中國在哥本哈根全球氣候峰會上不容小視﹐中國官員正給美國和其它富裕國家施壓﹐要求其接受新的限制其排放的條款﹐並繼續對貧窮國家採納清潔能源技術的做法予以補貼。中國是世界上最大的碳排放國。人們不太瞭解的是﹐中國現在正在成為其中一些解決辦法的發源地。中國的目標面臨著巨大挑戰。中國最終可能只是成為一個低成本的生產基地﹐而不是創新的發源地。更糟的是﹐它在降低成本上的努力可能會扼殺海外的創新。
中國在減少碳排放的道路上還有很長的路要走。對於在為期兩年的清理過程中關閉的每家過時的發電廠﹐它又新產生了大約兩倍於此的發電能力。甚至情況更好一些的發電廠也運行不善﹐因為公司的負責人不願支付清理排放的費用。
在對抗全球變暖的鬥爭中﹐最大的收獲中將有一部分來自清理燃煤電廠的碳排放。中國和美國總計佔全球煤炭儲量的44%﹐並且不打算放棄這種廉價可靠的電力來源。根據美國政府的預測﹐全球煤炭使用量到2030年時可能會增加近50%。
中國政府週一表示﹐將通過加快保障性住房建設以及城市和國有工礦棚戶區改造來努力遏制部分城市房價過快上漲的勢頭。 中國國務院(State Council)的上述決定並新政﹐但中國最高領導層似乎越來越擔心長期通貨膨脹壓力的不斷積聚。在政府政策刺激下的信貸熱以及大規模公共支出促使中國經濟得以快速復甦﹐但這也引發了上述的通貨膨脹壓力擔憂。中國政府目前正面對公眾對房地產市場過熱所表現出的日益加重的焦慮情緒﹐以及股市潛在的資產泡沫問題﹐這些最終可能會威脅到社會穩定。
地產的政策重心將更側重於鼓勵政府補貼住房的建設和銷售﹐而不是普通住房和更昂貴的商品房。
2010年2月11日 星期四
哥本哈根氣候變化會議 丹麥銀行系統備受重視
哥本哈根氣候變化會議 丹麥銀行系統備受重視
經濟日報 2009/12/24轉寄列印
■項家麟■
正當丹麥首都哥本哈根舉行聯合國氣候變化會議如火如荼之際，丹麥銀行系統再度備受重視。特別是在經歷全球金融風暴之際，丹麥的金融體系卻依舊穩健，成為不少富豪大戶們理想安全的資金存放地。
連續兩年丹麥獲選為全世界最快樂的國家，當世界只注意到丹麥人如何享受人生的生活態度時，全球富豪正默默的將資金移往這個快樂的國家。根據歐元雜誌（Euromoney）調查，丹麥是全球投資環境評比第一名的國家，在丹麥，利息所得和資本收益不被徵稅，且政府嚴格執行保密法，保證客戶資金安全的金融法律，這些都是吸引富豪將資金移轉到此的原因。
當政府力量開始伸進人民的生活時，保密似乎成了有錢人最在意的事情。丹麥哥本哈根私人銀行總經理MichaelChristensen提到，過去以來，亞洲人民一直不重視隱密性，加上政府沒有保密法，導致有錢人的資金移出自己國家。而在美國政府追查瑞士稅務，全球開始討伐境外免稅天堂之際，丹麥健全的金融體制卻在這時候脫穎而出。MichaelChristensen提到，丹麥人的稅務非常高，但是針對丹麥以外的居民在丹麥銀行帳戶，政府不會課徵任何稅務，這是我們最大的優勢之一。
丹麥哥本哈根銀行四年前，開始針對亞洲國家人民提供私人銀行服務。該行大中華區代表蔡幼青指出，我們和來自美國的華人資產管理公司-華家族辦公室合作，讓處於地球另一端的華人有機會去接觸和理解我們銀行。
蔡幼青表示，近來由於具有雙重國籍的亞洲人急於解決稅務問題，龐大的業務量，已讓我們必須再應徵銀行家，來提供亞洲客戶的服務。我們不但協助客戶投資全世界的金融商品及提供最好的存款利率，我們也開始為亞洲客戶提供信託及家族基金會設立的服務。
2010年開始，丹麥哥根本哈根銀行結合華家族辦公室，提供客戶Family Office的服務。蔡幼青提到，當今有錢人的需求越來越廣泛，私人銀行服務已經無法滿足他們，我們將針對亞洲的家族客戶，推出Family Office的服務，我想，最好的時機已經出現。
由於今年丹麥舉行聯合國氣候變化會議，才讓全球再度注意到這個國家的金融服務，一直以來處於低調的丹麥，將在此時開始，藉由金融服務發光發熱。丹麥哥本哈根私人銀行暨華家族辦公室可聯絡：aipt@hwafamily.com、Alfred.tsai@finansbanken.dk。
經濟日報 2009/12/24轉寄列印
■項家麟■
正當丹麥首都哥本哈根舉行聯合國氣候變化會議如火如荼之際，丹麥銀行系統再度備受重視。特別是在經歷全球金融風暴之際，丹麥的金融體系卻依舊穩健，成為不少富豪大戶們理想安全的資金存放地。
連續兩年丹麥獲選為全世界最快樂的國家，當世界只注意到丹麥人如何享受人生的生活態度時，全球富豪正默默的將資金移往這個快樂的國家。根據歐元雜誌（Euromoney）調查，丹麥是全球投資環境評比第一名的國家，在丹麥，利息所得和資本收益不被徵稅，且政府嚴格執行保密法，保證客戶資金安全的金融法律，這些都是吸引富豪將資金移轉到此的原因。
當政府力量開始伸進人民的生活時，保密似乎成了有錢人最在意的事情。丹麥哥本哈根私人銀行總經理MichaelChristensen提到，過去以來，亞洲人民一直不重視隱密性，加上政府沒有保密法，導致有錢人的資金移出自己國家。而在美國政府追查瑞士稅務，全球開始討伐境外免稅天堂之際，丹麥健全的金融體制卻在這時候脫穎而出。MichaelChristensen提到，丹麥人的稅務非常高，但是針對丹麥以外的居民在丹麥銀行帳戶，政府不會課徵任何稅務，這是我們最大的優勢之一。
丹麥哥本哈根銀行四年前，開始針對亞洲國家人民提供私人銀行服務。該行大中華區代表蔡幼青指出，我們和來自美國的華人資產管理公司-華家族辦公室合作，讓處於地球另一端的華人有機會去接觸和理解我們銀行。
蔡幼青表示，近來由於具有雙重國籍的亞洲人急於解決稅務問題，龐大的業務量，已讓我們必須再應徵銀行家，來提供亞洲客戶的服務。我們不但協助客戶投資全世界的金融商品及提供最好的存款利率，我們也開始為亞洲客戶提供信託及家族基金會設立的服務。
2010年開始，丹麥哥根本哈根銀行結合華家族辦公室，提供客戶Family Office的服務。蔡幼青提到，當今有錢人的需求越來越廣泛，私人銀行服務已經無法滿足他們，我們將針對亞洲的家族客戶，推出Family Office的服務，我想，最好的時機已經出現。
由於今年丹麥舉行聯合國氣候變化會議，才讓全球再度注意到這個國家的金融服務，一直以來處於低調的丹麥，將在此時開始，藉由金融服務發光發熱。丹麥哥本哈根私人銀行暨華家族辦公室可聯絡：aipt@hwafamily.com、Alfred.tsai@finansbanken.dk。
Swiss Annuities And Life Insurance: Secure Returns, Asset Protection, And Privacy
Swiss Annuities And Life Insurance: Secure Returns, Asset Protection, And Privacy
Gantenbein / 著
Swiss Annuities
Despite a recent pact between Switzerland and the United States to share tax evasion information, Swiss franc fixed annuities have been attracting a lot of U.S. dollars of late. Sources estimate that Americans have been putting about $2 billion annually into the Swiss insurance instruments, due to the falling dollar, inflation fears and the need to protect assets from creditors.
It’s no wonder. While U.S. fixed deferred annuities yield about 2 percent to 3 percent, Swiss franc fixed annuities have generated a total return of more than 8.5 percent annually over the past five years, according to Swiss Guard International, a Zurich-based brokerage firm. Of course, this factors in currency appreciation against the U.S. dollar.
“Our business and business of other Swiss brokers has increased,” says Darrell Aviss, Swiss Guard International managing director. “We have a lot of business people, professionals and doctors that are investing because they want to be protected from frivolous lawsuits.”
Whether this trend will continue is uncertain, however, after a number of Swiss banks have stopped accepting deposits from, or opening accounts, for U.S. customers, according to a July 21 article in The Wall Street Journal. Swiss insurance companies are being cautious due to the problems with UBS, a Swiss investment bank that had been under investigation by the IRS. The bank and the U.S government are negotiating a settlement. The bank was ordered to provide information to the IRS on about 52,000 U.S. clients who may have been involved in U.S. income tax evasion. The two countries agreed in June to fight tax evasion through information sharing. Nevertheless, the Swiss Government said it would not permit UBS to turn over the names.
As is well known, the Swiss have a tradition of secrecy when it comes to dealing with investors’ money. In Switzerland, there are no foreign reporting requirements or forced repatriation of funds. Under Swiss law, an annuity cannot be seized by any court-ordered collection procedures instigated by creditors.
Although Swiss franc investments may be attractive in uncertain economic times, only a fistful of insurance companies can issue fixed rate annuities to Americans. Among those: Pax Insurance, Basel; Generali-Life in Adliswil; Forces-Vives, Lausanne, and Swiss Life, Zurich.
Unlike U.S. fixed annuities, Swiss fixed annuities are not tax-deferred. A U.S. taxpayer owes taxes on both income and any foreign currency value appreciation. However, Swiss annuities are not subject to Swiss taxes. And they are exempt from the 35 percent withholding tax that Switzerland imposes on account interest received by foreigners.
Swiss franc fixed annuities lack the 10 percent penalty that U.S. annuities have on withdrawals before age 59 ½. Plus a Swiss-U.S. double taxation treaty eliminates the 1 percent U.S. excise tax on the purchase of foreign insurance products.
Swiss insurance companies are not currently required to issue 1099 interest and dividend forms to the U.S. IRS. Nevertheless, policyholders just report fixed annuity income and currency gains on their U.S. tax returns, based on IRS rule 1.1275-1.
Although more details need to be worked out, a recent U.S. Swiss agreement requires the countries to share information on potential tax evaders and could change the way taxes are reported. Leonard Witman, a Florham Park, N.J. estate tax attorney and Rutgers University law professor, predicts discussions between the United States and Swiss could lead Swiss insurance companies to issue IRS 1099 forms on U.S. accounts.
“The (tax) information between the U.S. and Swiss is going to be expanded tremendously," Witman says. “We [the U.S. government] can’t raise taxes, but they can raise revenue by increasing enforcement. The IRS is hiring new agents to raise revenue.”
For clients concerned about how the IRS views offshore investments, Aviss says Swiss variable annuities may be a better alternative. A Swiss variable annuity can be structured to adhere to U.S. tax laws, complete with IRS 1099 forms. The money grows tax-deferred in international mutual funds, fixed income and other investments, such as hedge funds.
Swiss insurance companies don’t publish information on U.S. dollars moving into Swiss investments.
Overall, 68.6 percent of total Swiss life insurance premiums, which tallied $125 billion in 2009, represent foreign money, according to a 2009 report by the Zurich-based trade organization, the Swiss Insurance Association. It is estimated that Americans have been putting about $2 billion annually into Swiss franc annuities since 2004 due to the falling dollar, inflation fears and the desire to protect assets from creditors.
Swiss franc fixed annuities pay a guaranteed rate of about 2 percent. The guaranteed rate is determined by the Swiss government bond rate when the annuity contract is issued. Annuity interest earnings are supplemented by profit-sharing dividends. Historically, the average annual dividend rate paid on Swiss Franc annuities has ranged from 1 percent to 5 percent. If the Swiss franc rises in value versus the dollar, total return is higher. Of course, the total return can drop substantially if the U.S. dollar rises in value.
Minimum initial investments in Swiss annuities range from $20,000 to $50,000. Account opening forms are sent to the Swiss insurance company via a Swiss brokerage firm. Swiss insurance company premiums are paid via international wire transfers.
A fee-only registered investment advisor can refer a client to a Swiss insurance broker, such as SwissGuard, JML or BFI Consultants, all Zurich, and Volcon in Zug for a negotiated referral fee. But most U.S. broker-dealers prohibit registered reps from accepting referral fees.
“Swiss francs are considered one of the world’s steadiest currencies,” Aviss says. ”Switzerland also avoids government deficits and the government unofficially backs its currency over 100 percent with gold bullion.” Swiss insurance companies, he says, are required to set up separate reserves to back 100 percent of their annuity obligations.
Estate planning attorneys often recommend Swiss franc insurance products to the well-heeled for asset protection. However, Swiss fraudulent conveyance laws have a one-year statute of limitations for property transfers, according to Jacob Stein, partner with Klueger & Stein, Los Angeles. Plus blanket asset protection under Swiss law applies only when the annuity policy incorporates an appropriate beneficiary designation.
Before wiring money overseas, Witman advises that financial advisors talk to a local attorney. Many state annuities already are protected from creditor claims. “A Swiss annuity is just another annuity,” he says. It has to be evaluated as an investment and the financial strength of the insurance company.”
Other caveats to investing Swiss annuities:
· Swiss annuities may come with back-end surrender charges if your client cashes out the annuity before maturity.
· Legal fees and court costs could prove extra costly and cumbersome if you ever have a problem with an insurance company outside the United States.
· Unlike in the United States, there are no independent rating agencies to help you judge a Swiss insurance company’s financial strength.
It’s no wonder. While U.S. fixed deferred annuities yield about 2 percent to 3 percent, Swiss franc fixed annuities have generated a total return of more than 8.5 percent annually over the past five years, according to Swiss Guard International, a Zurich-based brokerage firm. Of course, this factors in currency appreciation against the U.S. dollar.
“Our business and business of other Swiss brokers has increased,” says Darrell Aviss, Swiss Guard International managing director. “We have a lot of business people, professionals and doctors that are investing because they want to be protected from frivolous lawsuits.”
Whether this trend will continue is uncertain, however, after a number of Swiss banks have stopped accepting deposits from, or opening accounts, for U.S. customers, according to a July 21 article in The Wall Street Journal. Swiss insurance companies are being cautious due to the problems with UBS, a Swiss investment bank that had been under investigation by the IRS. The bank and the U.S government are negotiating a settlement. The bank was ordered to provide information to the IRS on about 52,000 U.S. clients who may have been involved in U.S. income tax evasion. The two countries agreed in June to fight tax evasion through information sharing. Nevertheless, the Swiss Government said it would not permit UBS to turn over the names.
As is well known, the Swiss have a tradition of secrecy when it comes to dealing with investors’ money. In Switzerland, there are no foreign reporting requirements or forced repatriation of funds. Under Swiss law, an annuity cannot be seized by any court-ordered collection procedures instigated by creditors.
Although Swiss franc investments may be attractive in uncertain economic times, only a fistful of insurance companies can issue fixed rate annuities to Americans. Among those: Pax Insurance, Basel; Generali-Life in Adliswil; Forces-Vives, Lausanne, and Swiss Life, Zurich.
Unlike U.S. fixed annuities, Swiss fixed annuities are not tax-deferred. A U.S. taxpayer owes taxes on both income and any foreign currency value appreciation. However, Swiss annuities are not subject to Swiss taxes. And they are exempt from the 35 percent withholding tax that Switzerland imposes on account interest received by foreigners.
Swiss franc fixed annuities lack the 10 percent penalty that U.S. annuities have on withdrawals before age 59 ½. Plus a Swiss-U.S. double taxation treaty eliminates the 1 percent U.S. excise tax on the purchase of foreign insurance products.
Swiss insurance companies are not currently required to issue 1099 interest and dividend forms to the U.S. IRS. Nevertheless, policyholders just report fixed annuity income and currency gains on their U.S. tax returns, based on IRS rule 1.1275-1.
