Leo Lewis and Gary Duncan
Enter our Snapshots of Summer photography competition
The United States is to call for draconian rules to control sovereign wealth funds, the vast, opaque, state-backed financial powerhouses that hold assets worth about $2.5 trillion (£1.2 trillion).
The proposal will be made this week in Washington at the meeting of finance ministers and central bankers from the Group of Seven (G7) nations, The Times has learnt. Observers question whether such regulations will be able to rein in the funds.
There is increasing concern in Britain over the influence of sovereign funds. About half the shares in the London Stock Exchange are held by Qatar and Dubai, with the former close to acquiring J Sainsbury, the supermarket chain. Temasek, of Singapore, and the Chinese Development Bank both have stakes in Barclays.
The US is expected to call on G7 leaders and the International Monetary Fund to agree on a set of guidelines demanding better disclosure by the sovereign funds and giving governments greater ability to scrutinise their activities. It is expected to be the first time that the subject of the funds will appear in the closing statement of a G7 meeting and should generate a fierce backlash from the countries that manage the largest funds.
The calls come amid mounting fears that the aggressive funds — which are focusing increasingly on the stocks of listed companies and other mainstream investments — could destabilise financial markets and be used to mount stealth takeover bids for a range of strategic assets.
A report this morning will say that Western economies are on a collision course with the sovereign funds. “There is a serious likelihood of Western governments and sovereign wealth funds clashing over what they can buy and where,” Gerard Lyons, the chief economist of Standard Chartered and the author of the report, said.
“We are likely to see Western governments seeking to protect national champions and strategic sectors, as is their right.”
The rapid growth and broadening activity of the sovereign funds follow the long-term surge in crude oil prices and the amassing of huge foreign exchange reserves by Asian economies that manipulate their own currencies. One main proposal from Washington will be that the funds declare what proportion of their investments is held overseas.
The sovereign funds that have raised the most concern include those run by Singapore, Russia, the United Arab Emirates and, most recently, the $200 billion behemoth launched by China last month. Merrill Lynch analysts predict that capital managed by sovereign funds could hit nearly $8 trillion by 2011 and many believe that the funds soon will exceed the entire hedge fund industry in market influence.
The US position on sovereign funds was clarified over the summer in a largely unnoticed speech by Clay Lowery, the Under-Secretary for International Affairs at the US Treasury. Identifying a potential “impact on financial market stability”, he said that because so little was known about the funds’ investment policies, minor comments or rumours could spark volatility. “It is hard to dismiss entirely the possibility of unseen, imprudent risk management with broader consequences,” he said in June.
Cabinet Office insiders in Japan told The Times that Tokyo had held informal discussions with Washington over the growing market influence of the sovereign funds and that it doubtless would back the US proposal. One source said: “The shared concern by Japan and the US is that the funds do not behave according to traditional market logic, and that is why we need greater transparency. ”A source close to the Bank of Japan said that Japan was “institutionally terrified” that its high-tech industrial base would become the target of emerging economy governments via the funds.
The French Government has highlighted the rising influence of the sovereign funds and is understood to be producing a report on how to deal with the political threat posed by them to the country’s “industrial jewels”.
National interests
Recent big deals by sovereign funds
June 2007: Singapore fund buys property group that owns Merrill Lynch Financial Centre in London for $960 million
July: Singapore fund buys 50 per cent of WestQuay shopping centre in Southampton for $600 million
July: Singapore’s Temasek fund invests $2 billion in Barclays, with prospect of $3 billion more
September: Dubai and Qatar buy almost 50 per cent of London Stock Exchange between them
October: Delta Two fund run by Qatar close to buying J Sainsbury
Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
Discover the power of collective thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Media Hub Home Entertainment System
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday
Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination
Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™
2009
per month on 36-month
Personal Contract Hire (PCH)
2008
42850
Car Insurance
£24,250 - £30,346
MI5
London
£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol
Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands
OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities
Completely London
Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views
The best new homes in Wimbledon?
Nationwide
Fabulous Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers Including Virgin Atlantic Flights Prices Start From Only £699pp!
Last Minute Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers. Med From £499pp, Caribbean From £699pp!
5 star quality at a 3 star price.
