's a lack of demand and extreme price cutting,' said John Murphy, a senior automotive analyst at Bank of America Corp. Eventually there will be 'massive consolidation' to soak up the excess capacity, Murphy said. For automakers, relentless discounting erodes profit margins, undermines brand value and forces even well-capitalized companies into unsustainable financial positions. Low-priced and low-quality products can seriously damage the international reputation of 'Made-in-China' cars, the People's Daily, an outlet controlled by the Communist Party, said. And that knock would come just as models from BYD to Geely, Zeekr and Xpeng start to collect accolades on the world stage. For consumers, price drops may seem beneficial but they mask deeper risks. Unpredictable pricing discourages long-term trust — already people are complaining on China's social media, wondering why they should buy a car now when it may be cheaper next week — while there's a chance automakers, as they cut costs to stay afloat, may reduce investment in quality, safety and after-sales service. Auto CEOs were told last week they must 'self-regulate' and shouldn't sell cars below cost or offer unreasonable price cuts, according to people familiar with the matter. The issue of zero-mileage cars also came up — where vehicles with no distance on their odometers are sold by dealers into the second-hand market, seen widely as a way for automakers to artificially inflate sales and clear inventory. Chinese automakers have been discounting a lot more aggressively than their foreign counterparts. Murphy said US automakers should just get out. 'Tesla probably needs to be there to compete with those companies and understand what's going on, but there's a lot of risk there for them.' Others leave no room for doubt that BYD, China's No. 1 selling car brand, is the culprit. 'It's obvious to everyone that the biggest player is doing this,' Jochen Siebert, managing director at auto consultancy JSC Automotive, said. 'They want a monopoly where everybody else gives up.' BYD's aggressive tactics are raising concerns over the potential dumping of cars, dealership management issues and 'squeezing out suppliers,' he said. The pricing turmoil is also unfolding against a backdrop of significant overcapacity. The average production utilization rate in China's automotive industry was mere 49.5% in 2024, data compiled by Shanghai-based Gasgoo Automotive Research Institute show. An April report by AlixPartners meanwhile highlights the intense competition that's starting to emerge among new energy vehicle makers, or companies that produce pure battery cars and plug-in hybrids. In 2024, the market saw its first ever consolidation among NEV-dedicated brands, with 16 exiting and 13 launching. 'The Chinese automotive market, despite its substantial scale, is growing at a slower speed. Automakers have to put top priority now on grabbing more market share,' Ron Zheng, a partner at global consultancy Roland Berger GmbH, said. Jiyue Auto shows how quickly things can change. A little over a year after launching its first car, the automaker jointly backed by big names Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co. and technology giant Baidu Inc., began to scale down production and seek fresh funds. It's a dilemma for all carmakers, but especially smaller ones. 'If you don't follow suit once a leading company makes a price move, you might lose the chance to stay at the table,' AlixPartners consultant Zhang Yichao said. He added that China's low capacity utilization rate, which is 'fundamentally fueling' the competition, is now even under more pressure from export uncertainties. While the push to find an outlet for excess production is thrusting more Chinese brands to export, international markets can only offer some relief. 'The US market is completely closed and Japan and Korea may close very soon if they see an invasion of Chinese carmakers,' Siebert said. 'Russia, which was the biggest export market last year, is now becoming very difficult. I also don't see Southeast Asia as an opportunity anymore.' The pressure of cost cutting has also led analysts to express concern over supply chain finance risks. A price cut demand by BYD to one of its suppliers late last year attracted scrutiny around how the car giant may be using supply chain financing to mask its ballooning debt. A report by accounting consultancy GMT Research put BYD's true net debt at closer to 323 billion yuan ($45 billion), compared with the 27.7 billion yuan officially on its books as of the end of June 2024. The pain is also bleeding into China's dealdership network. Dealership groups in two provinces have gone out of business since April, both of them ones that were selling BYD cars. Beijing's meeting with automakers last week wasn't the first attempt at a ceasefire. Two years ago, in mid 2023, 16 major automakers, including Tesla Inc., BYD and Geely signed a pact, witnessed by the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers, to avoid 'abnormal pricing.' Within days though, CAAM deleted one of the four commitments, saying that a reference to pricing in the pledge was inappropriate and in breach of a principle enshrined in the nation's antitrust laws. The discounting continued unabated. --With assistance from Yasufumi Saito and Chester Dawson. More stories like this are available on
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Time of India
Trump ‘BLOCKS' Congress Sanctions Against Putin, GOP Senators Too Scared To Protest?