Although more details need to be worked out, a recent U.S. Swiss agreement requires the countries to share information on potential tax evaders and could change the way taxes are reported. Leonard Witman, a Florham Park, N.J. estate tax attorney and Rutgers University law professor, predicts discussions between the United States and Swiss could lead Swiss insurance companies to issue IRS 1099 forms on U.S. accounts.
“The (tax) information between the U.S. and Swiss is going to be expanded tremendously," Witman says. “We [the U.S. government] can’t raise taxes, but they can raise revenue by increasing enforcement. The IRS is hiring new agents to raise revenue.”
For clients concerned about how the IRS views offshore investments, Aviss says Swiss variable annuities may be a better alternative. A Swiss variable annuity can be structured to adhere to U.S. tax laws, complete with IRS 1099 forms. The money grows tax-deferred in international mutual funds, fixed income and other investments, such as hedge funds.
Swiss insurance companies don’t publish information on U.S. dollars moving into Swiss investments.
Overall, 68.6 percent of total Swiss life insurance premiums, which tallied $125 billion in 2009, represent foreign money, according to a 2009 report by the Zurich-based trade organization, the Swiss Insurance Association. It is estimated that Americans have been putting about $2 billion annually into Swiss franc annuities since 2004 due to the falling dollar, inflation fears and the desire to protect assets from creditors.
Swiss franc fixed annuities pay a guaranteed rate of about 2 percent. The guaranteed rate is determined by the Swiss government bond rate when the annuity contract is issued. Annuity interest earnings are supplemented by profit-sharing dividends. Historically, the average annual dividend rate paid on Swiss Franc annuities has ranged from 1 percent to 5 percent. If the Swiss franc rises in value versus the dollar, total return is higher. Of course, the total return can drop substantially if the U.S. dollar rises in value.
Minimum initial investments in Swiss annuities range from $20,000 to $50,000. Account opening forms are sent to the Swiss insurance company via a Swiss brokerage firm. Swiss insurance company premiums are paid via international wire transfers.
A fee-only registered investment advisor can refer a client to a Swiss insurance broker, such as SwissGuard, JML or BFI Consultants, all Zurich, and Volcon in Zug for a negotiated referral fee. But most U.S. broker-dealers prohibit registered reps from accepting referral fees.
“Swiss francs are considered one of the world’s steadiest currencies,” Aviss says. ”Switzerland also avoids government deficits and the government unofficially backs its currency over 100 percent with gold bullion.” Swiss insurance companies, he says, are required to set up separate reserves to back 100 percent of their annuity obligations.
Estate planning attorneys often recommend Swiss franc insurance products to the well-heeled for asset protection. However, Swiss fraudulent conveyance laws have a one-year statute of limitations for property transfers, according to Jacob Stein, partner with Klueger & Stein, Los Angeles. Plus blanket asset protection under Swiss law applies only when the annuity policy incorporates an appropriate beneficiary designation.
Before wiring money overseas, Witman advises that financial advisors talk to a local attorney. Many state annuities already are protected from creditor claims. “A Swiss annuity is just another annuity,” he says. It has to be evaluated as an investment and the financial strength of the insurance company.”
Other caveats to investing Swiss annuities:
· Swiss annuities may come with back-end surrender charges if your client cashes out the annuity before maturity.
· Legal fees and court costs could prove extra costly and cumbersome if you ever have a problem with an insurance company outside the United States.
· Unlike in the United States, there are no independent rating agencies to help you judge a Swiss insurance company’s financial strength.
中國面臨人民幣升值壓力和熱錢風險
發改委﹕中國面臨人民幣升值壓力和熱錢風險
2010年01月06日07:18
中國國家發展和改革委員會(National Development and Reform Commission, 簡稱﹕發改委)副主任張曉強表示﹐受美元走弱和發達國家量化寬鬆的貨幣政策影響﹐人民幣面臨新一輪升值壓力﹐可能引發熱錢大規模流入。發改委網站週二發佈了張曉強在一次工作會議上的講話。人民幣升值的國際壓力近幾個月不斷加劇﹐但中國政府卻一直在捍衛其維持人民幣匯率穩定的政策﹐稱該政策有助於世界各國應對金融危機。
張曉強表示﹐受發達國家量化寬鬆的貨幣政策、美元走弱、中國經濟率先復甦等因素影響﹐人民幣面臨新一輪升值壓力﹐可能引發熱錢大規模流入﹐給中國的流動性管理增加困難。張曉強的講話表明了中國政府在制定人民幣匯率政策時面臨的困境﹕中國龐大的貿易順差要求人民幣升值﹐但一旦有政府允許人民幣升值的任何風吹草動﹐都將可能導致大規模的資金流入﹐也就是分析師們所說的2008年上半年發生的情況。張曉強表示﹐中國政府還將鼓勵境內企業積極涉足海外油氣、礦產等領域﹐包括投資資源產品深加工項目﹐並將推出鼓勵境外投資的相關法規。張曉強在發改委負責外資及境外投資事務。
中國政府鼓勵境外投資﹐從一定程度上講是為了獲取資源及先進的技術﹐幫助境內企業通過併購品牌等方式實現境外擴張﹐並抑制因貿易順差及海外資金流入造成的流動性過剩局面。截至去年9月份﹐中國外匯儲備規模高達2.3萬億美元﹐居全球首位。張曉強稱﹐儘管中國的外匯儲備規模不斷擴大﹐但境內企業在向境外擴張時仍面臨融資困境。他表示﹐中國將敦促國內銀行向境外投資提供貸款支持﹐允許一些企業借用成本低於國內的國際商業貸款﹐並允許有實力的符合條件的企業通過發行債券方式到國際金融市場融資。
他還表示﹐預計中國2009年的國內生產總值(GDP)增長8.5%。這與市場對中國去年GDP增幅將超過8%的預期基本一致。在鼓勵外資外商投資方面﹐張曉強表示﹐中國需要保持對外開放﹐但同時要確保國家經濟安全。他舉例稱﹐外資併購國內農業企業﹐可能會給國家經濟發展帶來潛在風險。他表示﹐預計2009年外商在華投資略有下降﹐而中國境外投資額有所增長。他指出﹐中國將繼續支持符合條件的境內企業到境外發行股票並上市﹐鼓勵和引導外商在中國進行創業風險投資和私募股權投資。他還表示﹐中國將完善外債管理。
2010年01月06日07:18
中國國家發展和改革委員會(National Development and Reform Commission, 簡稱﹕發改委)副主任張曉強表示﹐受美元走弱和發達國家量化寬鬆的貨幣政策影響﹐人民幣面臨新一輪升值壓力﹐可能引發熱錢大規模流入。發改委網站週二發佈了張曉強在一次工作會議上的講話。人民幣升值的國際壓力近幾個月不斷加劇﹐但中國政府卻一直在捍衛其維持人民幣匯率穩定的政策﹐稱該政策有助於世界各國應對金融危機。
張曉強表示﹐受發達國家量化寬鬆的貨幣政策、美元走弱、中國經濟率先復甦等因素影響﹐人民幣面臨新一輪升值壓力﹐可能引發熱錢大規模流入﹐給中國的流動性管理增加困難。張曉強的講話表明了中國政府在制定人民幣匯率政策時面臨的困境﹕中國龐大的貿易順差要求人民幣升值﹐但一旦有政府允許人民幣升值的任何風吹草動﹐都將可能導致大規模的資金流入﹐也就是分析師們所說的2008年上半年發生的情況。張曉強表示﹐中國政府還將鼓勵境內企業積極涉足海外油氣、礦產等領域﹐包括投資資源產品深加工項目﹐並將推出鼓勵境外投資的相關法規。張曉強在發改委負責外資及境外投資事務。
中國政府鼓勵境外投資﹐從一定程度上講是為了獲取資源及先進的技術﹐幫助境內企業通過併購品牌等方式實現境外擴張﹐並抑制因貿易順差及海外資金流入造成的流動性過剩局面。截至去年9月份﹐中國外匯儲備規模高達2.3萬億美元﹐居全球首位。張曉強稱﹐儘管中國的外匯儲備規模不斷擴大﹐但境內企業在向境外擴張時仍面臨融資困境。他表示﹐中國將敦促國內銀行向境外投資提供貸款支持﹐允許一些企業借用成本低於國內的國際商業貸款﹐並允許有實力的符合條件的企業通過發行債券方式到國際金融市場融資。
他還表示﹐預計中國2009年的國內生產總值(GDP)增長8.5%。這與市場對中國去年GDP增幅將超過8%的預期基本一致。在鼓勵外資外商投資方面﹐張曉強表示﹐中國需要保持對外開放﹐但同時要確保國家經濟安全。他舉例稱﹐外資併購國內農業企業﹐可能會給國家經濟發展帶來潛在風險。他表示﹐預計2009年外商在華投資略有下降﹐而中國境外投資額有所增長。他指出﹐中國將繼續支持符合條件的境內企業到境外發行股票並上市﹐鼓勵和引導外商在中國進行創業風險投資和私募股權投資。他還表示﹐中國將完善外債管理。
2009年美元的漲與跌
2009年美元的漲與跌
2010年01月07日08:03
在美元以堅挺姿態挺過金融危機後﹐由於投資者重拾風險偏好﹐而且再度緊抓美元的弱點不放﹐美元在2009年曆經起落最終以下跌收場。
由摩根大通(J.P. Morgan Chase)編制的美元兌一籃子16種貨幣的美元指數在去年下跌了5%。這一數據掩蓋了美元匯價的大幅波動：去年春天﹐該指數漲幅一度高達8%﹐而去年下半年美元跌幅一度也達到了這一水平。年底將至時﹐美元展開了一場短暫但有力的反彈：美國的經濟數據意外強勁﹐而且隸屬歐元區的希臘和西班牙的可信度似乎也突然被打上了折扣。對一些投資者來說﹐這一事態加大了美元前景的變數﹐即美元勢必迎來更大的變化。美元不再像金融危機期間那樣只是人們風險承擔意願的象徵﹐而是再一次跟隨美國與其他國家的經濟強弱對比而時漲時落。
巴克萊(Barclays Capital)駐紐約的外匯交易員厄文(Jeremy Urwin)說﹐投資者可能會關注相對經濟表現﹐而不是簡單的冒險或避險策略﹔特別需要指出的是﹐各經濟體之間的利差將在2010年成為匯市首先需要考慮的問題。如果美國經濟能繼續有出人意料的表現﹐而且其他國家也令人失望的話﹐這對美元來說可能構成利好。但是如果美國經濟復蘇乏力﹐而且應對金融危機的種種努力催生出過度的通貨膨脹的話﹐那麼美元可能就沒有好果子吃了。美元在2009年初期銳不可當。當時金融系統仍步履蹣跚、股市持續下挫、經濟領域的壞消息一個接著一個。投資者蜂擁買進美元﹐因為置身於危機中的他們需要找到可能的避風港。然而﹐到了4月份時各國央行的救市努力初見成效﹐投資者也開始將手中現金派上用場﹐因此他們當中有些人就開始減持美元。美元跌勢在秋天有所加劇﹐因為在朝向復蘇邁進的過程中美國似乎是一瘸一拐﹐而其他國家已是大步流星了。舉例來說﹐澳大利亞和挪威屢次加息﹐只為遏制經濟增速﹐而美國聯邦儲備委員會(Fed)仍將利率維持在接近零的水平。
為了刺激經濟活動﹐美聯儲源源不斷地注入廉價現金﹐鼓勵投資者借入美元﹐買進從外匯、股票、黃金到大宗商品的各種投資品。這就是所謂的融資套利交易﹔即投資者以極低的利率借入資金﹐用它們賺取較高的回報。融資套利交易對於投資者在風險偏好上的改變很是敏感﹐因為市場波動可能會讓他們顆粒無收。當投資者感到緊張﹐他們就會買回自己此前借來開展融資套利交易的貨幣。對於美元此番跌勢﹐金融市場似乎只盯住了一點﹐那就是說美元和其他投資品的關係。如果美元疲軟﹐那麼股市、原油、黃金等等都會上漲﹐反之亦然。
德意志銀行(Deutsche Bank)的報告顯示﹐在12月初﹐美元和標準普爾500指數反向而動的程度已是史上未見。用於衡量兩者相互關係的指標顯示美元和股市出現了30多年來的最大走向背離。12月份形勢陡變。美國就業及零售數據好得出人意料﹐同時投資者聽聞信用評級公司因希臘等國難以為繼的大規模赤字而發出了一系列悲觀預測﹐其中希臘的評級還遭到了下調。此外﹐年末時清淡的交投放大了價格變化。在三週時間里﹐歐元兌美元跌去了將近6%。野村證券公司(Nomura Securities)外匯策略師諾迪維格(Jens Nordvig)在近期的一份研究報告中指出﹐得出世界已經改變、美元將長期走強的結論是很誘人的﹐但是﹐宏觀經濟層面的消息遠比價格波動平穩。諾迪維格建議做空美元。12月31日紐約匯市尾盤﹐歐元兌1.4316美元﹐美元較上年同期跌2.4%。不過﹐美元兌93.08日圓﹐較去年上漲了2.6%。曾經在金融危機中遭到重創的澳元和巴西雷亞爾又煥發了生機﹐這兩種貨幣兌美元的漲幅分別達到了26%和33%。
去年美元作為全球儲備貨幣的地位被人們幾度拿出來加以研究。3月份中國央行的非常之舉終於登上了報章頭條﹐即央行行長周小川公開質疑單一儲備貨幣的制度是否理想﹐建議讓此前無人問津的國際貨幣基金組織(IMF)特別提款權擁有更大的發揮空間。俄羅斯和巴西的領導人也對美元獨尊表達了擔憂。不過﹐幾乎沒有人認為美元作為主要儲備貨幣的地位會很快受到沖擊﹐替代品缺乏就是原因之一。在過去幾個月中﹐歐元自身疲態盡顯﹐歐元區內部經濟狀況差異很大﹐比如希臘和德國就大不相同。有些人相信中國的人民幣將在全球金融體系發揮更大作用﹐但那恐怕要等上很多年了。
事實上﹐中國政府堅持將人民幣和美元掛鉤的長期政策。中國曾經在2008年時允許人民幣逐步走強﹐但在2009年里一直將人民幣兌美元匯價保持穩定。這種政策讓中國的鄰國頗為不悅﹐因為這意味著去年下半年人民幣的有效匯率一直在下挫﹐令中國出口商在海外市場擁有了更大的競爭力。
2010年01月07日08:03
在美元以堅挺姿態挺過金融危機後﹐由於投資者重拾風險偏好﹐而且再度緊抓美元的弱點不放﹐美元在2009年曆經起落最終以下跌收場。
由摩根大通(J.P. Morgan Chase)編制的美元兌一籃子16種貨幣的美元指數在去年下跌了5%。這一數據掩蓋了美元匯價的大幅波動：去年春天﹐該指數漲幅一度高達8%﹐而去年下半年美元跌幅一度也達到了這一水平。年底將至時﹐美元展開了一場短暫但有力的反彈：美國的經濟數據意外強勁﹐而且隸屬歐元區的希臘和西班牙的可信度似乎也突然被打上了折扣。對一些投資者來說﹐這一事態加大了美元前景的變數﹐即美元勢必迎來更大的變化。美元不再像金融危機期間那樣只是人們風險承擔意願的象徵﹐而是再一次跟隨美國與其他國家的經濟強弱對比而時漲時落。
巴克萊(Barclays Capital)駐紐約的外匯交易員厄文(Jeremy Urwin)說﹐投資者可能會關注相對經濟表現﹐而不是簡單的冒險或避險策略﹔特別需要指出的是﹐各經濟體之間的利差將在2010年成為匯市首先需要考慮的問題。如果美國經濟能繼續有出人意料的表現﹐而且其他國家也令人失望的話﹐這對美元來說可能構成利好。但是如果美國經濟復蘇乏力﹐而且應對金融危機的種種努力催生出過度的通貨膨脹的話﹐那麼美元可能就沒有好果子吃了。美元在2009年初期銳不可當。當時金融系統仍步履蹣跚、股市持續下挫、經濟領域的壞消息一個接著一個。投資者蜂擁買進美元﹐因為置身於危機中的他們需要找到可能的避風港。然而﹐到了4月份時各國央行的救市努力初見成效﹐投資者也開始將手中現金派上用場﹐因此他們當中有些人就開始減持美元。美元跌勢在秋天有所加劇﹐因為在朝向復蘇邁進的過程中美國似乎是一瘸一拐﹐而其他國家已是大步流星了。舉例來說﹐澳大利亞和挪威屢次加息﹐只為遏制經濟增速﹐而美國聯邦儲備委員會(Fed)仍將利率維持在接近零的水平。
為了刺激經濟活動﹐美聯儲源源不斷地注入廉價現金﹐鼓勵投資者借入美元﹐買進從外匯、股票、黃金到大宗商品的各種投資品。這就是所謂的融資套利交易﹔即投資者以極低的利率借入資金﹐用它們賺取較高的回報。融資套利交易對於投資者在風險偏好上的改變很是敏感﹐因為市場波動可能會讓他們顆粒無收。當投資者感到緊張﹐他們就會買回自己此前借來開展融資套利交易的貨幣。對於美元此番跌勢﹐金融市場似乎只盯住了一點﹐那就是說美元和其他投資品的關係。如果美元疲軟﹐那麼股市、原油、黃金等等都會上漲﹐反之亦然。
德意志銀行(Deutsche Bank)的報告顯示﹐在12月初﹐美元和標準普爾500指數反向而動的程度已是史上未見。用於衡量兩者相互關係的指標顯示美元和股市出現了30多年來的最大走向背離。12月份形勢陡變。美國就業及零售數據好得出人意料﹐同時投資者聽聞信用評級公司因希臘等國難以為繼的大規模赤字而發出了一系列悲觀預測﹐其中希臘的評級還遭到了下調。此外﹐年末時清淡的交投放大了價格變化。在三週時間里﹐歐元兌美元跌去了將近6%。野村證券公司(Nomura Securities)外匯策略師諾迪維格(Jens Nordvig)在近期的一份研究報告中指出﹐得出世界已經改變、美元將長期走強的結論是很誘人的﹐但是﹐宏觀經濟層面的消息遠比價格波動平穩。諾迪維格建議做空美元。12月31日紐約匯市尾盤﹐歐元兌1.4316美元﹐美元較上年同期跌2.4%。不過﹐美元兌93.08日圓﹐較去年上漲了2.6%。曾經在金融危機中遭到重創的澳元和巴西雷亞爾又煥發了生機﹐這兩種貨幣兌美元的漲幅分別達到了26%和33%。
去年美元作為全球儲備貨幣的地位被人們幾度拿出來加以研究。3月份中國央行的非常之舉終於登上了報章頭條﹐即央行行長周小川公開質疑單一儲備貨幣的制度是否理想﹐建議讓此前無人問津的國際貨幣基金組織(IMF)特別提款權擁有更大的發揮空間。俄羅斯和巴西的領導人也對美元獨尊表達了擔憂。不過﹐幾乎沒有人認為美元作為主要儲備貨幣的地位會很快受到沖擊﹐替代品缺乏就是原因之一。在過去幾個月中﹐歐元自身疲態盡顯﹐歐元區內部經濟狀況差異很大﹐比如希臘和德國就大不相同。有些人相信中國的人民幣將在全球金融體系發揮更大作用﹐但那恐怕要等上很多年了。
事實上﹐中國政府堅持將人民幣和美元掛鉤的長期政策。中國曾經在2008年時允許人民幣逐步走強﹐但在2009年里一直將人民幣兌美元匯價保持穩定。這種政策讓中國的鄰國頗為不悅﹐因為這意味著去年下半年人民幣的有效匯率一直在下挫﹐令中國出口商在海外市場擁有了更大的競爭力。
The “Middle Class Rich” are Under Attack!
