In a shocking decision that has sent equities tumbling, Italy passed a one-time 40% levy on the profits banks gain from higher interest rates.
The government’s action followed a rise in official interest rates that led to record earnings for Italian banks. The government now claims that the money will go toward tax reduction and assistance for mortgage holders. The levy on their profits, according to Italian banks, will be “significantly detrimental” to the industry. And after the objections, the finance ministry said the tax would be capped at 0.1% of assets, while reiterating the commitment to support businesses and people suffering due to the higher borrowing costs.
The tax will apply to the net interest income that comes from the gap between the banks’ lending and deposit rates.
According to reports, the levy will generate about €2 billion (£1.7 billion), which will go toward supporting families who are suffering from higher interest rates.
However, some European banks have termed the move bad news for the sector.
Shares in the country’s two largest banks, Intesa Sanpaolo and UniCredit, saw valuation drops, as the government announced the move. Italy’s third-largest bank Banco BPM and the state-owned Monte dei Paschi di Siena also witnessed market bloodbaths. The situation hasn’t been different for the private banks as well. The fallout has impacted the banking sectors of Germany and France too.
What is a Windfall Tax?
A windfall tax is imposed on unexpected/extraordinary profits or gains earned by individuals, businesses, or industries due to specific economic circumstances. It is often considered when a company or sector experiences an unusually large increase in profits that may be perceived as excessive or unjustified.
The rationale behind implementing a windfall tax is to capture a portion of these windfall gains and redistribute them for the ‘public good’. Windfall taxes are typically levied on top of regular corporate or income taxes and are meant to mitigate the potential negative effects of excessive profits on economic equity and fairness.
The implementation of a windfall tax can be a matter of debate and policy decision, as it involves balancing the need for government revenue with considerations of economic incentives, investment, and potential unintended consequences.
Why are countries charging Windfall Taxes?
Crude oil, gas, and coal prices have dramatically increased since 2020. As a result, energy firms made large profits at the expense of customers, who now pay significantly more for their energy use.
In light of this, the UN Secretary-General urged countries to apply windfall taxes on businesses that have greatly benefited from the increase in the price of fossil fuels. As a result, numerous nations, besides India, are thinking about enacting windfall taxes, including the UK, Germany, and others.
International stance on Windfall Tax
Italy is the most recent nation in Europe to surprise banks with a windfall tax on their earnings, which have increased as a result of interest rate hikes, in an effort to assist homeowners.
In order to earn $3.4 billion in 2023 from profits judged excessive to support assistance for families and businesses hurt by skyrocketing electricity and gas prices, the Czech lower house of Parliament authorized a 60% windfall tax on energy firms and banks.
President Emmanuel Macron of France stated in March 2023 that businesses with over 5,000 employees should instead reinvest more of their “exceptionally high” revenues into their workforce. However, he and Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire have disregarded the idea of a windfall tax. While French banks restrict the rate of quarterly increases in loan pricing, the country has a well-known, regulated savings program with an inflation-linked return that adjusts more swiftly than loan rates. This program accounts for slightly under 20% of bank deposits in France.
Compared to the COVID-era lows, net interest revenue for some of Germany’s largest banks has increased by 50% to 70%. However, under pro-business Finance Minister Christian Lindner, a windfall tax has not been a topic of discussion.
The German finance ministry declined to comment on Italy’s decision but pointed out that a coalition government agreement in Germany forbids tax rises.
In a decree issued in June 2023, Hungary modified the windfall taxes levied on significant economic sectors, stating that banks might pay up to 50% less in windfall taxes in 2024 if they increased their purchases of government bonds. Additionally, it placed a brand-new 13% “social tax” on specific investment kinds.
Italy authorized a one-time 40% tax on bank profits from increased interest rates on August 8. It intends to utilize the money raised to assist homeowners. According to insiders, it anticipates receiving less than 3 billion euros ($3.3 billion) in tax revenue.
In May 2023, Lithuania authorized a windfall tax on the banking sector’s net interest revenue.
In order to improve public finances and provide room to absorb the costs that a financial crisis could generate, Sweden implemented a “risk tax” for institutions having liabilities related to Swedish operations of over 150 billion Swedish crowns ($14.1 billion) in 2022 January.