/ Jun 09, 2025, 01:08AM IST A legislation set to be tabled by a Republican senator seeking more sanctions on Russia has been stalled. According to a Bloomberg report, the bill has been stalled due to U.S. President Donald Trump's opposition. The legislation calls for a 500 per cent tariff on countries that buy Russian energy, uranium, and other raw materials. According to the report, Trump had said he had not even looked at the bill, adding he would consider sanctions "at the right time".
Mint
11 hours ago
- Mint
Hedge Funds Face California Rebuke Over Role in Wildfire Claims
(Bloomberg) -- Hedge funds are facing pushback in California as their bets tied to insurance claims stemming from the Los Angeles wildfires are attacked as unethical. The transactions in focus are tied to so-called subrogation claims, which hedge funds, private equity firms and other alternative investment managers have been buying from insurers over the past few months. Subrogation kicks in if a third party such as a utility is suspected of being responsible for losses covered by insurers. Hedge funds buying these claims from insurers are now under attack from the California Earthquake Authority, which is the administrator of the California Wildfire Fund. It has described such transactions as 'opportunistic, profit-driven investment speculation,' and says it's planning to take on 'hedge funds and other speculators' that it claims 'are actively seeking to profit from California's devastating wildfire catastrophes.' In practice, that means the authority will try to block the payout of what it says could end up being 'billions of dollars' to the investors that bought the claims, according to materials prepared ahead of a meeting that took place last month with the California Catastrophe Response Council, which oversees the fund. To that end, it plans to engage California's state legislature, according to a transcript of comments made during the meeting and seen by Bloomberg. A spokesperson for the authority declined to comment. Bradley Max, a director at Cherokee Acquisition, a New York-based investment bank that trades and invests in subrogation claims, says the development has 'put a chill on bidding,' which is already visible in pricing. Subrogation rights tied to the Eaton Fire that ripped through Southern California in January were trading as high as 50 cents on the dollar at one point, but have now dropped 'at least a few points lower,' Max said. Still, even though the political development has led to lower prices on the subrogation claims, it hasn't held back transactions, he said. Cherokee said in April it had brokered deals linked to the Los Angeles fires for 'larger, more sophisticated distressed debt hedge funds.' And by April 15, investment bank Oppenheimer & Co. Inc. had executed 10 transactions tied to the Eaton and Palisades fires totaling over $1 billion worth of recovery rights, Ronald Ryder, co-head of special assets at Oppenheimer, told the California Earthquake Authority. That includes over $125 million in claims traded in just one day, Ryder wrote. A spokesperson for Oppenheimer declined to comment. Cherokee didn't name the hedge funds for which it brokered deals. In an email to the California Earthquake Authority, Ryder said that as catastrophic weather events become 'more prevalent,' insurers are increasingly resorting to 'recovery subrogation in the secondary market to fortify the balance sheet.' There's a growing consensus that insurers can't cover the rising costs of weather-related catastrophes alone, especially as climate change fuels more extreme events. For that reason, the industry is looking for ways to shift part of its financial risk over to capital markets, with alternative asset managers often the only investor class willing to step in. Efforts to prevent investors from profiting from the subrogation claims they've bought represent 'a politically motivated attempt to not pay legitimate obligations,' Max at Cherokee said. They're 'trying to beat up deep-pocketed hedge funds, despite the ethical and legal implications,' he said. Recovery of subrogation claims is costly and can take years to play out, which is why insurers have started selling them in exchange for an upfront cash payment. The hedge funds buying them are betting that the recovery sum at the end of the process will exceed the amount they paid the insurer to buy the claim. The market for investing in subrogation claims is characterized by over-the-counter deals with little to no transparency. Subrogation deals had a seminal moment more than half a decade ago, when faulty power lines and equipment failures at California utility PG&E Corp. were blamed for wildfires in the state. Back then, hedge fund Baupost Group LLC purchased claims against PG&E worth $6.8 billion. Bloomberg has previously reported that Baupost may have generated an estimated $1 billion of profits. The California Wildfire Fund, which is administered by the state's Earthquake Authority and overseen by the California Catastrophe Response Council, was set up in 2019 to help reimburse claims arising from wildfires caused by utility companies. If hedge funds prevail in their subrogation claims, some of the money could end up coming from the California Wildfire Fund. The fund, which sits on about $13 billion in liquid assets, is partly capitalized by three utilities — San Diego Gas & Electric Co., Edison International's Southern California Edison and PG&E. While the cause of the January fires remains under investigation, it's already clear that the Eaton Fire started inside the service territory of Edison and therefore leaves the fund potentially exposed, the authority said. With current estimates for insured losses as high as $45 billion, the January Southern California wildfires are expected to be the costliest in US history, according to the California Earthquake Authority. The Earthquake Authority and Catastrophe Response Council are now reviewing claims and administration procedures as they take the matter to the state legislature. More stories like this are available on