The “Middle Class Rich” are Under Attack!
In virtually every state, property taxes are soaring… budgets are bleeding and “eat the rich” attacks are gaining support…
Social security is already in net deficit… This year, $10 billion more will be paid out to retirees than is taken in through taxes.
In a prelude to full-blown Currency Controls – the Feds have cracked down on dollar-alternatives – like Oil and Natural Gas funds – forcing investors back into crumbling U.S. dollars.
A National Sales Tax (or VAT) is about to be hustled through Congress to fund billions of dollars in new “handouts” and giveaway programs… that will cost you an extra $10,680 a year.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) is $8 billion in the red.
The US Dollar has crashed 19% vs. the Euro… and 42% against gold in the past 12 months.
Even those who sell us “hope” – like President Obama and his staff – have warned of dark days ahead.
In virtually every state, property taxes are soaring… budgets are bleeding and “eat the rich” attacks are gaining support…
Social security is already in net deficit… This year, $10 billion more will be paid out to retirees than is taken in through taxes.
In a prelude to full-blown Currency Controls – the Feds have cracked down on dollar-alternatives – like Oil and Natural Gas funds – forcing investors back into crumbling U.S. dollars.
A National Sales Tax (or VAT) is about to be hustled through Congress to fund billions of dollars in new “handouts” and giveaway programs… that will cost you an extra $10,680 a year.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) is $8 billion in the red.
The US Dollar has crashed 19% vs. the Euro… and 42% against gold in the past 12 months.
Even those who sell us “hope” – like President Obama and his staff – have warned of dark days ahead.
Boutique private banks
Providers are attracted by 1,000-year nest egg
By Robert Cookson
Published: December 15 2009 02:37
Last updated: December 15 2009 02:37
In the wake of the financial crisis, private banks across the world are scrambling to regain the trust of the wealthy. In Asia-Pacific, the task is particularly urgent.
The region will overtake North America as the world’s largest pool of wealth by 2013, according to Merrill Lynch and Capgemini – making it a market no private bank can ignore.
However, winning clients in Asia is an expensive and risky business, especially for groups that are late to the game.
“I see a plethora of newcomers coming and setting up shop in Asia,” says a veteran private banking executive in Singapore. “I think half of them will have disappeared within five years.”
By his estimation, setting up a single office with 30 client advisers costs about $40m a year and it would only start to break even after five years – or $200m – if it was lucky.
“You need a strong commitment from senior management to spend money in the region,” he says.
Then there is the tricky business of hiring – and retaining – the right people. RBS Coutts, the private banking arm of Royal Bank of Scotland, is trying to rebuild its Asia operations after 70 employees – a third of its Singapore team – resigned en masse this year, partly because of worries over bonus levels. Two of its most senior executives went to BSI, a Swiss bank, and others are expected to follow.
While the scale of the Coutts exodus was highly unusual, senior private bankers expect the battle for talent to intensify over the coming years. Private bankers often take clients with them when they switch employers, making them attractive targets for ambitious banks with cash to spend.
Some groups are pursuing faster growth through acquisitions. Recently, both ANZ, the Australian bank, and OCBC, the Singapore bank, have acquired private banking assets in Asia Pacific from ING, the Dutch lender.
Behind the scenes, banks have been overhauling the products they offer and rethinking how they deal with clients. Asia’s wealthy, many of whom are entrepreneurs with sophisticated investment requirements, have become more exacting after their portfolios were hit by the financial crisis.
Adding insult to injury, many of these investors had fled to cash and government bonds by the start of the year and therefore missed out on the rally in equities and other risky assets.
“The crisis has certainly made clients a lot more demanding,” says Aamir Rahim, Asia private banking head at Citigroup. “They are looking for much more specialist advice.”
Other senior executives tell a similar story: where clients once made most investment decisions on their own, they are increasingly looking for advice. As a result, they have become far more discriminating between private banks.
Another consequence of the crisis has been a flight to investment products that are transparent and liquid, bankers say, not least because many clients were burned by complex structured products such as the Lehman “minibonds” that went spectacularly wrong in 2008.
Interestingly, however, appetite for risky complex products has not completely vanished. So-called “accumulators” – dubbed by some as “I’ll kill you later” contracts – are once again rising in popularity in Hong Kong, dealers say.
This time round, however, private banks are making sure they have rigorous procedures in place to ensure that clients buy only products that are suited to their requirements – with a paper trail to show that is the case.
But there are bigger strategic issues to deal with, when it comes to expansion in Asia-Pacific.
First and foremost is the question of exactly where and how to do business in a fragmented region that stretches from Japan – a vast pool of wealth in a stagnant economy – to Australia – still in the midst of a commodities boom. In between is a diverse array of countries with enticing growth prospects, including India, Indonesia, and China, but where access is by no means easy.
Take China. It is obvious why foreign banks would want to tap into the country’s wealth. It is now home to more millionaires than the UK, and the number is set to continue rising rapidly. The trouble is, accessing that wealth is tricky (to put it mildly) because capital controls restrict mainlanders from moving money offshore, while setting up private banking operations onshore is challenging.
As a result of these kinds of considerations, global private banks are pursuing a wide variety of strategies and the jury is still out on which will succeed.
JPMorgan’s private bank, for example, is not expanding beyond the regional hubs of Singapore and Hong Kong, as its executives reckon that Asia’s very richest people tend to keep their “juiciest” assets offshore.
The group occupies a niche in which it almost exclusively targets “ultra high net worth” clients – those with at least $30m in investable assets.
“I love it when my competitors spend their money opening up branches in places that oftentimes they don’t fully understand,” says Paul Scibetta, head of JPMorgan’s private bank in Asia. “We don’t see a need to move onshore, but we will consider that over time.”
Instead, JPMorgan is devoting its resources to technology and training. As well as financial education, JPMorgan is rolling out a programme throughout 2010 to teach its employees in Asia about art and fine wine.
“It’s meant to be fun and also to make them better at their jobs,” says Mr Scibetta.
Other banks believe that since the vast majority of wealth in Asia is held onshore, long-term growth will require setting up branches across the region.
“In our view, the only way to stay ahead is to be present in the domestic markets,” says Kathryn Shih, head of UBS Wealth Management, Asia-Pacific.
“It’s easier said than done. Investing in a domestic market is a serious investment; it takes years to build up a client base,” she explains.
As well as its Hong Kong and Singapore hubs, UBS has branches in Japan, Australia, China, and Taiwan and is just starting operations in India.
Domestic banks, many of which managed to grab market share from foreign rivals during the crisis, are expected to become an increasingly powerful force over the coming years, even if they lack the global reach of their larger rivals.
“We take local competitors very seriously,” says Didier von Daeniken, Asia private banking head of Barclays Capital. “We take that into consideration when we plan our expansion into a particular country.”
With large numbers of Asian entrepreneurs set to float shares in their companies overseas, private banks that are attached to investment banks will have an edge, says Marcel Kreis, Asia head of private banking at Credit Suisse.
“If we can help in listing a Chinese company in an overseas market, we’re in a good position to help manage some of these proceeds,” he says.
Of course, boutique private banks argue the opposite. They say clients have lost faith in large banking conglomerates and want the safety and personalised treatment of a smaller institution.
On one thing, however, everyone agrees: the number of Asian millionaires and billionaires is going to boom over the coming years. All that remains is for private banks to work out how best to
By Robert Cookson
Published: December 15 2009 02:37
Last updated: December 15 2009 02:37
In the wake of the financial crisis, private banks across the world are scrambling to regain the trust of the wealthy. In Asia-Pacific, the task is particularly urgent.
The region will overtake North America as the world’s largest pool of wealth by 2013, according to Merrill Lynch and Capgemini – making it a market no private bank can ignore.
However, winning clients in Asia is an expensive and risky business, especially for groups that are late to the game.
“I see a plethora of newcomers coming and setting up shop in Asia,” says a veteran private banking executive in Singapore. “I think half of them will have disappeared within five years.”
By his estimation, setting up a single office with 30 client advisers costs about $40m a year and it would only start to break even after five years – or $200m – if it was lucky.
“You need a strong commitment from senior management to spend money in the region,” he says.
Then there is the tricky business of hiring – and retaining – the right people. RBS Coutts, the private banking arm of Royal Bank of Scotland, is trying to rebuild its Asia operations after 70 employees – a third of its Singapore team – resigned en masse this year, partly because of worries over bonus levels. Two of its most senior executives went to BSI, a Swiss bank, and others are expected to follow.
While the scale of the Coutts exodus was highly unusual, senior private bankers expect the battle for talent to intensify over the coming years. Private bankers often take clients with them when they switch employers, making them attractive targets for ambitious banks with cash to spend.
Some groups are pursuing faster growth through acquisitions. Recently, both ANZ, the Australian bank, and OCBC, the Singapore bank, have acquired private banking assets in Asia Pacific from ING, the Dutch lender.
Behind the scenes, banks have been overhauling the products they offer and rethinking how they deal with clients. Asia’s wealthy, many of whom are entrepreneurs with sophisticated investment requirements, have become more exacting after their portfolios were hit by the financial crisis.
Adding insult to injury, many of these investors had fled to cash and government bonds by the start of the year and therefore missed out on the rally in equities and other risky assets.
“The crisis has certainly made clients a lot more demanding,” says Aamir Rahim, Asia private banking head at Citigroup. “They are looking for much more specialist advice.”
Other senior executives tell a similar story: where clients once made most investment decisions on their own, they are increasingly looking for advice. As a result, they have become far more discriminating between private banks.
Another consequence of the crisis has been a flight to investment products that are transparent and liquid, bankers say, not least because many clients were burned by complex structured products such as the Lehman “minibonds” that went spectacularly wrong in 2008.
Interestingly, however, appetite for risky complex products has not completely vanished. So-called “accumulators” – dubbed by some as “I’ll kill you later” contracts – are once again rising in popularity in Hong Kong, dealers say.
This time round, however, private banks are making sure they have rigorous procedures in place to ensure that clients buy only products that are suited to their requirements – with a paper trail to show that is the case.
But there are bigger strategic issues to deal with, when it comes to expansion in Asia-Pacific.
First and foremost is the question of exactly where and how to do business in a fragmented region that stretches from Japan – a vast pool of wealth in a stagnant economy – to Australia – still in the midst of a commodities boom. In between is a diverse array of countries with enticing growth prospects, including India, Indonesia, and China, but where access is by no means easy.
Take China. It is obvious why foreign banks would want to tap into the country’s wealth. It is now home to more millionaires than the UK, and the number is set to continue rising rapidly. The trouble is, accessing that wealth is tricky (to put it mildly) because capital controls restrict mainlanders from moving money offshore, while setting up private banking operations onshore is challenging.
As a result of these kinds of considerations, global private banks are pursuing a wide variety of strategies and the jury is still out on which will succeed.
JPMorgan’s private bank, for example, is not expanding beyond the regional hubs of Singapore and Hong Kong, as its executives reckon that Asia’s very richest people tend to keep their “juiciest” assets offshore.
The group occupies a niche in which it almost exclusively targets “ultra high net worth” clients – those with at least $30m in investable assets.
“I love it when my competitors spend their money opening up branches in places that oftentimes they don’t fully understand,” says Paul Scibetta, head of JPMorgan’s private bank in Asia. “We don’t see a need to move onshore, but we will consider that over time.”
Instead, JPMorgan is devoting its resources to technology and training. As well as financial education, JPMorgan is rolling out a programme throughout 2010 to teach its employees in Asia about art and fine wine.
“It’s meant to be fun and also to make them better at their jobs,” says Mr Scibetta.
Other banks believe that since the vast majority of wealth in Asia is held onshore, long-term growth will require setting up branches across the region.
“In our view, the only way to stay ahead is to be present in the domestic markets,” says Kathryn Shih, head of UBS Wealth Management, Asia-Pacific.
“It’s easier said than done. Investing in a domestic market is a serious investment; it takes years to build up a client base,” she explains.
As well as its Hong Kong and Singapore hubs, UBS has branches in Japan, Australia, China, and Taiwan and is just starting operations in India.
Domestic banks, many of which managed to grab market share from foreign rivals during the crisis, are expected to become an increasingly powerful force over the coming years, even if they lack the global reach of their larger rivals.
