logo
#

Latest news with #FinanceandExpenditureSelectCommittee

Wise urges New Zealand MPs to end NZD $667m FX fee losses
Wise urges New Zealand MPs to end NZD $667m FX fee losses

Techday NZ

time21-07-2025

  • Business
  • Techday NZ

Wise urges New Zealand MPs to end NZD $667m FX fee losses

Wise has urged Parliament to address what it describes as misleading bank fees on foreign transactions, claiming these are costing New Zealanders hundreds of millions of New Zealand dollars each year. The call was made as part of Wise's submission to Parliament's Finance and Expenditure Select Committee on the Financial Markets Conduct Amendment Bill 2025, which is currently under consideration. Wise contends that changes are needed to protect both consumers and businesses who are affected each time a currency conversion takes place, whether through sending money overseas, shopping online, travelling abroad, or operating businesses internationally. Hidden costs Research commissioned by Wise from Edgar, Dunn & Company indicated that New Zealanders lost a total of NZD $667 million to hidden foreign exchange (FX) payment fees in 2023. According to projections, this figure is set to increase to NZD $991 million by 2029 if current practices continue. Wise argues that these losses are primarily due to banks advertising "fee-free" international transactions while actual costs are concealed via inflated exchange rates. Tristan Dakin, Country Manager ANZ at Wise, stated: "New Zealanders think they're getting a good deal because they see 'no fees' or 'zero commission'. But the real cost is hidden in the exchange rate mark-up, which can be vastly different to the rate you find on Google. By ensuring more transparency, parliament can put millions back into the wallets of consumers, while removing barriers for small businesses that want to expand internationally." Regulatory context New Zealand currently has no specific legal requirements in place to tackle the problem of hidden FX costs in cross-border banking and payments. However, Wise's submission follows growing discussions in both local and international contexts about the need to enhance competition and transparency. Last year, the New Zealand Commerce Commission noted there "appears to be room to improve competition" in this area, and the G20 is already working towards making international payments more affordable, faster, and more transparent worldwide. Dakin also commented: "What the banks are doing right now is unfair, misleading, and is somehow perfectly legal. That needs to change, or they will continue to take an unfair share from Kiwi consumers and businesses. With the Financial Markets Conduct Amendment Bill 2025 and the growing international calls for reform, it's only a matter of time before governments all around the world take action on misleading FX fees." He added: "New Zealand has an incredible opportunity to set an example for the rest of the world. These proposed reforms offer a practical, low-cost solution that would help Kiwis make better choices and save money, while driving competition and innovation in the space." Proposed measures Wise's submission recommends several changes be included in the Bill. First, they suggest that all banks and financial service providers should be required to display the full cost of a transfer upfront, showing both fixed fees and exchange rate mark-ups. Wise also calls for a ban on advertising that implies transfers are "fee-free" when costs are actually embedded in the exchange rate. It believes that standardising how prices are displayed would make it easier for consumers and businesses to compare service providers effectively, and that key terms like "mid-market exchange rate" should be clearly defined to maintain consistency across the sector. The G20 has also cited the importance of enhancing cross-border payments, arguing that faster, cheaper, more transparent and more inclusive services would benefit citizens and economies worldwide by supporting economic growth, trade, development, and financial inclusion. Wise referenced this international perspective to highlight the relevance of its recommendations in the New Zealand context. Committee consideration The Financial Markets Conduct Amendment Bill 2025 remains before the Finance and Expenditure Select Committee, which is expected to report later in the year. Wise, supported by the data from its commissioned research, is urging policymakers to act in order to address what it sees as a lack of transparency and competition in cross-border payments. The company's submission is part of a wider movement across several jurisdictions to regulate and clarify the costs of international money transfers and currency exchanges, amid projections of growing sums lost to hidden fees in the years ahead.

