The Business End

Other people's business

Syndicate contentRSS

Q&A: Libor

So what just happened?

Barclays, Photograph: Getty Image
Barclays, Photograph: Getty Images

What is Libor?

Libor is the average cost of borrowing for banks, which is re-calculated daily. Banks are asked to report their borrowing costs, and an average is taken (excluding the highest and lowest four rates). This figure is then used to price loans and financial products all over the world.

What did Barclays do wrong?

In 2005, traders in Barclays investment bank asked Barclays treasury function to report false Libor rates, in order to give their profits a boost. Barclays reversed this in 2007, and started deliberately understating their Libor rates, after they started to worry that high Libor rates were making it look risky in the wake of the run on Northern Rock.

What was the effect?

When Barclays misreported their borrowing rates, the average was slightly skewed. As Libor is used to price hundreds of trillions of pounds of financial stock, this effect was hugely magnified. Every time Barclays artificially altered their Libor for gain, another financial party lost out. This loss was distributed over the whole economy, and ultimately taken by the tax payer. Company loans are often calculated straight from Libor, meaning added problems here.

4 comments

James Keenan 's picture

In today’s culture of public scrutiny, organisations can ill afford to be complacent when it comes to addressing compliance issues. It is vital that those who fall under public scrutiny for perceived wrong doing to not only take corrective action and are able to demonstrate that they are taking the right corrective action that will deliver long-term, effective change. Although a failure in process or technology is often blamed, in many cases a deeper analysis reveals culture to be the underlying issue. Failure to address the underlying culture risks the same issues arising again in another format and this applies to companies, business programmes or projects.
www.locconsulting.co.uk

Catsmeat's picture

"...an agreement by two or more by dishonesty to deprive a person of something which is his or to which he is or would be entitled and an agreement by two or more by dishonesty to injure some proprietary right of his, suffices to constitute the offence of conspiracy to defraud." Scott v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1975] AC 910

anon3's picture

FUck alive. Those bastards need to face criminal charges. If that is not stealing i.e. against the Law, what is....?

Latest tweets