“We take local competitors very seriously,” says Didier von Daeniken, Asia private banking head of Barclays Capital. “We take that into consideration when we plan our expansion into a particular country.”
With large numbers of Asian entrepreneurs set to float shares in their companies overseas, private banks that are attached to investment banks will have an edge, says Marcel Kreis, Asia head of private banking at Credit Suisse.
“If we can help in listing a Chinese company in an overseas market, we’re in a good position to help manage some of these proceeds,” he says.
Of course, boutique private banks argue the opposite. They say clients have lost faith in large banking conglomerates and want the safety and personalised treatment of a smaller institution.
On one thing, however, everyone agrees: the number of Asian millionaires and billionaires is going to boom over the coming years. All that remains is for private banks to work out how best to
UBS Taiwan
29 January 2010 - Dow Jones International News
UBS Taiwan To Add 15-20 Wealth-Management Staff In 2010
UBS AG (UBS) will add 15 to 20 wealth-management relationship managers in Taiwan this year, in a push to increase its business on the island, Dennis Chen, chief executive of UBS's wealth-management business in Taiwan, said Friday.
The company's wealth-management operation in Taiwan has about 210 staff now, Chen said.
He said Taiwan was one of the few wealth-management markets in Asia that was profitable for UBS in 2009.
But "business will be more challenging this year...it will not be like the smooth sailing we had in 2009," Chen said.
William Dong, head of UBS equity research in Taiwan, said he expects the current correction in Taiwan shares still has quite a way to go, and market volatility will likely continue until June. Investors will then start to get a better idea of how the economy will fare in 2011, he said.
Taiwan's benchmark Weighted Price Index ended down 0.7% Friday at 7640.44, its ninth consecutive decline. It is down 6.7% since the start of the year.
"We expect a more solid recovery in the global economy in 2011 because that's when the global job markets will improve significantly," Dong said. "For Taiwan, we prefer PC hardware stocks over the long term."
UBS Taiwan To Add 15-20 Wealth-Management Staff In 2010
UBS AG (UBS) will add 15 to 20 wealth-management relationship managers in Taiwan this year, in a push to increase its business on the island, Dennis Chen, chief executive of UBS's wealth-management business in Taiwan, said Friday.
The company's wealth-management operation in Taiwan has about 210 staff now, Chen said.
He said Taiwan was one of the few wealth-management markets in Asia that was profitable for UBS in 2009.
But "business will be more challenging this year...it will not be like the smooth sailing we had in 2009," Chen said.
William Dong, head of UBS equity research in Taiwan, said he expects the current correction in Taiwan shares still has quite a way to go, and market volatility will likely continue until June. Investors will then start to get a better idea of how the economy will fare in 2011, he said.
Taiwan's benchmark Weighted Price Index ended down 0.7% Friday at 7640.44, its ninth consecutive decline. It is down 6.7% since the start of the year.
"We expect a more solid recovery in the global economy in 2011 because that's when the global job markets will improve significantly," Dong said. "For Taiwan, we prefer PC hardware stocks over the long term."
U.S. Deal With Taiwan Has China Retaliating
January 31, 2010
U.S. Deal With Taiwan Has China Retaliating
By KEITH BRADSHER
HONG KONG — The Chinese government announced late Saturday an unusually broad series of retaliatory measures in response to the latest United States arms sales to Taiwan, including sanctions against American companies that supply the weapon systems for the arms sales.
The Foreign Ministry announced in a pair of statements from Beijing that some military exchange programs between the United States and China would be canceled in addition to the commercial sanctions. Furthermore, a vice foreign minister, He Yafei, has called in Jon M. Huntsman Jr., the United States ambassador to China, to protest the sales.
The American decision to sell more weapons to Taiwan “constitutes a gross intervention into China’s internal affairs, seriously endangers China’s national security and harms China’s peaceful reunification efforts,” Mr. He said in the ministry’s statement.
The Obama administration notified Congress on Friday of its plans to proceed with five arms sales transactions with Taiwan worth a total of $6.4 billion. The arms deals include 60 Black Hawk helicopters, Patriot interceptor missiles, advanced Harpoon missiles that can be used against land or ship targets and two refurbished minesweepers.
China has regarded Taiwan as a breakaway province ever since the Communists prevailed in 1949 in China’s civil war and the Nationalists retreated to Taiwan. The United States has been supplying Taiwan with arms under the Taiwan Relations Act, which Congress approved in 1979 and which mandates that the United States supply weapons that Taiwan could use to fend off an attack by mainland Chinese forces.
Canceling military discussions and calling in the American ambassador have been two standard Chinese measures in response to previous American arms sales to Taiwan. But the announcement of restrictions on the Chinese operations of American companies involved in the arms sales represents an unusual twist, said James C. Mulvenon, the director of the Center for Intelligence Research and Analysis, a defense analysis firm in Washington.
The Foreign Ministry’s statement that mentioned the commercial sanctions was vague, providing no details on the restrictions that would be imposed on these companies’ business dealings in China or even what companies would be involved.
“We regret that the Chinese side has curtailed military-to-military and other exchanges” Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary, said, according to Reuters. “We also regret Chinese action against U.S. firms transferring defensive articles to Taiwan.”
The United States has occasionally imposed bans on exports to the United States by Chinese companies that have violated international agreements on weapons proliferation, most notably penalizing Chinese companies involved in alleged surreptitious shipments of medium-range missiles to Pakistan.
But China is going a step further in moving to penalize American companies engaged in commercial arms transactions that are publicly announced and do not violate international nonproliferation pacts, Mr. Mulvenon said.
The World Trade Organization generally prohibits the imposition of import restrictions as political maneuvers. But the body’s rules include a broad exception for national security that the Chinese could cite if the United States tried to challenge them. China has also never joined the W.T.O. side agreement on government procurement. So China could bar the American companies from selling to the government without fear of W.T.O. review.
U.S. Deal With Taiwan Has China Retaliating
By KEITH BRADSHER
HONG KONG — The Chinese government announced late Saturday an unusually broad series of retaliatory measures in response to the latest United States arms sales to Taiwan, including sanctions against American companies that supply the weapon systems for the arms sales.
The Foreign Ministry announced in a pair of statements from Beijing that some military exchange programs between the United States and China would be canceled in addition to the commercial sanctions. Furthermore, a vice foreign minister, He Yafei, has called in Jon M. Huntsman Jr., the United States ambassador to China, to protest the sales.
The American decision to sell more weapons to Taiwan “constitutes a gross intervention into China’s internal affairs, seriously endangers China’s national security and harms China’s peaceful reunification efforts,” Mr. He said in the ministry’s statement.
The Obama administration notified Congress on Friday of its plans to proceed with five arms sales transactions with Taiwan worth a total of $6.4 billion. The arms deals include 60 Black Hawk helicopters, Patriot interceptor missiles, advanced Harpoon missiles that can be used against land or ship targets and two refurbished minesweepers.
China has regarded Taiwan as a breakaway province ever since the Communists prevailed in 1949 in China’s civil war and the Nationalists retreated to Taiwan. The United States has been supplying Taiwan with arms under the Taiwan Relations Act, which Congress approved in 1979 and which mandates that the United States supply weapons that Taiwan could use to fend off an attack by mainland Chinese forces.
Canceling military discussions and calling in the American ambassador have been two standard Chinese measures in response to previous American arms sales to Taiwan. But the announcement of restrictions on the Chinese operations of American companies involved in the arms sales represents an unusual twist, said James C. Mulvenon, the director of the Center for Intelligence Research and Analysis, a defense analysis firm in Washington.
The Foreign Ministry’s statement that mentioned the commercial sanctions was vague, providing no details on the restrictions that would be imposed on these companies’ business dealings in China or even what companies would be involved.
“We regret that the Chinese side has curtailed military-to-military and other exchanges” Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary, said, according to Reuters. “We also regret Chinese action against U.S. firms transferring defensive articles to Taiwan.”
The United States has occasionally imposed bans on exports to the United States by Chinese companies that have violated international agreements on weapons proliferation, most notably penalizing Chinese companies involved in alleged surreptitious shipments of medium-range missiles to Pakistan.
But China is going a step further in moving to penalize American companies engaged in commercial arms transactions that are publicly announced and do not violate international nonproliferation pacts, Mr. Mulvenon said.
The World Trade Organization generally prohibits the imposition of import restrictions as political maneuvers. But the body’s rules include a broad exception for national security that the Chinese could cite if the United States tried to challenge them. China has also never joined the W.T.O. side agreement on government procurement. So China could bar the American companies from selling to the government without fear of W.T.O. review.
Commerzbank disbands fund of hedge funds arm
1 February 2010 - William Hutchings
Commerzbank disbands fund of hedge funds arm
Commerzbank has wound down its $1bn (€720m) fund of hedge funds management business, Comas, after abandoning a sale process run by Goldman Sachs. The bank has returned the assets to investors and let the team go, in another sign of the problems facing the fund of funds industry.
A source close to Comas said 85% of the assets had been returned to investors by the end of December, and a handful of operational staff had been left to facilitate the return of the remaining assets over the next three months.
Comas was set up 11 years ago with the encouragement of Mehmet Dalman, then head of Commerzbank’s investment banking unit. At its peak, in late 2008, it managed $1.5bn, making it one of the hundred largest fund of hedge funds managers in an industry of more than 3,000. Its dissolution comes in the context of funds of hedge funds seeing their assets under management fall by half as a result of losing investors’ confidence.
Comas was running $1bn on behalf of third-party clients and Commerzbank, including the Comas Gateway Fund, when it was put up for sale, according to the source. The Goldman Sachs sales document, obtained by Financial News, said Comas had made pre-tax profits of €12.5m in 2004, €9.8m in 2005, €7m in 2006, €6.3m in 2007 and €2.4m in 2008.
Sources close to the sale said more than 30 interested parties had approached Commerzbank for details of Comas and that Goldman Sachs had asked 10 to bid in the first round.
A spokeswoman for the German bank said: “Commerzbank announced in July 2009 it had taken the decision to wind down the Comas business. The decision to close the funds was considered by the bank to be in the best interests of investors.”
The spokeswoman declined to comment further on the reasons for abandoning the sale. Spokeswomen for SoFFin, the German government agency that owns a 25% stake in Commerzbank, and for the German Ministry of Finance, which supervises SoFFin, said the decision to cancel the sale of Comas was not influenced by the German Government.
Tags: Commerzbank , Germany , Goldman Sachs , Hedge Funds , Mehmet Dalman
Commerzbank disbands fund of hedge funds arm
Commerzbank has wound down its $1bn (€720m) fund of hedge funds management business, Comas, after abandoning a sale process run by Goldman Sachs. The bank has returned the assets to investors and let the team go, in another sign of the problems facing the fund of funds industry.
A source close to Comas said 85% of the assets had been returned to investors by the end of December, and a handful of operational staff had been left to facilitate the return of the remaining assets over the next three months.
Comas was set up 11 years ago with the encouragement of Mehmet Dalman, then head of Commerzbank’s investment banking unit. At its peak, in late 2008, it managed $1.5bn, making it one of the hundred largest fund of hedge funds managers in an industry of more than 3,000. Its dissolution comes in the context of funds of hedge funds seeing their assets under management fall by half as a result of losing investors’ confidence.
Comas was running $1bn on behalf of third-party clients and Commerzbank, including the Comas Gateway Fund, when it was put up for sale, according to the source. The Goldman Sachs sales document, obtained by Financial News, said Comas had made pre-tax profits of €12.5m in 2004, €9.8m in 2005, €7m in 2006, €6.3m in 2007 and €2.4m in 2008.
Sources close to the sale said more than 30 interested parties had approached Commerzbank for details of Comas and that Goldman Sachs had asked 10 to bid in the first round.
A spokeswoman for the German bank said: “Commerzbank announced in July 2009 it had taken the decision to wind down the Comas business. The decision to close the funds was considered by the bank to be in the best interests of investors.”
The spokeswoman declined to comment further on the reasons for abandoning the sale. Spokeswomen for SoFFin, the German government agency that owns a 25% stake in Commerzbank, and for the German Ministry of Finance, which supervises SoFFin, said the decision to cancel the sale of Comas was not influenced by the German Government.
Tags: Commerzbank , Germany , Goldman Sachs , Hedge Funds , Mehmet Dalman
樊綱﹕資產泡沫是中國經濟面臨的真正威脅
樊綱﹕資產泡沫是中國經濟面臨的真正威脅
2010年02月01日16:33
在官方對房地產價格快速上升的擔憂不斷加重的背景下﹐中國央行(People's Bank of China)顧問樊綱週一表示﹐資產泡沫是中國經濟面臨的真正威脅﹐政府應對此加以妥善管理。樊綱目前是中國央行貨幣政策委員會委員﹐他的講話表明央行可能會繼續最近回籠流動性的措施。上週五中國央行在第四季度經濟形勢分析報告中強調了房地產價格快速上漲問題。
中國央行通過命令各家銀行提高存款準備金率﹐減少可用於貸款的資金來回籠流動性。央行已經表示全年都將採取措施平衡銀行信貸。在一個新聞發佈會上﹐樊綱表示﹐央行近期回籠過剩流動性的措施是恰當、及時且必要的﹐金融市場也對此作出了良性反應。除了管理流動性之外﹐他表示物業稅將有助於遏制資產泡沫。中國正在研究實施新的物業稅﹐取代目前與房地產交易有關的一次性稅收（包括印花稅和交易稅）。但實施新稅的日期尚未確定。 去年12月中國城市房地產價格漲幅是17個月來最快的﹐令人擔憂資產泡沫正在形成﹐並凸現了中國政府維持經濟增長所面臨的挑戰。去年12月中國70個大中型城市房地產價格較上年同期增長7.8%﹐漲幅高於11月的5.7%。
中國央行上週五表示﹐2009年房地產價格較2007年上次房價上漲時高出20.8%。一線城市房地產價格已經超過2007年下半年度的峰值﹐較小城市房價正接近2007年的前高點。中國銀行監管機構已指出﹐房地產市場是影響貸款質量的潛在危險源﹐因房屋價格飆升令普通人無法承受﹐而房價突然下跌將損害房地產開發商和買房者的利益﹐從而損害銀行利益。 週日﹐上海市市長表示上海計劃將最低工資標準提高15%﹐並於今年加快建設公共租賃房屋﹐幫助低收入居民解決上海房價過高的難題。上海是中國房價最高的地方之一﹐由於過去數年房價大幅上漲以及缺少窮人負擔得起的住房﹐當地公眾不滿情緒日益增長。 樊綱表示﹐雖然通貨膨脹和資產價格泡沫令人擔心﹐但今年消費者價格指數不太可能大幅上升﹐因製造業產能閑置而且食品價格穩定。
樊綱還表示﹐中國需要實現外匯資產多元化﹐但他並未透露更多細節。
2010年02月01日16:33
在官方對房地產價格快速上升的擔憂不斷加重的背景下﹐中國央行(People's Bank of China)顧問樊綱週一表示﹐資產泡沫是中國經濟面臨的真正威脅﹐政府應對此加以妥善管理。樊綱目前是中國央行貨幣政策委員會委員﹐他的講話表明央行可能會繼續最近回籠流動性的措施。上週五中國央行在第四季度經濟形勢分析報告中強調了房地產價格快速上漲問題。
中國央行通過命令各家銀行提高存款準備金率﹐減少可用於貸款的資金來回籠流動性。央行已經表示全年都將採取措施平衡銀行信貸。在一個新聞發佈會上﹐樊綱表示﹐央行近期回籠過剩流動性的措施是恰當、及時且必要的﹐金融市場也對此作出了良性反應。除了管理流動性之外﹐他表示物業稅將有助於遏制資產泡沫。中國正在研究實施新的物業稅﹐取代目前與房地產交易有關的一次性稅收（包括印花稅和交易稅）。但實施新稅的日期尚未確定。 去年12月中國城市房地產價格漲幅是17個月來最快的﹐令人擔憂資產泡沫正在形成﹐並凸現了中國政府維持經濟增長所面臨的挑戰。去年12月中國70個大中型城市房地產價格較上年同期增長7.8%﹐漲幅高於11月的5.7%。
中國央行上週五表示﹐2009年房地產價格較2007年上次房價上漲時高出20.8%。一線城市房地產價格已經超過2007年下半年度的峰值﹐較小城市房價正接近2007年的前高點。中國銀行監管機構已指出﹐房地產市場是影響貸款質量的潛在危險源﹐因房屋價格飆升令普通人無法承受﹐而房價突然下跌將損害房地產開發商和買房者的利益﹐從而損害銀行利益。 週日﹐上海市市長表示上海計劃將最低工資標準提高15%﹐並於今年加快建設公共租賃房屋﹐幫助低收入居民解決上海房價過高的難題。上海是中國房價最高的地方之一﹐由於過去數年房價大幅上漲以及缺少窮人負擔得起的住房﹐當地公眾不滿情緒日益增長。 樊綱表示﹐雖然通貨膨脹和資產價格泡沫令人擔心﹐但今年消費者價格指數不太可能大幅上升﹐因製造業產能閑置而且食品價格穩定。
樊綱還表示﹐中國需要實現外匯資產多元化﹐但他並未透露更多細節。
Very interesting and risky current time
Very interesting and risky current time……….possible high inflation rate for most of the West & China……
What’s your action toward it????