Wise Urges Parliament To Act On Misleading Foreign Transaction Fees That Cost Kiwis Hundreds Of Millions Each Year
Wise Urges Parliament To Act On Misleading Foreign Transaction Fees That Cost Kiwis Hundreds Of Millions Each Year

Scoop

time21-07-2025

  • Business
  • Scoop

Wise Urges Parliament To Act On Misleading Foreign Transaction Fees That Cost Kiwis Hundreds Of Millions Each Year

As the Financial Markets Conduct Amendment Bill 2025 moves through parliament, Wise highlights the full scale of the problem to MPs Wellington: Wise is calling for more transparency and fairness on foreign transactions, as New Zealand consumers and businesses continue to be ripped off by hidden fees. In a submission to Parliament's Finance and Expenditure Select Committee on the Financial Markets Conduct Amendment Bill 2025, Wise explains how banks claim to provide 'fee-free' cross currency services while hiding true costs behind inflated transfer rates. According to research by Edgar, Dunn & Company, commissioned by Wise, New Zealand consumers lost a total of NZD 667 million due to hidden FX payment fees in 2023, with this figure projected to increase to NZD 991 million by 2029.1 Tristan Dakin, Country Manager ANZ at Wise says: 'New Zealanders think they're getting a good deal because they see 'no fees' or 'zero commission'. But the real cost is hidden in the exchange rate mark-up, which can be vastly different to the rate you find on Google. By ensuring more transparency, parliament can put millions back into the wallets of consumers, while removing barriers for small businesses that want to expand internationally.' Growing push to tackle hidden FX While there are no current laws in place in New Zealand to address the issue, momentum for change is growing. Last year, the NZ Commerce Commission said there 'appears to be room to improve competition' in the space. And internationally, the G20 is acting on its roadmap for making international payments cheaper, faster, and more transparent. Dakin adds: 'What the banks are doing right now is unfair, misleading, and is somehow perfectly legal. That needs to change, or they will continue to take an unfair share from Kiwi consumers and businesses. With the Financial Markets Conduct Amendment Bill 2025 and the growing international calls for reform, it's only a matter of time before governments all around the world take action on misleading FX fees. New Zealand has an incredible opportunity to set an example for the rest of the world. These proposed reforms offer a practical, low-cost solution that would help Kiwis make better choices and save money, while driving competition and innovation in the space', says Dakin. The Bill is currently before Parliament's Finance and Expenditure Committee which is due to report on 19 October. Wise is calling for the following changes: Require banks and financial service providers to show the full cost of a transfer upfront, including both fixed fees and exchange rate markups. Ban advertising that claims transfers are 'fee-free' when a fee is hidden in the exchange rate. Standardise how pricing is shown, so people can compare providers easily. Define key terms like 'mid-market exchange rate' to ensure consistency. 1 The 2023 hidden fee data from Edgar, Dunn, and Company (EDC) were calculated based on the exchange rate margin offered by the largest banks in New Zealand when their customers move money from the country. Fee data from 2024 to 2029 are projected based on expected GDP growth of New Zealand. About Wise: Wise is a global technology company, building the best way to move and manage the world's money. Wise has more than 400,000 active New Zealand customers. With Wise Account and Wise Business, people and businesses can hold 40 currencies, move money between countries and spend money abroad. Large companies and banks use Wise technology too; an entirely new network for the world's money. One of the world's fastest growing, profitable tech companies, Wise launched in 2011 and is listed on the London Stock Exchange under the ticker, WISE. In fiscal year 2025, Wise supported around 14.8 million personal customers and 700,000 business customers, processing approximately £145.2 billion in cross-border transactions, and saving customers an estimated £2 billion.

Greater Wellington Recommends Withdrawal Of Regulatory Standards Bill
Greater Wellington Recommends Withdrawal Of Regulatory Standards Bill

