THE chief executive of HSBC, Stuart Gulliver, has said the giant bank could decide within months to move its headquarters from the UK insisting the possibility of a change was not an idle threat.
"It's going to take us a few months not years," Mr Gulliver told reporters regarding the timescale for deciding whether to shift the bank's HQ to another country.
He added: "This isn't meant to be a threat. This is just very objectively looking at a few facts."
HSBC's Glaswegian chairman Douglas Flint told last month's general meeting that the bank had launched a formal review of where it should have its headquarters.
Some institutional shareholders are said to have been urging HSBC to consider moving back to its former Hong Kong home.
HSBC launched the review amid concern about the Tories' intended referendum on the EU and the prospect of a continuing squeeze on banks in the UK.
George Osborne increased the levy on banks, to 0.21 per cent of their total debts, from 0.156 per cent, in The Budget.
Regarding increases in the levy, Mr Gulliver said: "That's actually going to make it impossible for us to stick to our commitment to make the dividend progressive."
HSBC is expected to pay $1.5 billion (£1bn), or about seven percent of expected profits, under this year's bank levy.
Mr Gulliver said HSBC had announced the HQ review shortly before a general election to raise the political profile of the issue.
However, the bank would have to get shareholder approval for a headquarters move.
Mr Flint told last month's general meeting the question is a complex one.
HSBC will hold an investor update on June 9. Mr Gulliver said it would give more detail about the HQ review on the day but did not expect to have completed it by then.
The group increased first quarter pre-tax profits by four per cent annually to $7.1bn compared with analysts' forecasts of around $5.8bn.
Growth in investment banking profits compensated for increased compliance and regulation costs.
HSBC began life in Hong Kong 150 years ago. It moved from Hong Kong to London in 1993 when it bought Midland Bank.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.Â
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.Â
That is invaluable.Â
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article