In 2009, the FDIC closed a total of 140 banks
It’s just one month into 2010, and the FDIC has already seized 12 banks – the ultimate and embarrassing result of insolvency. Multiply that out by 12, and it would appear, on the surface, that the FDIC is on track to close about 144 banks this year.
In 2009, the FDIC closed a total of 140 banks. With the second wave of subprime and Alt-A mortgages set to hit in the later half of 2010, I’d expect a ramp-up in the number of banks that need to be seized…and my colleagues are expecting something much more sinister might be underway…
Already, I’ve compiled a list of the top 108 banks likely to fail this year. What makes them likely? They’ve all got Texas Ratios above 100. It sounds scary, but you won’t truly be frightened until you understand exactly what that means…
In 2009, the FDIC closed a total of 140 banks. With the second wave of subprime and Alt-A mortgages set to hit in the later half of 2010, I’d expect a ramp-up in the number of banks that need to be seized…and my colleagues are expecting something much more sinister might be underway…
Already, I’ve compiled a list of the top 108 banks likely to fail this year. What makes them likely? They’ve all got Texas Ratios above 100. It sounds scary, but you won’t truly be frightened until you understand exactly what that means…
Keeping Precious Metals Offshore --GOLD Saving Plan
Keeping Precious Metals Offshore
An increasing number of Americans are concerned enough about the threat of precious metals confiscation to want to store gold or silver overseas. But laws in effect in 21 states may stand in their way.
I learned about these laws last year when one of my subscribers in Arizona called.
He wanted to buy gold from a foreign dealer for storage offshore, but the dealer refused to sell to him. The reason: the Arizona Model Commodities Act. After some research, I learned that 21 states have enacted the MCA or some variation of it: Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, and Washington.
I looked into the Nevada law, which a lawyer in that state told me was typical of MCAs in other states. Basically, residents of Nevada can purchase “commodities” only under circumstances which effectively exclude having precious metals delivered a non-U.S. storage facility.
The MCA came into existence in the 1980s, after a series of commodities scams in the 1970s.
One of the most notorious ones was International Gold Bullion Exchange (IGBE). Beginning in 1979, William and James Alderdice built their tiny jewelry business in Fort Lauderdale into a multi-million-dollar enterprise with over 1,000 employees.
IGBE advertised in The Wall Street Journal, Barron’s, and many other respected financial publications. In exchange for discount prices, customers waited three months or more for delivery. But many customers never received anything. When authorities finally caught up with IGBE, much of the gold supposedly stored for customers turned out to be railroad ties painted gold. In the end, customers lost millions of dollars.
With this background, it’s not surprising that states acted to protect their residents from commodities scams. But the laws appear to prohibit commodities purchases for delivery overseas.
Fortunately, companies that sell precious metals for storage overseas have developed some creative ways to deal with these laws. One option is for the buyer to use the address of a friend or family member in a non-MCA state. Another is to purchase the metals through an IRA with a custodian in a non-MCA state. A third is to sell the metals to an offshore structure that the buyer controls or is a beneficiary of.
Ultimately, though, the lesson of IGBE and similar scams is “buyer beware.” Wherever you buy, if you don’t take physical possession of precious metals you purchase, make sure that the company you’re dealing with is storing real gold, silver, platinum, or palladium—not railroad ties painted to look like the real thing.
Now, Here’s How to Report Them…
Unfortunately, neither the IRS nor the U.S. Treasury has provided direct guidance on how to report metals held offshore. As a result, I generally recommend that my clients report such ownership, although there appear to be some exceptions.
First, a little background…
U.S. citizens and residents have an annual obligation to report the existence of all “foreign bank, securities or ‘other’ financial accounts” if the aggregate value of those accounts exceeded US$10,000 at any time during the preceding year. Those failing to do so face a fine up to US$250,000, imprisonment up to five years, or both. (In an earlier blog entry, I described how non-U.S. persons have the same obligation if they are “in or doing business” in the United States.)
The report, which the Treasury Department cleverly calls Form TD F 90-22.1, is due by June 30 of the following year. Thus, you must file this form by June 30, 2009, if you had any reportable foreign account relationships anytime in 2008.
You have a separate obligation to disclose any “reportable” foreign accounts on Schedule B of Form 1040. Hopefully, you already made that acknowledgment when you filed your 2008 tax return. If not, you should file an amended return and make the required disclosure (check “yes” on line 7a of Schedule B).
The Treasury Department and the IRS construe the term “financial account” very broadly. The definition unquestionably includes bank, securities, and other accounts that hold financial instruments. However, it does not include individual bonds or stock certificates. This is an important distinction. If you have a foreign brokerage account that contains stock, this is a foreign financial account. If you hold individual shares of the stock directly, it is not reportable.
By analogy, the same rules would presumably apply to gold or other precious metals held offshore. If you hold the metals in a safety deposit box or private vault, without opening a bank or other financial account, you don’t appear to have any reporting obligation. (However, at many foreign banks, you must open an account in order to rent a safety deposit box.) On the other hand, if you purchase the metals through a foreign bank account and the bank stores the metals in its vault as part of your account holdings, the relationship would be reportable.
What if you arrange for a company to purchase gold or other metals on your behalf and that company stores those metals on your behalf in a foreign bank’s vault? While nothing is certain in life (other than death and taxes) a strong case can be made that this is not a “foreign financial account” if the following conditions apply:
The company does not itself sell the metals but only brokers purchases and sales
The metals are held together in a designated area of the foreign bank’s vault
Each bar or coin is identified by a unique, certified number.
The bars or coins in the vault are individually packaged and labeled so that it they are readily identifiable as your property.
You can take physical possession of the metals at any time.
Naturally, the IRS might disagree with this analysis. And if you enter into such an arrangement, I highly recommend confirming my interpretation with your own tax advisor.
An increasing number of Americans are concerned enough about the threat of precious metals confiscation to want to store gold or silver overseas. But laws in effect in 21 states may stand in their way.
I learned about these laws last year when one of my subscribers in Arizona called.
He wanted to buy gold from a foreign dealer for storage offshore, but the dealer refused to sell to him. The reason: the Arizona Model Commodities Act. After some research, I learned that 21 states have enacted the MCA or some variation of it: Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, and Washington.
I looked into the Nevada law, which a lawyer in that state told me was typical of MCAs in other states. Basically, residents of Nevada can purchase “commodities” only under circumstances which effectively exclude having precious metals delivered a non-U.S. storage facility.
The MCA came into existence in the 1980s, after a series of commodities scams in the 1970s.
One of the most notorious ones was International Gold Bullion Exchange (IGBE). Beginning in 1979, William and James Alderdice built their tiny jewelry business in Fort Lauderdale into a multi-million-dollar enterprise with over 1,000 employees.
IGBE advertised in The Wall Street Journal, Barron’s, and many other respected financial publications. In exchange for discount prices, customers waited three months or more for delivery. But many customers never received anything. When authorities finally caught up with IGBE, much of the gold supposedly stored for customers turned out to be railroad ties painted gold. In the end, customers lost millions of dollars.
With this background, it’s not surprising that states acted to protect their residents from commodities scams. But the laws appear to prohibit commodities purchases for delivery overseas.
Fortunately, companies that sell precious metals for storage overseas have developed some creative ways to deal with these laws. One option is for the buyer to use the address of a friend or family member in a non-MCA state. Another is to purchase the metals through an IRA with a custodian in a non-MCA state. A third is to sell the metals to an offshore structure that the buyer controls or is a beneficiary of.
Ultimately, though, the lesson of IGBE and similar scams is “buyer beware.” Wherever you buy, if you don’t take physical possession of precious metals you purchase, make sure that the company you’re dealing with is storing real gold, silver, platinum, or palladium—not railroad ties painted to look like the real thing.
Now, Here’s How to Report Them…
Unfortunately, neither the IRS nor the U.S. Treasury has provided direct guidance on how to report metals held offshore. As a result, I generally recommend that my clients report such ownership, although there appear to be some exceptions.
First, a little background…
U.S. citizens and residents have an annual obligation to report the existence of all “foreign bank, securities or ‘other’ financial accounts” if the aggregate value of those accounts exceeded US$10,000 at any time during the preceding year. Those failing to do so face a fine up to US$250,000, imprisonment up to five years, or both. (In an earlier blog entry, I described how non-U.S. persons have the same obligation if they are “in or doing business” in the United States.)
The report, which the Treasury Department cleverly calls Form TD F 90-22.1, is due by June 30 of the following year. Thus, you must file this form by June 30, 2009, if you had any reportable foreign account relationships anytime in 2008.
You have a separate obligation to disclose any “reportable” foreign accounts on Schedule B of Form 1040. Hopefully, you already made that acknowledgment when you filed your 2008 tax return. If not, you should file an amended return and make the required disclosure (check “yes” on line 7a of Schedule B).
The Treasury Department and the IRS construe the term “financial account” very broadly. The definition unquestionably includes bank, securities, and other accounts that hold financial instruments. However, it does not include individual bonds or stock certificates. This is an important distinction. If you have a foreign brokerage account that contains stock, this is a foreign financial account. If you hold individual shares of the stock directly, it is not reportable.
By analogy, the same rules would presumably apply to gold or other precious metals held offshore. If you hold the metals in a safety deposit box or private vault, without opening a bank or other financial account, you don’t appear to have any reporting obligation. (However, at many foreign banks, you must open an account in order to rent a safety deposit box.) On the other hand, if you purchase the metals through a foreign bank account and the bank stores the metals in its vault as part of your account holdings, the relationship would be reportable.
What if you arrange for a company to purchase gold or other metals on your behalf and that company stores those metals on your behalf in a foreign bank’s vault? While nothing is certain in life (other than death and taxes) a strong case can be made that this is not a “foreign financial account” if the following conditions apply:
The company does not itself sell the metals but only brokers purchases and sales
The metals are held together in a designated area of the foreign bank’s vault
Each bar or coin is identified by a unique, certified number.
The bars or coins in the vault are individually packaged and labeled so that it they are readily identifiable as your property.
You can take physical possession of the metals at any time.
Naturally, the IRS might disagree with this analysis. And if you enter into such an arrangement, I highly recommend confirming my interpretation with your own tax advisor.
U.S. Debt
The government is walking a tightrope of insolvency.
On one side there are their foreign creditors. Sovereign banks who lend them hundreds of billions of dollars each year. Money they've used to rack up a total debt of $38,956 for every man, woman and child in the country. Creditors who have the power to shut off that cash flow in a heartbeat.
On this side are you and me. Honest, hardworking citizens. Just trying to make a better life for ourselves. We give them their spending money in the form of taxes. Last tax season alone, we handed over an estimated $2.52 trillion dollars of our money. We play by their rules. We do what they tell us. And to them – we're an easy mark.
They need money. And they need it now. So where are they going to get it?
They can't raise taxes... Political suicide. Even starting to repay the debt would require a 55% tax increase.
They can't cut spending... Political suicide. From 2004 through 2009 they wasted $129.2 billion tax dollars on earmarks. That's more than the entire GDPs of 169 countries around the world.
They can't borrow much more from foreign creditors... Too high risk. They've already borrowed record amounts. And a snub by foreign lenders, or even a poor auction result, could be disastrous.
They can't keep printing to “monetize” their own debt... Political AND economic suicide. A further devaluation of foreign investors dollars could lead to economic retaliation.
So what can they do? Simple...
They can take it from you!
Take a look at these charts...
The government's public debt is closing in on US$12 trillion. Current numbers show private retirement funds still totaling roughly US$14 trillion. Can you see what they're thinking?
If they can move as much private capital as possible onto their balance sheet... problem solved. And you'd better believe it's coming because...
On one side there are their foreign creditors. Sovereign banks who lend them hundreds of billions of dollars each year. Money they've used to rack up a total debt of $38,956 for every man, woman and child in the country. Creditors who have the power to shut off that cash flow in a heartbeat.
On this side are you and me. Honest, hardworking citizens. Just trying to make a better life for ourselves. We give them their spending money in the form of taxes. Last tax season alone, we handed over an estimated $2.52 trillion dollars of our money. We play by their rules. We do what they tell us. And to them – we're an easy mark.
They need money. And they need it now. So where are they going to get it?
They can't raise taxes... Political suicide. Even starting to repay the debt would require a 55% tax increase.
They can't cut spending... Political suicide. From 2004 through 2009 they wasted $129.2 billion tax dollars on earmarks. That's more than the entire GDPs of 169 countries around the world.
They can't borrow much more from foreign creditors... Too high risk. They've already borrowed record amounts. And a snub by foreign lenders, or even a poor auction result, could be disastrous.
They can't keep printing to “monetize” their own debt... Political AND economic suicide. A further devaluation of foreign investors dollars could lead to economic retaliation.
So what can they do? Simple...
They can take it from you!
Take a look at these charts...
The government's public debt is closing in on US$12 trillion. Current numbers show private retirement funds still totaling roughly US$14 trillion. Can you see what they're thinking?
If they can move as much private capital as possible onto their balance sheet... problem solved. And you'd better believe it's coming because...
Financial Crisis
In 1933, as the financial crisis of the day reached its peak, Franklin Roosevelt launched a full scale confiscationof depositors money. This “bank holiday” was supposed to be a cooling off period. But in reality it was merely a strong-arm tactic to control those whose only concern was for their and their family's well being.
To prevent panicked citizens from “hoarding” gold, he signed the gold confiscation act. Forcing individuals to surrender their personal gold holdings for $20.60 per ounce. Then he revalued gold at $35 an ounce! Instantly boosting the value of the government's gold. And instantly making those who turned in their gold 43% poorer...
In 2008, Argentina nationalized all $30 billion of its citizens' private retirement savings. But before they took this extraordinary action, they took steps to make the public believe it was for their own good...
The government has flooded the financial system with so much money in just the past 8 years, they've devalued the US dollar by 42%!
To prevent panicked citizens from “hoarding” gold, he signed the gold confiscation act. Forcing individuals to surrender their personal gold holdings for $20.60 per ounce. Then he revalued gold at $35 an ounce! Instantly boosting the value of the government's gold. And instantly making those who turned in their gold 43% poorer...
In 2008, Argentina nationalized all $30 billion of its citizens' private retirement savings. But before they took this extraordinary action, they took steps to make the public believe it was for their own good...
The government has flooded the financial system with so much money in just the past 8 years, they've devalued the US dollar by 42%!
Mandatory IRAs
There is an estimated $15 trillion worth of private retirement plans in the United States; $4 trillion in IRAs alone; this constitutes 35% percent of all private assets in America. That is what Obama government is eyeing to help plug the multi-trillion dollar deficit in his big spending budget.
In October 2008, Peronista president Cristina Kirchner of Argentina (right) confiscated US$30 billion worth in that country's ten privately managed pension funds. This was presented as an emergency measure to meet her faltering government's financing costs. The Argentine congress went along with this radical property grab of individual retirement accounts, 401Ks and the like.