8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions | E-paper
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Many hedge funds and private equity do not operate very transparently - so there is a risk of the US being hypocritical here. But if these funds out of China and the Middle-East become enormously large and powerful in years to come, they really do have the ability to cause massive fluctuations in the market (whether on purpose, or through lack of transparency). This is extremely dangerous for the market and i think a much bigger conern in the long-run than are so called "strategic assets". I think there is definitely a need to talk about these concerns; but assuming countries like China really do opt for increasing transparency and less currency manipulation in the future, i am against these proposed barriers
Andy, College Station, Texas
The United Statesâ global distribution of dollars, reasons aplenty, now must face the question; How are the new owners of the wealth to employ the dollars? Internal economic use results in accelerating the national inflation rate. Purchasing United States Treasury bonds serves the issuerâs desires. The accumulated dollars are in reality difficult to place into circulation without disruptive results. The rebalancing of global economies in an orderly fashion is in question. Western central bank âworking agreementsâ failed to accommodate this radical wealth shift. Questions without answers
L Valluzzo, E Hampton, USA
As far as im concerned are not all forms of 'Economic warfare' already restricted by multiple international treatys under which these funds could be prsoecuted if they tried to use these assets to uneconomic ends? or are the restrictions currency and stock market specific?
Andrew, Southampton, UK
This just shows how hypocritical western economies are. They will only support free trade providing that they themselves are the winners. Many multinational corps in Europe are also related or owned partly by governments but if Asian governments try to block them from acquiring their assets, then I am sure they will take the case to the WTO and complain about protectionism.
Mike, Hong Kong, China
This puts back in the public eye the matter of Governments holding a "golden share" in public utilities. But would we ever see the day when golden shares were extended to cover other businesses? Somehow I think not, but the US is correct to be very concerned over the increasing power of sovereign wealth funds.
Ray R, London, England
At a time when the US housing market is weak and companies are finding it difficult to access credit is it sensible to be placing restrictions on foreign investors, who are bringing liquidity to the market and are all seeking to maximise shareholder value (I still have not come across an investor who intends to lose money by the deals they are making). Equity markets are booming, but this could turn nasty of hot flows into this are disrupted, thus causing equity financing to dry up as well.
It seems very strange to me that nations, who could create their own private equity companies within any Western nation (which adds costs to deals - thus decreasing efficiency) are being shunned.
One of the problems in the Great Depression was protectionism - we have already seen the US housing bubble burst, without continued liquidity and efficiency in markets we may see many other asset bubbles bursting too, AND it will hurt the "common man" hardest.
Jaja Hale, Cayman Islands,
This puts back in the limelight the matter of Governments holding a "golden share" in public utilities in order to retain ultimate control. But would we ever see the day when golden shares were extended to cover other businesses? Somehow I think not, but the US is correct to be very concerned over the increasing power of sovereign wealth funds.
Ray R, London, England
One thing about the table accompanying the hard copy newspaper version of this article puzzled me. The largest of the top ten sovereign wealth funds shown was that of UAE at $625bn, which was nearly a third of the aggregate value of those ten. Yet nowhere was Saudi Arabia mentioned, neither in the table nor the text of the article. One might have expected them to be the largest.
Can anyone clarify how they figure and fit into the scheme of things?
qd, LONDON, uk
"If touted restrictions work, multinationals could like wise be regulated."
They already are.
Bertrand, Brazil
The problem is not that a foreigner will own the company, its that a foreigner will own the company and use it to its advantage.
The current system works because maximising sharehlder wealth is the accepted norm.
Is that Chinas aim when it buys barclays?
Or is it setting up a strategic weapon?
Dominic, Manchester, UK
Would it be paranoic to think that an assault on capitalism is under way? Its open society primal ideal let it be opened to attacks from inside. What will be those corporations concerns if they would be under non-western societies rules? Or capitalism will over rule them philosophically? I do oppose government intervention, but if other countries are doing it, what is left to do?
Bertrand Kolesza, Porto Alegre, Brazil
If touted restrictions work, multinationals could like wise be regulated.
Errol, Juriqyulla, Mexico
These are valid concerns. But perhaps if the US didn't have such a vast borrowing need (i.e., a current account deficit), other countries wouldn't have to build up such large cash surpluses, which have to go somewhere! Or are China and the Arab states supposed to accept US dollars that can only be used for I.O.U. US Treasury bonds rather than actual assets? That would make US dollars into something less than real money in the terms we understand it today...
Mike, Bangkok,