Goldman backs down on bank bonus delay

LONDON Tue Jan 15, 2013 6:01pm GMT

The Governor of the Bank of England Mervyn King speaks to the Economic Club of New York in New York, December 10, 2012. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid

The Governor of the Bank of England Mervyn King speaks to the Economic Club of New York in New York, December 10, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Brendan McDermid

Related News

Related Topics



LONDON (Reuters) - Goldman Sachs has scrapped plans to delay paying bonuses to its bankers in Britain to exploit an income tax cut for top earners after Bank of England Governor Mervyn King criticised the move.

Earlier on Tuesday, King chided the U.S. investment bank for considering a delay in bonuses until after April 6 when the top tax rate falls to 45 percent from 50 percent.

"The delay had been under consideration and the decision was made today not to do it," a person familiar with the situation said.

Goldman Sachs declined to comment.

King's intervention ratcheted up the pressure on Goldman, which sparked a furore last week when the bank's plan emerged.

"I find it a bit depressing that people who earn so much seem to think that it's even more exciting to adjust the timing of it to get the benefit of the lower tax rate," King told a panel of British MPs when asked about Goldman's plan.

The head of the central bank said that while Goldman's plan was not unlawful, the tax reduction was being done at a time when the rest of society was suffering from the consequences of the global financial crisis.

Britain had to shore up and nationalise banks during the 2007-09 crisis, which has sparked public anger over bonuses at a time when the government is freezing public pay and cutting expenditure.

Chancellor George Osborne, who introduced the reduction to the top rate of tax, has come under pressure from campaigners to prevent banks such as Goldman from avoiding tax by delaying their bonuses.

King, who has a salary of 305,000 pounds a year, told parliament's Treasury Select Committee it was "clumsy" to pay bonuses in such a way and betrayed a lack of attention to how others might feel.

"And in the long run, financial institutions, like all large institutions, do depend on goodwill and the rest of society. They can't just exist on their own," King said.

Goldman's plan touched on two sensitive issues that have triggered public anger in Britain: the size of bankers' bonuses and why large international firms like Starbucks and Amazon have been able to pay so little UK tax in recent years.

The Goldman bonuses in question were deferred from 2009 to 2011, a person familiar with the bank's operations told Reuters on Sunday.

The bank recently brought forward payments of deferred stock to executives in the United States to 2012 to beat tax hikes implemented for top earners this year.

"Political pressure in this area is likely to grow. Already the Labour opposition has attacked the government for giving Goldman an opportunity to reduce taxes on bonuses," UK shareholder advisory firm PIRC said in a note on Tuesday.

(Additional reporting by Lauren Tara LaCapra in New York and Sinead Cruise in London; Editing by Erica Billingham)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see
Comments (2)
Raymond.Vermont wrote:
Labour being very restrained in its news outage about this… Probably as Labour is a Goldman Sachs bitch.

Jan 15, 2013 8:26pm GMT  --  Report as abuse
finchley wrote:
Given that Goldman Sachs was one of the prime movers in organising the skids under the recent economic collapse throughout the world, saving a few bucks by delaying their bonuses merely indicates what sort of morally corrupt organisation they are.

Could they ever learn or do we have to suffer their depredations until the world gets sick of them and liquidates them?

Jan 16, 2013 12:33pm GMT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.