Could this happen in America?
Mandatory IRAs just proposed by Obama Administration on 1/25/10 is the 1st step in stealth nationalization & forced investment of our retirement benefits to support the treasury debt market! Read the veiled report in Business Week below:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-01-25/mandatory-iras-may-burden-small-employers-business-group-says.html
In October 2008, Peronista president Cristina Kirchner of Argentina (right) confiscated US$30 billion worth in that country's ten privately managed pension funds. This was presented as an emergency measure to meet her faltering government's financing costs. The Argentine congress went along with this radical property grab of individual retirement accounts, 401Ks and the like.
Could this happen in America?
Mandatory IRAs just proposed by Obama Administration on 1/25/10 is the 1st step in stealth nationalization & forced investment of our retirement benefits to support the treasury debt market! Read the veiled report in Business Week below:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-01-25/mandatory-iras-may-burden-small-employers-business-group-says.html
Tax Today
The United States is the only major country that imposes tax on a citizen's worldwide income, no matter where that citizen lives.
If you live in England, Ireland, Japan, or almost any other country, all you need to do to avoid the obligation to pay tax on your worldwide income is to leave. After an extended period—normally one year or longer—you no longer have any obligation to pay taxes on your income outside that country (although you may continue to be subject to gift and estate taxes).
But not the USA. To permanently disconnect from U.S. tax obligations, a U.S. citizen must not only leave the United States, but also take the radical step of giving up U.S. citizenship. This process (from a U.S. standpoint) is called expatriation.
If you're wealthy, giving up US citizenship or residence can save millions or even billions of dollars in future taxes. The US$1 billion estate if an Irish citizen dying in 2008 who didn't live in Ireland pays zero gift and estate tax for all bequests outside of Ireland. The US$1 billion estate of an US citizen dying in 2008 who lived anywhere in the world pay a maximum combined gift and estate tax burden of exceeding US$450 million.
The arithmetic is almost as compelling for smaller estates. An entrepreneur with a US$20 million estate could save over US$8 million in estate and gift taxes by giving up US citizenship.
The image of unimaginably wealthy former US citizens living tax-free in tropical paradises was (and remains) an irresistible populist target. The result has been a series of increasingly stringent laws that put real teeth into rules penalizing US citizens who give up their US citizenship with "tax avoidance" as a principle reason.
Because these anti-expatriation rules have historically been relatively easy to circumvent, there have been periodic calls to make what critics call the "billionaire's loophole" stricter. The latest effort to stem the flow of wealthy individuals to lower-tax havens is an exit tax enacted in 2008.
Expatriates must now pay a tax on all unrealized gains of their worldwide estate, including most offshore trusts. And the tax applies not only to former U.S. citizens, but also to long-term green-card holders who have resided in the United States for at least eight of the 15 years preceding expatriation.
How are you supposed to pay the tax without selling your assets? That's your problem—not the IRS's—although the bill permits deferral in certain circumstances.
If you live in England, Ireland, Japan, or almost any other country, all you need to do to avoid the obligation to pay tax on your worldwide income is to leave. After an extended period—normally one year or longer—you no longer have any obligation to pay taxes on your income outside that country (although you may continue to be subject to gift and estate taxes).
But not the USA. To permanently disconnect from U.S. tax obligations, a U.S. citizen must not only leave the United States, but also take the radical step of giving up U.S. citizenship. This process (from a U.S. standpoint) is called expatriation.
If you're wealthy, giving up US citizenship or residence can save millions or even billions of dollars in future taxes. The US$1 billion estate if an Irish citizen dying in 2008 who didn't live in Ireland pays zero gift and estate tax for all bequests outside of Ireland. The US$1 billion estate of an US citizen dying in 2008 who lived anywhere in the world pay a maximum combined gift and estate tax burden of exceeding US$450 million.
The arithmetic is almost as compelling for smaller estates. An entrepreneur with a US$20 million estate could save over US$8 million in estate and gift taxes by giving up US citizenship.
The image of unimaginably wealthy former US citizens living tax-free in tropical paradises was (and remains) an irresistible populist target. The result has been a series of increasingly stringent laws that put real teeth into rules penalizing US citizens who give up their US citizenship with "tax avoidance" as a principle reason.
Because these anti-expatriation rules have historically been relatively easy to circumvent, there have been periodic calls to make what critics call the "billionaire's loophole" stricter. The latest effort to stem the flow of wealthy individuals to lower-tax havens is an exit tax enacted in 2008.
Expatriates must now pay a tax on all unrealized gains of their worldwide estate, including most offshore trusts. And the tax applies not only to former U.S. citizens, but also to long-term green-card holders who have resided in the United States for at least eight of the 15 years preceding expatriation.
How are you supposed to pay the tax without selling your assets? That's your problem—not the IRS's—although the bill permits deferral in certain circumstances.
台湾企业家约占亚洲离岸私人银行市场（不包括日本）的一半
欧洲某私人银行的一位高管表示：“如果你处在欧洲这个成熟的市场，亚洲看上去就像是私人银行的天堂。问题是，你必须应对残酷的竞争和迅速提升的成本。” 由于对顶尖员工的竞争日益激烈，驻亚洲私人银行家奖金可望接近有史以来的高点，这表明该行业增长迅速。
据美国战略咨询公司波士顿咨询集团（Boston Consulting Group）的数据，客户关系经理或私人顾问的年度奖金有望上涨近50％，底薪将上涨20％至30％。据波士顿咨询集团的数据，经验丰富的客户关系经理将至少能获得25万美元，最多能得到35万美元，其中奖金占薪酬方案总额的约40％。预计亚洲顶尖顾问将获得总计70万至80万美元的收入。波士顿咨询集团私人银行业务负责人克里斯蒂安•德朱尼亚克（Christian de Juniac）表示，今年企业营收的增长或许将不止抵消员工成本的上升，预计平均税前利润上升近50％。但如果市场走下坡路，给新员工过高报酬的那些银行利润率会急剧下降。
据波士顿咨询集团表示，目前给私人银行家们的薪酬方案，尽管低于投资银行业的水平，已接近2000年时的最高点。一些分析师认为，这表明相对年轻的亚洲私人银行业存在“非理性繁荣”。
德朱尼亚克先生表示，最大增长潜力将来自中国、印度、俄罗斯等市场上，资产在100万至500万美元之间的新兴富人。摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）分析师休•范斯蒂尼斯（Huw van Steenis）表示，有能力在这些市场赢得资金的银行将比同行增长更快。他表示，“人们低估了亚洲的增长会有多强劲。”
“亚洲私人银行业务极度依赖于关系，”摩根大通私人银行（JPMorgan Private Bank）亚洲区主管Michael Fung表示，“成功的私人银行家都是某个家族的内部成员。”
“到目前为止，净资产流入的快速增长远远抵消了成本不断增加带来的影响，”克里斯蒂安•德-朱尼亚克（Christian de Juniac）表示，“亚洲私人银行业务的负责人就像是英雄，因为他们的资产增长如此之快。但是，一些业务远不如其它业务有利可图。”波士顿咨询集团称，亚洲私人银行业务产生的利润平均约占管理资产额的0.5％，而在欧洲，这一数字为0.3％。
这种差距反映出亚洲富人的投资文化。他们往往是一些白手起家的百万富翁，对利润较高的交易服务或金融衍生产品颇感兴趣。德-朱尼亚克表示：“与更成熟市场的富人不同，这些客户更关心的仍然是财富创造，而不是财富保值。”他认为，台湾企业家约占亚洲离岸私人银行市场（不包括日本）的一半，反映出他们中国大陆业务的惊人增长。
据美国战略咨询公司波士顿咨询集团（Boston Consulting Group）的数据，客户关系经理或私人顾问的年度奖金有望上涨近50％，底薪将上涨20％至30％。据波士顿咨询集团的数据，经验丰富的客户关系经理将至少能获得25万美元，最多能得到35万美元，其中奖金占薪酬方案总额的约40％。预计亚洲顶尖顾问将获得总计70万至80万美元的收入。波士顿咨询集团私人银行业务负责人克里斯蒂安•德朱尼亚克（Christian de Juniac）表示，今年企业营收的增长或许将不止抵消员工成本的上升，预计平均税前利润上升近50％。但如果市场走下坡路，给新员工过高报酬的那些银行利润率会急剧下降。
据波士顿咨询集团表示，目前给私人银行家们的薪酬方案，尽管低于投资银行业的水平，已接近2000年时的最高点。一些分析师认为，这表明相对年轻的亚洲私人银行业存在“非理性繁荣”。
德朱尼亚克先生表示，最大增长潜力将来自中国、印度、俄罗斯等市场上，资产在100万至500万美元之间的新兴富人。摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）分析师休•范斯蒂尼斯（Huw van Steenis）表示，有能力在这些市场赢得资金的银行将比同行增长更快。他表示，“人们低估了亚洲的增长会有多强劲。”
“亚洲私人银行业务极度依赖于关系，”摩根大通私人银行（JPMorgan Private Bank）亚洲区主管Michael Fung表示，“成功的私人银行家都是某个家族的内部成员。”