Scoop

time09-07-2025

  • Politics
  • Scoop

Greater Wellington Recommends Withdrawal Of Regulatory Standards Bill

Greater Wellington's submission to the Finance & Expenditure Committee on the Regulatory Standards Bill recommends the immediate withdrawal of the Bill. Deputy Chair of Greater Wellington and Councillor for Wairarapa Adrienne Staples and Chief Executive Nigel Corry, speaking to its submission to the Finance and Expenditure Select Committee said the Bill raised a cluster of red flags. 'It constrains government and regulators from acting in society's collective interest, it undermines Te Tiriti o Waitangi and constitutes executive government overreach, it attempts to solve a problem that doesn't exist, it creates legal risks, inefficiency, complexity and increased costs for local government, its partners and communities. On top of all that it will lead to worse social, environmental and economic outcomes,' said Mr Corry. 'Parliament has already voted down the flawed and inflammatory Te Tiriti o Waitangi Principles Bill. Surely it did not intend that a second Trojan horse would be injected into the Parliamentary Chamber. New Zealanders deserve better political discourse frankly,' said Cr Staples. In its submission, Greater Wellington highlighted the many, varied and adverse effects the Bill would have in the region and across New Zealand, specifically outlining the risks to core council functions: Environment - conservation, biodiversity and pest control The Bill's focus on short-term measurable benefit may impact Greater Wellington's ability to invest in innovative or long-term initiatives like predator control, replanting programmes, mātauranga Māori and mātauranga-ā-iwi driven conservation practices, or protection of taonga species with no immediate economic value. Māori approaches to conservation including their right to exercise kaitiakitanga could be challenged by the Bill's focus on individual rights over collective obligations. The restrictions on new regulatory powers could slow Greater Wellington's responses to unforeseen or emerging threats to biodiversity. Environmental Regulation The Bill's push for nationally consistent, minimal rules could constrain councils' discretion to use precautionary limits or adopt stricter standards in sensitive areas. Efforts to regulate (e.g. high-emitting industries) might be challenged or require compensation for lost profits. Modern environmental law and policy is based on the 'polluter pays' principle - those causing pollution or environmental harm bearing the costs of remediation or prevention. The Bill's regulatory takings clause, however, reverses this principle. As an example, if a future government were to enact regulations to protect rivers, requiring a dairy corporation to reduce its pollution or stocking rates, and this action was deemed to impair the corporation's property, the Bill implies some form of compensation may be payable. This creates a perverse incentive structure where the public, through taxpayer funds, would effectively subsidise the costs of environmental protection, rather than the polluters. Water Greater Wellington could be constrained in restricting water use to restore the health of the waterways, or during drought or pollution events if such measures are judged as unfairly impacting certain users. Attempts to uphold Te Mana o Te Wai or incorporate tikanga into freshwater regulation could be undermined by a framework that prioritises uniformity and individual rights. Any efforts to address long-standing inequitable rights to water access for example, for Māori landowners or under-serviced rural communities, could be stopped, as inconsistent with the Bill's emphasis on formal equality, or identical treatment for all. In the same way, the following could be challenged: partnerships with communities, iwi and hapū to govern and manage water, and Māori and public input into water planning if they are not considered 'materially affected'. Climate change and infrastructure for resilience In elevating a narrow economic reading of regulation with efficiency and cost-limitation tests, the Bill could put broad constraints on Greater Wellington's ability to invest in: long term resilience infrastructure upgrades, Māori-led climate initiatives, equity-based adaptation initiatives, low-emissions public transport, and progressive social procurement policies e.g. hiring locally, involving Māori suppliers and paying the living wage. Transport The Bill could curtail New Zealand's ability to expand public transport for the public good, including but not limited to: supporting community-led transport initiatives e.g. connecting to marae and papakāinga; cross-subsidising services in less profitable areas or where there is a higher need e.g. rural areas, disability access upgrades; and initiatives to reduce transport emissions. These initiatives could be challenged as being 'unequal treatment', and/or inconsistent with centralised efficiency metrics or cost-benefit assessments. Greater Wellington's free, frank and robust submission can be found here: Greater Wellington — Regulatory Standards Bill – Greater Wellington Regional Council Submission

Sound Law-Making Needed
Sound Law-Making Needed

Scoop

time08-07-2025

  • Business
  • Scoop

Sound Law-Making Needed

Sound law-making is needed for NZ to attract investment and achieve economic growth, BusinessNZ says. Chief Economist John Pask presented BusinessNZ's submission on the Regulatory Standards Bill to the Finance and Expenditure Select Committee today. He said the Bill was an important step towards improving the quality of regulation and reducing the compliance burden on businesses. "While Parliament is sovereign and can change legislation at any time it sees fit, there is benefit from placing appropriate scrutiny on decision-makers when law is made," Mr Pask said. "This Bill is not a silver bullet, but it is another good tool in the toolbox to improve the quality of regulation in NZ." He said it was important that the Bill more clearly covered regulatory takings, where an individual or business had their property restricted or confiscated by regulation, and provided for the principle of compensation in such cases. BusinessNZ recommends that scrutiny of local government regulation and Private Members Bills should also be provided for in the Bill, as well as scrutiny of central government legislation.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store