In 2022, the tax amounted to 0.05% of liabilities and rose to 0.06% in 2023. The estimated annual revenue is 6 billion Swedish crowns.
Britain did not enact a bank windfall tax, but since 2011, it has imposed a bank levy that applies to both the global balance sheet assets of UK banks and the assets of foreign banks that have operations in the country.
Are Windfall Taxes fair?
There is a school of thought that believes that corporations don’t operate in a vacuum and that they have a moral obligation to the citizens of the countries they are from. The citizens are the end consumers who help these colossal organizations amass incredible profits.
However, this political intervention in the industry is risky because it occurs while economies are on the verge of recession. Governments must use extreme caution since doing so will undoubtedly frighten bank investors, increasing the capital cost. Additionally, weakening banks is not a wise move because those same banks may be required to provide free-flowing credit during a crisis.
There are many arguments against windfall tax, the most obvious of which is arguably the fact that the majority of banks have no windfall to tax. Analysis reveals a somewhat different scenario from the headlines about European banks reporting “decade-high” profits that have dominated the current reporting season. For many of these banks, the return on the equity deployed remains unimpressive, averaging 10 to 13%. That merely covers the return required by investors, which is also their cost of equity.
Additionally, a recession might be on the horizon, and when one hits, bank earnings plummet as loans default and losses skyrocket. On whether banks would be better prepared to weather a crisis this time, there is debate—there always is. However, the scenario in which impairments increase and profitability declines is by far the most likely. Profitability may decline from its low beginning levels. Because of this, despite appearing to have received “windfalls,” the share values of European banks have decreased by approximately 10% since March 2023.
The fact that politicians and regulators effectively opposed such a move in the recent past, albeit from a different angle, may be the strongest case against a windfall tax. At the beginning of the COVID crisis, politicians persuaded European regulators to compel banks to halt dividend payments. Their justification was straightforward and seemed convincing. Banks would be better prepared to handle the impending recession if they kept more of their profits, allowing them to lend more to the real economy and have more cash to recognize loan losses.
Do Windfall Taxes work?
There are several historical examples of such a windfall tax levied on a specific industry after it registered record gains.
The Oil and Gas Industry in the United Kingdom was taxed for the windfalls it made in the early 2000s. The country introduced windfall taxes on energy companies during a period of high oil prices. The taxes were meant to capture a portion of the unexpected profits generated by these companies due to the surge in oil prices. While these taxes generated revenue for the government, the move also faced criticism from the affected companies and some economists, who argued that such taxes could discourage investment in the energy sector and lead to reduced exploration and production.
The Mining Industry in Australia had a windfall tax during the commodities boom in the mid-2000s. The tax, known as the “Resource Super Profits Tax,” was intended to capture a portion of the extraordinary profits made by mining companies due to the high demand for commodities like iron ore and coal. The tax proposal faced strong opposition from the mining industry, which argued that it would hinder investment and job creation. The tax was eventually repealed.
Germany implemented a windfall tax on telecommunications companies during the late 1990s and early 2000s as part of its efforts to reduce its budget deficit. The tax was imposed on the proceeds from the auction of 3G mobile spectrum licenses. While the windfall tax helped generate additional revenue for the government, it also sparked criticism from the affected companies and analysts who raised concerns about the potential impact on investment in the telecommunications sector.
The Banking Industry in Iceland was taxed in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. The move was projected as a bid to stabilize the European country’s economy and address its fiscal challenges. The tax was applied to the large profits that Icelandic banks had made leading up to the crisis. This measure was part of a broader set of policies aimed at managing the crisis, and its effects were intertwined with other economic factors at play.
Some commodity-exporting countries, such as those heavily reliant on oil revenues, have considered or implemented windfall taxes to capture a larger share of profits when global prices are high. These taxes can provide governments with additional revenue that can be used for public spending or diversifying the economy. However, elements like the degree of government transparency, the administration of tax revenue, and the state of the economy as a whole can affect how effective such taxes are.
It’s important to note that the effects of windfall taxes can vary widely based on specific circumstances. They have the potential to affect investment choices, economic activity, and government revenue, and a variety of factors, such as the state of the economy, the structure of the industry, and public opinion, can affect their success or failure.