“到目前为止，净资产流入的快速增长远远抵消了成本不断增加带来的影响，”克里斯蒂安•德-朱尼亚克（Christian de Juniac）表示，“亚洲私人银行业务的负责人就像是英雄，因为他们的资产增长如此之快。但是，一些业务远不如其它业务有利可图。”波士顿咨询集团称，亚洲私人银行业务产生的利润平均约占管理资产额的0.5％，而在欧洲，这一数字为0.3％。
这种差距反映出亚洲富人的投资文化。他们往往是一些白手起家的百万富翁，对利润较高的交易服务或金融衍生产品颇感兴趣。德-朱尼亚克表示：“与更成熟市场的富人不同，这些客户更关心的仍然是财富创造，而不是财富保值。”他认为，台湾企业家约占亚洲离岸私人银行市场（不包括日本）的一半，反映出他们中国大陆业务的惊人增长。
私人银行起步
私人银行起步
http://www.jrj.com/ 2007年04月06日 17:22 《证券市场周刊》
起源自欧洲的私人银行，有着众多的类型，周到得难以想像的服务，为富人打理财产和生活
作为银行众多业务中的一种，私人银行服务（Private Banking）由国际级金融集团提供的私密性银行业务，开户门槛最低50万美元（一般需要拥有至少100万美元以上的金融资产）。私人银行的服务对象通常是富有的个人或家庭，和一般的理财服务相比，私人银行面向的是金字塔顶端的富豪阶层：这里没有华丽的门面，没有精致的壁饰与地毯，没有美味的点心，也没有笑容可掬的银行职员站在门口对客人问好；这里只有森严、隐秘的小会议室，雅致的桌椅和异常安静的空间。千百万美元的大宗交易，都在这样的环境中完成。
与零售银行部门提供的贵宾理财服务相比，私人银行的客户和服务更高端，借助在各国建立的广泛人际关系和渠道优势，善于解决富人跨国投资难题和资金管理事务，业务范围更广，金融产品的复杂程度更高，通常会按照客户需求量身定做相关产品和服务：从帮助客户管理庞大的资产（如投资规划、避税），到提供并购案的建议及标的，甚至还提供收藏鉴定，代表客户到拍卖场所竞标古董。通过私人银行服务，客户还可接触到许多常人无法购买的股票、债券，获得许多投资私人公司、优先购买IPO股票的机会。近年来，美国私人银行业务每年的平均利润率高达35％，年平均盈利增长12％-15％，远远优于一般的零售银行业务。
从金匠到“财富避风港”
私人银行起源于17世纪初欧洲的一些金匠，最初是由私人独资或合伙投资经营的非股份公司形式的银行，属个人所有，由家族控制，一般以私人名字命名。几个世纪以来，私人银行通常都是权贵富豪财富的“避风港”。
目前，国际顶尖的私人银行主要在欧洲，在国际金融界和美国华尔街的投资银行分庭抗礼。和其他银行所提供的私人银行业务相比较，瑞士的私人银行最具特色并且具有标准的欧洲绅士风范，其特色可概括为：以欧洲客户为主、充分尊重隐私、银行承担无限责任、拒绝非稳定性增长——这几乎是一种完美的古典私人银行图解。
承担无限责任是瑞士私人银行的一个极为重要的特征，这意味着假如传统的瑞士私人银行倒闭，无法如数归还客户的资金，客户甚至可以拿走私人银行所有者的家族资产。相反，如果一家股份制银行倒闭，其客户只能依据这家银行的账面资产获得部分或全部赔偿。
瑞士最著名的私人银行中，大多数是非上市的家族企业，不少只做资产管理业务。以成立于1805年的私人银行百达（BankPictetCie）为例，其客户囊括了欧洲上流社会前1000位最为知名、富有的家族，经手的资产额达2360亿瑞士法郎。但它服务的客户群体相当有限，可谓是专注于顶尖服务的私人银行代表。
全球化的资产配置
为了规避国内单一市场的风险，私人银行帮助客户进行全球化的资产配置，投资离岸基金（off shore fund）就是一种重要的形式。离岸基金也称海外基金，是指基金资本来源于国外，并投资于国外证券市场的投资基金。与之对应，私人银行通常提供的理财服务被称为在岸业务。离岸基金根据“基金发行公司注册地”以及“计价币种”的不同，可以分为：由国外的基金公司发行、募集，通过在本地成立的投资顾问公司引进，由国内投资者申购的基金（注册地在海外，特别是一些免税天堂如英属处女岛等），计价币种也是各种外币；以及由国内基金公司发行、募集资金，赴海外投资的基金。
如果投资者有移民或子女有出国留学的打算，想把部分财产转移到国外，离岸基金将是一种合适的财务工具。因为贸然把资金汇到境外，可能会引发意想不到的后遗症。不少国家的税率很高（普遍达到40％～50％），一旦资金进入到国外的银行，将来做任何事都会牵涉到纳税的问题。所以，最好是先将资金放在离岸基金上，可以方便投资者作全球的资金调配以及实现最佳的避税效果。
除了跨国界的投资安排，私人银行还向客户提供“环球财富保障计划”。在海外免税国家与地区成立离岸私人公司是其中的一项重要方案，有助于税务和遗产规划。其主要功能是持有外币存款、证券投资、黄金、物业和土地等资产，如果配合境外成立的家族信托基金保障效果会更好。通过设立离岸公司，客户可以节省收益、利息和遗产的相关纳税支出，增加财务私密性，保护财产免受法律审核与纠纷，避免政治与经济动荡导致的房地产充公、没收风险，自由支配财产，并且可以减少投资与融资的交易成本。
由于传统的私人银行离岸业务为“洗钱”行为提供了便利，而为外界和各国政府所抨击。一些私人银行尤其是一些瑞士私人银行，加大了跨境在岸业务和在岸业务的开拓，继续保持其业务的吸引力。
财富保障与传承
家族信托基金也是私人银行保障客户财富的有效方式。信托基金是委托人（客户）将其财产所有权转移至受托人（银行）的法律关系，让受托人按照信托契约条文为受益人的利益持有并管理委托人的资产（信托基金）。根据信托协议，受托人是财产的合法拥有者，必须根据管辖法律与信托协议的条款管理财产。基于受益人拥有信托财产的合法权利，并须对受益人负诚信责任，只有受益人可强制执行信托的条款。
信托基金具有相当的灵活性，委托人可按其特别要求制定信托协议的条款，特别是有关处理财产的条款。同时，信托基金保密性极高。受托人以其本人的名义负责信托的所有业务，使第三者无法得知委托人或受益人的身份。即使委托人（客户）发生意外或因犯罪，资产被政府冻结，信托基金的资料仍受到保护。通常，信托与离岸公司同时使用可以更为安全。信托亦可取代遗嘱，避免预立遗嘱与遗嘱认证程序的公开。此外，信托基金还可以成为安排后代财富继承的有效方式，统筹管理资产，减轻甚至豁免遗产税（信托名下的资产不会被视为遗产）。对于委托人而言，“全权代管信托基金”赋予受托人许多弹性，使其根据外部环境的转变灵活处理信托基金，因而受到了私人银行的大力推崇。
随着财富管理业的日渐兴起，不少专业的理财公司和私人银行都纷纷推出了针对下一代人的儿童理财培训项目和夏令营活动，把从股票、债券到初创企业和慈善事业的方方面面都教给孩子们。对这些公司来说，这不但是推广产品的机会，也是着眼未来，巩固自己同那些富裕家庭客户之间关系的大好机会。
http://www.jrj.com/ 2007年04月06日 17:22 《证券市场周刊》
起源自欧洲的私人银行，有着众多的类型，周到得难以想像的服务，为富人打理财产和生活
作为银行众多业务中的一种，私人银行服务（Private Banking）由国际级金融集团提供的私密性银行业务，开户门槛最低50万美元（一般需要拥有至少100万美元以上的金融资产）。私人银行的服务对象通常是富有的个人或家庭，和一般的理财服务相比，私人银行面向的是金字塔顶端的富豪阶层：这里没有华丽的门面，没有精致的壁饰与地毯，没有美味的点心，也没有笑容可掬的银行职员站在门口对客人问好；这里只有森严、隐秘的小会议室，雅致的桌椅和异常安静的空间。千百万美元的大宗交易，都在这样的环境中完成。
与零售银行部门提供的贵宾理财服务相比，私人银行的客户和服务更高端，借助在各国建立的广泛人际关系和渠道优势，善于解决富人跨国投资难题和资金管理事务，业务范围更广，金融产品的复杂程度更高，通常会按照客户需求量身定做相关产品和服务：从帮助客户管理庞大的资产（如投资规划、避税），到提供并购案的建议及标的，甚至还提供收藏鉴定，代表客户到拍卖场所竞标古董。通过私人银行服务，客户还可接触到许多常人无法购买的股票、债券，获得许多投资私人公司、优先购买IPO股票的机会。近年来，美国私人银行业务每年的平均利润率高达35％，年平均盈利增长12％-15％，远远优于一般的零售银行业务。
从金匠到“财富避风港”
私人银行起源于17世纪初欧洲的一些金匠，最初是由私人独资或合伙投资经营的非股份公司形式的银行，属个人所有，由家族控制，一般以私人名字命名。几个世纪以来，私人银行通常都是权贵富豪财富的“避风港”。
目前，国际顶尖的私人银行主要在欧洲，在国际金融界和美国华尔街的投资银行分庭抗礼。和其他银行所提供的私人银行业务相比较，瑞士的私人银行最具特色并且具有标准的欧洲绅士风范，其特色可概括为：以欧洲客户为主、充分尊重隐私、银行承担无限责任、拒绝非稳定性增长——这几乎是一种完美的古典私人银行图解。
承担无限责任是瑞士私人银行的一个极为重要的特征，这意味着假如传统的瑞士私人银行倒闭，无法如数归还客户的资金，客户甚至可以拿走私人银行所有者的家族资产。相反，如果一家股份制银行倒闭，其客户只能依据这家银行的账面资产获得部分或全部赔偿。
瑞士最著名的私人银行中，大多数是非上市的家族企业，不少只做资产管理业务。以成立于1805年的私人银行百达（BankPictetCie）为例，其客户囊括了欧洲上流社会前1000位最为知名、富有的家族，经手的资产额达2360亿瑞士法郎。但它服务的客户群体相当有限，可谓是专注于顶尖服务的私人银行代表。
全球化的资产配置
为了规避国内单一市场的风险，私人银行帮助客户进行全球化的资产配置，投资离岸基金（off shore fund）就是一种重要的形式。离岸基金也称海外基金，是指基金资本来源于国外，并投资于国外证券市场的投资基金。与之对应，私人银行通常提供的理财服务被称为在岸业务。离岸基金根据“基金发行公司注册地”以及“计价币种”的不同，可以分为：由国外的基金公司发行、募集，通过在本地成立的投资顾问公司引进，由国内投资者申购的基金（注册地在海外，特别是一些免税天堂如英属处女岛等），计价币种也是各种外币；以及由国内基金公司发行、募集资金，赴海外投资的基金。
如果投资者有移民或子女有出国留学的打算，想把部分财产转移到国外，离岸基金将是一种合适的财务工具。因为贸然把资金汇到境外，可能会引发意想不到的后遗症。不少国家的税率很高（普遍达到40％～50％），一旦资金进入到国外的银行，将来做任何事都会牵涉到纳税的问题。所以，最好是先将资金放在离岸基金上，可以方便投资者作全球的资金调配以及实现最佳的避税效果。
除了跨国界的投资安排，私人银行还向客户提供“环球财富保障计划”。在海外免税国家与地区成立离岸私人公司是其中的一项重要方案，有助于税务和遗产规划。其主要功能是持有外币存款、证券投资、黄金、物业和土地等资产，如果配合境外成立的家族信托基金保障效果会更好。通过设立离岸公司，客户可以节省收益、利息和遗产的相关纳税支出，增加财务私密性，保护财产免受法律审核与纠纷，避免政治与经济动荡导致的房地产充公、没收风险，自由支配财产，并且可以减少投资与融资的交易成本。
由于传统的私人银行离岸业务为“洗钱”行为提供了便利，而为外界和各国政府所抨击。一些私人银行尤其是一些瑞士私人银行，加大了跨境在岸业务和在岸业务的开拓，继续保持其业务的吸引力。
财富保障与传承
家族信托基金也是私人银行保障客户财富的有效方式。信托基金是委托人（客户）将其财产所有权转移至受托人（银行）的法律关系，让受托人按照信托契约条文为受益人的利益持有并管理委托人的资产（信托基金）。根据信托协议，受托人是财产的合法拥有者，必须根据管辖法律与信托协议的条款管理财产。基于受益人拥有信托财产的合法权利，并须对受益人负诚信责任，只有受益人可强制执行信托的条款。
信托基金具有相当的灵活性，委托人可按其特别要求制定信托协议的条款，特别是有关处理财产的条款。同时，信托基金保密性极高。受托人以其本人的名义负责信托的所有业务，使第三者无法得知委托人或受益人的身份。即使委托人（客户）发生意外或因犯罪，资产被政府冻结，信托基金的资料仍受到保护。通常，信托与离岸公司同时使用可以更为安全。信托亦可取代遗嘱，避免预立遗嘱与遗嘱认证程序的公开。此外，信托基金还可以成为安排后代财富继承的有效方式，统筹管理资产，减轻甚至豁免遗产税（信托名下的资产不会被视为遗产）。对于委托人而言，“全权代管信托基金”赋予受托人许多弹性，使其根据外部环境的转变灵活处理信托基金，因而受到了私人银行的大力推崇。
随着财富管理业的日渐兴起，不少专业的理财公司和私人银行都纷纷推出了针对下一代人的儿童理财培训项目和夏令营活动，把从股票、债券到初创企业和慈善事业的方方面面都教给孩子们。对这些公司来说，这不但是推广产品的机会，也是着眼未来，巩固自己同那些富裕家庭客户之间关系的大好机会。
诠释私人银行
诠释私人银行
http://www.jrj.com/ 2007年06月11日 10:09 金融时报-金时网
*私人银行起源于16世纪的瑞士日内瓦。开始是专门服务于200万美元以上的超级富翁家族，后来逐步演变为向众多的高净资产客户提供更多产品和更多内容的金融服务。
*中国在2002年之后，各家商业银行才开始发展零售银行业务，而由于分业经营的限制，投资银行业务没有归入其中。目前，大多数全国性商业银行的主要业务仅仅是零售银行、商业银行和公司银行三部分，并没有把目光转向私人银行。 目前，中资银行发展私人银行业务还面临政策瓶颈、人才瓶颈以及意识瓶颈三大瓶颈的制约，需要管理层和银行从业人员能明确认识，并及早突破。
一、私人银行的起源及基本概念
私人银行起源于16世纪的瑞士日内瓦。法国的一些经商的贵族由于宗教信仰原因被驱逐出境，形成了第一代瑞士的私人银行家，欧洲的皇室高官们迅即享受了这种私密性很强的卓越的金融服务。开始是专门服务于200万美元以上的超级富翁家族。后来逐步演变为向众多的高净资产客户提供更多产品和更多内容的金融服务。 还有一说法，17世纪欧洲贵族出外打仗，家中财产由留守的贵族代为管理，这些贵族逐步形成了第一代私人银行家。总之，私人银行起源于一种私密性极强的专门提供给贵族和富人阶层的金融服务。
谈到私人银行的概念，很多中国人甚至银行业内人士都有着不同的理解，并存在很大的认识误区，所以有必要澄清一下。首先，私人银行不是私人开的银行，它只是银行中的一条业务线或者一种银行服务类别，与银行所有制的性质无关。其次，私人银行不是零售银行，虽然私人银行在表现形式上，是直接与一个富人接触为起点，但私人银行的服务也涵盖了这个富人——一个自然人所拥有企业的全部金融需求。第三，私人银行不是财富管理，财富管理曾经是私人银行服务的核心部分，但是随着金融业发展和客户需求的多样化，财富管理在私人银行业务中所占的比重越来越小。
其实，私人银行从来没有一个确切的定义，通俗地讲，它是一个“从摇篮到坟墓”的金融服务，是专门针对富人进行的一种私密性极强的服务。要根据客户需求量身定做投资理财产品，要对客户投资企业进行全方位投融资服务，要对富人及家人，孩子进行教育规划，移民计划，合理避税，信托计划的服务。曾经有一位客户这样描述，“私人银行的服务是渗透到客户生活的每一阶段、每一个细节、每一个角落。”
西方银行业对自然人的服务共有四大类，是根据金融资产的多少进行分类的。第一类是大众银行，不限制客户资产规模；第二类是贵宾银行，客户资产在10万美元以上；第三类是私人银行要求客户资产在100万美元以上；第四类是家庭办公室，要求客户资产在3000万美元以上。当然，各家国际性大银行在不同地区、不同时间段，对这四类服务要求的最低金融资产额度也略有不同，比如高盛对港澳地区私人银行客户设置的门槛是1000万美元，HSBC的最低门槛是300万美元，而UBS（全球私人银行资产名列第一）对中国大陆客户的离岸账户的金融资产要求仅为50万美元。
二、私人银行家需要具备的素质
大多数外资银行没有把Private Banker翻译成私人银行家，而是简单地称之为客户经理，其实，一名合格的私人银行客户经理应该对私人银行家的称谓受之无愧。因为私人银行对从业人员所要求的专业知识水平和能力都是很高的。
众所周知，欧美国家的大型银行集团是混业经营的，可分为零售银行或消费银行、商业银行、公司银行、投资银行和私人银行五大业务线。在这五大类中，私人银行是对从业人员要求很高，同时也是待遇很高的一条业务线。私人银行的客户经理要精通个人财富管理、企业财务管理，熟悉国际金融市场及衍生金融产品，了解资本市场运作的一般规则，了解保险知识，熟悉主要国家的税收政策和移民政策，熟悉信托计划的规则和运作，等等。所以，几乎所有私人银行的中坚力量都是在投资银行、商业银行、公司银行、零售银行工作10年以上的资深从业人员，他们不仅具备扎实深厚的理论知识，还要有亲历一个经济或金融周期的实战经验，这样才能与客户在同一层面上对话和交流。不要忘记，我们的私人银行客户大都是35岁以上的成功人士，他们要求的不是“花瓶”，也不是“高尔夫陪练”，他们需要的是真正有益于财富规划和事业发展的优秀金融专家。
三、内地发展私人银行的可行性
内地是在2002年之后，各家商业银行才开始发展零售银行业务，而由于分业经营的限制，投资银行业务没有归入其中，目前，大多数全国性商业银行的主要业务仅仅是零售银行、商业银行和公司银行三部分，并没有把目光转向私人银行。但大量涌入的外资银行早已对中国潜在的私人银行市场虎视眈眈，迅速推出了各类离岸私人银行服务。根据麦肯锡的测算，目前内地离岸私人银行业务大概占到整个市场潜力的五分之一，做中国内地个人资产离岸业务的主要地点是香港和新加坡。
同时，外资银行也在积极筹备在岸（中国境内）私人银行服务，这场抢夺中国富人的无硝烟战争，让中资银行备感竞争压力，纷纷举起贵宾服务和财富管理的大旗，并开始紧锣密鼓地筹建私人银行，今年3月28日，中国银行率先推出了私人银行服务，工商银行、中信银行、广发银行的私人银行也正在筹备之中。
由于中国严格的分业经营金融体制和严格的资本管制制度，离岸和在岸的私人银行服务范畴会有一些不同，面对刚刚起步的私人银行业务，很多中资银行从业人员都感觉不够自信，往往表现出消极的态度。他们认为，外资银行在投资理财、资产管理、金融衍生品市场都有着极其丰富的，上百年的经验，中资银行是无法与之抗衡的。的确，经验不足是客观存在的，但也不能就此妄自菲薄，随着内地金融创新步伐加快，金融产品线越来越丰富，中资银行拥有了更多开展私人银行服务的有利条件。20纪90年代以来，从全球金融角度来看，在岸私人银行的发展远远快于离岸私人银行业务发展；在与大量中国富裕阶层接触后，发现他们对于在岸和离岸的私人银行服务有着同样的渴望和需求，而且这两类服务是相互无法替代的。下面就简单分析一下中资银行开展在岸私人银行服务的可行性：
第一，客户财富管理。在境外，私人银行可以根据客户指示，代客户进行股票、固定收益产品、基金、结构性产品、货币市场产品、商品票据的投资，并可以代理海外保险。中国境内的现状逐步在与离岸金融缩短差距：
一是与证券业和保险业的产品合作。虽然目前国内仍旧是分业经营，但证券业、银行业和保险业的合作日趋紧密，金融产品创新的浪潮更是一浪高过一浪。首先，银行可以代理各种保险产品，从这个角度讲，私人银行可以为客户提供它所需要的保险服务，与离岸私人银行服务别无二致。其次，虽然在银行账户上还不能直接进行股票买卖，但在银行逐步开展股票交易第三方存管业务后，通过银行的网上银行和电话银行实现便捷的银证转账，也并不影响客户的市场交易。显然，中资银行最明显的不足之处就是无法替私人银行客户直接交易香港、欧美股票，但同样，即使外资银行在中国开立私人银行服务，这同样是个禁区。
二是可以代销全部基金产品。作为中国境内发展最快、市场反响最好的财富管理产品，基金的火暴直接推动了私人银行业务的发展，但由于政策限制，不同基金公司会与不同的银行合作，这就限制了一家银行对所有基金产品代理的可能，客户很难从一家银行柜台买到所有基金产品。不过，这种限制有望在今年解决，可以保证客户在私人银行随意挑选所有新旧基金产品。
三是结构性产品发展迅速。在私人银行提供的投资理财产品中，有大量与股票价格、外汇汇率、利率、商品价格等为标的物的结构性产品。国内相关的产品创新速度很快，有丰富多彩的结构型产品供给客户。尽管我们在这方面起步较晚，但正在以一年当二十年的速度追赶欧美。举一个简单的例子，某家证券公司正在与银行合作推出一种类似香港高息股票票据的人民币理财产品。
四是外汇产品利用“拿来主义”。毋庸置疑，中资银行在国际资本市场的运作经验远远落后于外资，但在外汇理财产品市场，中资银行完全可以采用“拿来主义”，从外资银行引进成熟产品直接提供给客户即可。由于QDII刚刚起步，也由于中资银行的管理层在外汇资产安排上还存在固有的一些顾虑，影响了中资银行和外资银行合作的力度。有理由相信中资银行会很快进行这方面的资金安排、或与外资应行合作、或产品自主创新，否则就会使外汇资金继续流入外资银行。
由于中国金融监管的限制，中国境内的银行还是有一些受限制的金融服务的。比如，中资银行不能进行全权委托资产管理，但可以通过和信托公司合作，来达到客户在这方面的投资需求。另外，由于中国境内固定收益产品，即政府债券和公司债券的品种很少，客户可以选择的余地较小，但随着中国金融开放步伐的加快，中国债市会有一个较大的发展。
第二，个人信托、合理避税、遗产安排和移民计划。由于中国没有遗产税和赠与税，所以通过创立离岸账户，办理个人信托这个私人银行服务内容，对于中国大多数客户来说意义不大。从实际需求来看，办理个人信托最重要的意义在于它对个人财产的保护及增强私密性，这样的业务和服务将来会有极大的市场需求和市场前景。正是因为有了个人信托、税务、遗产和移民服务，财富管理的概念才逐步转向了财富规划，私人银行服务也就由此与财富管理区分开来。
第三，企业融资服务。私人银行对企业融资服务仅限于该企业主为私人银行客户，并以他的金融资产包括房产作为抵押进行的贷款融资服务。相信中资银行在中国本土运营的多年经验和强大的分支网络可以使这项业务成为它的强项。
第四，市场中介服务和各种咨询中介服务。银行为私人银行客户提供各种中介咨询服务，以收取咨询费，是越来越受市场关注的热点，也逐步为中国客户所接受。
四、国内发展私人银行面临的瓶颈
目前，中资银行发展私人银行业务还面临三大瓶颈的制约，需要管理层和银行从业人员能明确认识，并及早突破。
第一，政策瓶颈。上面论述中已经提到了目前存在的政策瓶颈，但很多迹象也表明，政策限制在慢慢松动和突破，比如银行与证券、信托、保险的广泛合作，银监会高调支持商业银行金融创新，等等；再加上外资银行私人银行业务的步步进逼，我们也相信，金融改革创新的步伐会越来越快。
第二，人才瓶颈。对于目前中资银行发展私人银行业务，人才瓶颈是最致命的障碍。我们在为中资银行筹建私人银行而欣喜的同时，也不禁为他们引进人才的问题而担忧。熟悉中国金融环境，又了解国外私人银行运作的国际性人才非常有限，没有足够的吸引力，这些人才很难引进到中资银行，就像一些监管层官员所讲，“有很多人才从中资流失到外资，但很难从外资再回到中资”，这个现实值得我们行长们深思。
第三，意识瓶颈。由于私人银行的概念在2005年之后才出现在中国富人生活中，穿梭于香港和内地的外资银行客户经理（大概1个月1次）成为了私人银行理念的初期普及者，所以，普及的频率还是较低。很多中国成功人士对私人银行的概念模糊，甚至抵触。一位UBS私人银行的高级客户经理感慨，“中国除了上海、北京和深圳等大城市之外，大多数人还是将私人银行看成私人开的银行了，或者将投资理财规划当成拉存款的。”这种意识瓶颈和投资者教育不能一蹴而就，需要依靠银行从业人员，媒体对公众进行正确引导和传播，并且要基于媒体记者和金融从业人员正确认知的基础上。
对于所有国际银行业巨头来说，中国市场都是商家必争之地，因为中国的富人群体正在迅速崛起，并且每年都以世界上最快的速度增长。有数据显示，在中国拥有10万美元以上金融资产的人有120万，拥有100万美元以上的有30万人，几乎所有国际性银行都将私人银行业务转向亚洲转向中国。
由此，我们没有理由不去相信中国私人银行服务的巨大潜力和丰厚利润；也没有理由怀疑，未来一两年间，中国的私人银行业务将进入白热化的竞争和蓬勃发展阶段。（张秋林）
http://www.jrj.com/ 2007年06月11日 10:09 金融时报-金时网
*私人银行起源于16世纪的瑞士日内瓦。开始是专门服务于200万美元以上的超级富翁家族，后来逐步演变为向众多的高净资产客户提供更多产品和更多内容的金融服务。
*中国在2002年之后，各家商业银行才开始发展零售银行业务，而由于分业经营的限制，投资银行业务没有归入其中。目前，大多数全国性商业银行的主要业务仅仅是零售银行、商业银行和公司银行三部分，并没有把目光转向私人银行。 目前，中资银行发展私人银行业务还面临政策瓶颈、人才瓶颈以及意识瓶颈三大瓶颈的制约，需要管理层和银行从业人员能明确认识，并及早突破。
一、私人银行的起源及基本概念
私人银行起源于16世纪的瑞士日内瓦。法国的一些经商的贵族由于宗教信仰原因被驱逐出境，形成了第一代瑞士的私人银行家，欧洲的皇室高官们迅即享受了这种私密性很强的卓越的金融服务。开始是专门服务于200万美元以上的超级富翁家族。后来逐步演变为向众多的高净资产客户提供更多产品和更多内容的金融服务。 还有一说法，17世纪欧洲贵族出外打仗，家中财产由留守的贵族代为管理，这些贵族逐步形成了第一代私人银行家。总之，私人银行起源于一种私密性极强的专门提供给贵族和富人阶层的金融服务。
谈到私人银行的概念，很多中国人甚至银行业内人士都有着不同的理解，并存在很大的认识误区，所以有必要澄清一下。首先，私人银行不是私人开的银行，它只是银行中的一条业务线或者一种银行服务类别，与银行所有制的性质无关。其次，私人银行不是零售银行，虽然私人银行在表现形式上，是直接与一个富人接触为起点，但私人银行的服务也涵盖了这个富人——一个自然人所拥有企业的全部金融需求。第三，私人银行不是财富管理，财富管理曾经是私人银行服务的核心部分，但是随着金融业发展和客户需求的多样化，财富管理在私人银行业务中所占的比重越来越小。
其实，私人银行从来没有一个确切的定义，通俗地讲，它是一个“从摇篮到坟墓”的金融服务，是专门针对富人进行的一种私密性极强的服务。要根据客户需求量身定做投资理财产品，要对客户投资企业进行全方位投融资服务，要对富人及家人，孩子进行教育规划，移民计划，合理避税，信托计划的服务。曾经有一位客户这样描述，“私人银行的服务是渗透到客户生活的每一阶段、每一个细节、每一个角落。”
西方银行业对自然人的服务共有四大类，是根据金融资产的多少进行分类的。第一类是大众银行，不限制客户资产规模；第二类是贵宾银行，客户资产在10万美元以上；第三类是私人银行要求客户资产在100万美元以上；第四类是家庭办公室，要求客户资产在3000万美元以上。当然，各家国际性大银行在不同地区、不同时间段，对这四类服务要求的最低金融资产额度也略有不同，比如高盛对港澳地区私人银行客户设置的门槛是1000万美元，HSBC的最低门槛是300万美元，而UBS（全球私人银行资产名列第一）对中国大陆客户的离岸账户的金融资产要求仅为50万美元。
二、私人银行家需要具备的素质
大多数外资银行没有把Private Banker翻译成私人银行家，而是简单地称之为客户经理，其实，一名合格的私人银行客户经理应该对私人银行家的称谓受之无愧。因为私人银行对从业人员所要求的专业知识水平和能力都是很高的。
众所周知，欧美国家的大型银行集团是混业经营的，可分为零售银行或消费银行、商业银行、公司银行、投资银行和私人银行五大业务线。在这五大类中，私人银行是对从业人员要求很高，同时也是待遇很高的一条业务线。私人银行的客户经理要精通个人财富管理、企业财务管理，熟悉国际金融市场及衍生金融产品，了解资本市场运作的一般规则，了解保险知识，熟悉主要国家的税收政策和移民政策，熟悉信托计划的规则和运作，等等。所以，几乎所有私人银行的中坚力量都是在投资银行、商业银行、公司银行、零售银行工作10年以上的资深从业人员，他们不仅具备扎实深厚的理论知识，还要有亲历一个经济或金融周期的实战经验，这样才能与客户在同一层面上对话和交流。不要忘记，我们的私人银行客户大都是35岁以上的成功人士，他们要求的不是“花瓶”，也不是“高尔夫陪练”，他们需要的是真正有益于财富规划和事业发展的优秀金融专家。
三、内地发展私人银行的可行性
内地是在2002年之后，各家商业银行才开始发展零售银行业务，而由于分业经营的限制，投资银行业务没有归入其中，目前，大多数全国性商业银行的主要业务仅仅是零售银行、商业银行和公司银行三部分，并没有把目光转向私人银行。但大量涌入的外资银行早已对中国潜在的私人银行市场虎视眈眈，迅速推出了各类离岸私人银行服务。根据麦肯锡的测算，目前内地离岸私人银行业务大概占到整个市场潜力的五分之一，做中国内地个人资产离岸业务的主要地点是香港和新加坡。
同时，外资银行也在积极筹备在岸（中国境内）私人银行服务，这场抢夺中国富人的无硝烟战争，让中资银行备感竞争压力，纷纷举起贵宾服务和财富管理的大旗，并开始紧锣密鼓地筹建私人银行，今年3月28日，中国银行率先推出了私人银行服务，工商银行、中信银行、广发银行的私人银行也正在筹备之中。
由于中国严格的分业经营金融体制和严格的资本管制制度，离岸和在岸的私人银行服务范畴会有一些不同，面对刚刚起步的私人银行业务，很多中资银行从业人员都感觉不够自信，往往表现出消极的态度。他们认为，外资银行在投资理财、资产管理、金融衍生品市场都有着极其丰富的，上百年的经验，中资银行是无法与之抗衡的。的确，经验不足是客观存在的，但也不能就此妄自菲薄，随着内地金融创新步伐加快，金融产品线越来越丰富，中资银行拥有了更多开展私人银行服务的有利条件。20纪90年代以来，从全球金融角度来看，在岸私人银行的发展远远快于离岸私人银行业务发展；在与大量中国富裕阶层接触后，发现他们对于在岸和离岸的私人银行服务有着同样的渴望和需求，而且这两类服务是相互无法替代的。下面就简单分析一下中资银行开展在岸私人银行服务的可行性：
第一，客户财富管理。在境外，私人银行可以根据客户指示，代客户进行股票、固定收益产品、基金、结构性产品、货币市场产品、商品票据的投资，并可以代理海外保险。中国境内的现状逐步在与离岸金融缩短差距：
一是与证券业和保险业的产品合作。虽然目前国内仍旧是分业经营，但证券业、银行业和保险业的合作日趋紧密，金融产品创新的浪潮更是一浪高过一浪。首先，银行可以代理各种保险产品，从这个角度讲，私人银行可以为客户提供它所需要的保险服务，与离岸私人银行服务别无二致。其次，虽然在银行账户上还不能直接进行股票买卖，但在银行逐步开展股票交易第三方存管业务后，通过银行的网上银行和电话银行实现便捷的银证转账，也并不影响客户的市场交易。显然，中资银行最明显的不足之处就是无法替私人银行客户直接交易香港、欧美股票，但同样，即使外资银行在中国开立私人银行服务，这同样是个禁区。
二是可以代销全部基金产品。作为中国境内发展最快、市场反响最好的财富管理产品，基金的火暴直接推动了私人银行业务的发展，但由于政策限制，不同基金公司会与不同的银行合作，这就限制了一家银行对所有基金产品代理的可能，客户很难从一家银行柜台买到所有基金产品。不过，这种限制有望在今年解决，可以保证客户在私人银行随意挑选所有新旧基金产品。
三是结构性产品发展迅速。在私人银行提供的投资理财产品中，有大量与股票价格、外汇汇率、利率、商品价格等为标的物的结构性产品。国内相关的产品创新速度很快，有丰富多彩的结构型产品供给客户。尽管我们在这方面起步较晚，但正在以一年当二十年的速度追赶欧美。举一个简单的例子，某家证券公司正在与银行合作推出一种类似香港高息股票票据的人民币理财产品。
四是外汇产品利用“拿来主义”。毋庸置疑，中资银行在国际资本市场的运作经验远远落后于外资，但在外汇理财产品市场，中资银行完全可以采用“拿来主义”，从外资银行引进成熟产品直接提供给客户即可。由于QDII刚刚起步，也由于中资银行的管理层在外汇资产安排上还存在固有的一些顾虑，影响了中资银行和外资银行合作的力度。有理由相信中资银行会很快进行这方面的资金安排、或与外资应行合作、或产品自主创新，否则就会使外汇资金继续流入外资银行。
由于中国金融监管的限制，中国境内的银行还是有一些受限制的金融服务的。比如，中资银行不能进行全权委托资产管理，但可以通过和信托公司合作，来达到客户在这方面的投资需求。另外，由于中国境内固定收益产品，即政府债券和公司债券的品种很少，客户可以选择的余地较小，但随着中国金融开放步伐的加快，中国债市会有一个较大的发展。
第二，个人信托、合理避税、遗产安排和移民计划。由于中国没有遗产税和赠与税，所以通过创立离岸账户，办理个人信托这个私人银行服务内容，对于中国大多数客户来说意义不大。从实际需求来看，办理个人信托最重要的意义在于它对个人财产的保护及增强私密性，这样的业务和服务将来会有极大的市场需求和市场前景。正是因为有了个人信托、税务、遗产和移民服务，财富管理的概念才逐步转向了财富规划，私人银行服务也就由此与财富管理区分开来。
第三，企业融资服务。私人银行对企业融资服务仅限于该企业主为私人银行客户，并以他的金融资产包括房产作为抵押进行的贷款融资服务。相信中资银行在中国本土运营的多年经验和强大的分支网络可以使这项业务成为它的强项。
第四，市场中介服务和各种咨询中介服务。银行为私人银行客户提供各种中介咨询服务，以收取咨询费，是越来越受市场关注的热点，也逐步为中国客户所接受。
四、国内发展私人银行面临的瓶颈
目前，中资银行发展私人银行业务还面临三大瓶颈的制约，需要管理层和银行从业人员能明确认识，并及早突破。
第一，政策瓶颈。上面论述中已经提到了目前存在的政策瓶颈，但很多迹象也表明，政策限制在慢慢松动和突破，比如银行与证券、信托、保险的广泛合作，银监会高调支持商业银行金融创新，等等；再加上外资银行私人银行业务的步步进逼，我们也相信，金融改革创新的步伐会越来越快。
第二，人才瓶颈。对于目前中资银行发展私人银行业务，人才瓶颈是最致命的障碍。我们在为中资银行筹建私人银行而欣喜的同时，也不禁为他们引进人才的问题而担忧。熟悉中国金融环境，又了解国外私人银行运作的国际性人才非常有限，没有足够的吸引力，这些人才很难引进到中资银行，就像一些监管层官员所讲，“有很多人才从中资流失到外资，但很难从外资再回到中资”，这个现实值得我们行长们深思。
第三，意识瓶颈。由于私人银行的概念在2005年之后才出现在中国富人生活中，穿梭于香港和内地的外资银行客户经理（大概1个月1次）成为了私人银行理念的初期普及者，所以，普及的频率还是较低。很多中国成功人士对私人银行的概念模糊，甚至抵触。一位UBS私人银行的高级客户经理感慨，“中国除了上海、北京和深圳等大城市之外，大多数人还是将私人银行看成私人开的银行了，或者将投资理财规划当成拉存款的。”这种意识瓶颈和投资者教育不能一蹴而就，需要依靠银行从业人员，媒体对公众进行正确引导和传播，并且要基于媒体记者和金融从业人员正确认知的基础上。
对于所有国际银行业巨头来说，中国市场都是商家必争之地，因为中国的富人群体正在迅速崛起，并且每年都以世界上最快的速度增长。有数据显示，在中国拥有10万美元以上金融资产的人有120万，拥有100万美元以上的有30万人，几乎所有国际性银行都将私人银行业务转向亚洲转向中国。
由此，我们没有理由不去相信中国私人银行服务的巨大潜力和丰厚利润；也没有理由怀疑，未来一两年间，中国的私人银行业务将进入白热化的竞争和蓬勃发展阶段。（张秋林）
Swiss banking and financial services
The success of Swiss banking and financial services does not rest solely on banking secrecy laws. Most banks in Switzerland are fairing very well in the current market environment. Despite the tax collection schemes and public scare tactics of the aforementioned countries, funds are flowing into Switzerland unabated. In fact, they continue to flow in at an increasing rate. Individuals, families, and companies are taking domicile in Switzerland at a rate similar to the period of World War II.
It is not banking secrecy bringing this about. It is safety, social peace, political solidity, the rule of law, and the privilege of living and working in a country where things work, where tax revenues flow into a first-class infrastructure and good public services exist.
