• Russia will be cut off from another bank at the end of the month.

• Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp. will stop processing Russian transactions in November, Bloomberg reported.

• The Singaporean bank is following lenders in China, which have largely pulled back from Russia.

Another bank has turned its back on Russia as lenders grow worried about doing business with Moscow under the threat of Western sanctions.

Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp., the second-largest lender in Singapore, told its clients it would no longer process any transactions related to Russia as of the start of November, a person familiar with the matter told Bloomberg in a report published this week.

The person said that those transactions included the transport and sale of goods and services in Russia and that OCBC attributed the pullback to operational challenges around compliance and regulation.

The new restrictions aren’t expected to significantly impact the bank, given that OCBC hasn’t opened new accounts for Russian clients in two years, the source added.

The bank didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment from Business Insider.

The changes have come as more lenders grow hesitant about doing deals with Russian clients after the West threatened to impose secondary sanctions on firms doing business in the country.

A Russian state media outlet reported that nearly all Chinese banks had stopped processing payments from Russia out of fear of being targeted.

Russia, meanwhile, has nearly depleted its yuan reserves, and businesses were locked out of billions earlier this year amid payment issues abroad, according to data from Russia’s central bank.

Read the original article on Business Insider

A scramble for Chinese equities united the global investment industry last month, just as attitudes towards European and Japanese stock markets became heavily bifurcated along geographical lines.

Despite strong domestic enthusiasm, foreign exchange traded fund investors turned their backs on European and Japanese stock markets in September.

Yet global investors were unified in their enthusiasm for Chinese stocks after the People’s Bank of China unveiled a series of stimulus measures that included monetary easing, steps to support the country’s crisis-hit property market and a Rmb800bn fund to boost the stock market, by lending to asset managers, insurers and brokers to buy equities and to listed companies to buy back their stock.

The war chest expanded on the activities of China’s “national team” of sovereign wealth funds, most prominently Central Huijin Investment, which have ploughed billions of renminbi into domestic equity ETFs over the past 12 months in a bid to boost the onshore A-share market and rekindle investor confidence.

China’s blue-chip CSI 300 index of Shanghai and Shenzhen-listed companies responded by jumping 32 per cent in the space of two weeks, before slipping back 7 per cent on Wednesday. Despite the rally, the blue-chip index still remains 32 per cent below its February 2021 peak.

Overseas ETF investors played their part, launching a buying spree that represented a dramatic volte-face.

In the final four trading days of September, investors pumped $1.6bn into US-listed exchange traded funds focused on China while similar funds listed in Europe pulled in $753mn, according to data from TrackInsight.

This was a sharp contrast to the pattern seen so far this year: in the near-nine months to September 24, US investors withdrew a net $5.1bn from China-focused ETFs while their European counterparts cut their exposure by $331mn.

The newfound inflows, however, remain dwarfed by domestic flows. Asia-Pacific listed China equity ETFs have vacuumed up a net $127bn so far this year, according to data from BlackRock. The vast majority of this is likely to have stemmed from ETFs listed in China itself, in part due to the machinations of the national team.

Despite the U-turn in ETF flows, enthusiasm in some quarters towards Chinese equities remains tempered.

The BlackRock Investment Institute moved from a neutral position to a “modestly overweight” view on China in the wake of the stimulus announcement, magnified by the onshore A-shares market’s lower valuation than developed market equities.  

However, it said it remained “cautious long term given China’s structural challenges” and was “ready to pivot” to a gloomier view if deemed necessary.

Rony Abboud of TrackInsight cautioned that regulatory risks from both US regulators — in respect of security and audit concerns — and their Chinese counterparts — given their past crackdowns on big tech — “are still major factors” in many investors thinking.

Moreover, “there’s scepticism about the long-term impact of the recent stimulus. While it may ease short-term pressures, it’s not seen as enough for a strong recovery without further fiscal support,” Abboud added.

“Time will tell if the bounce was a short squeeze or a sustainable rally,” said Matthew Bartolini, head of Americas ETF research at State Street Global Advisors, given that short interest in China-focused single-country ETFs “had been elevated” beforehand and trailing three-month inflows “the worst they had ever been entering September”.

Any semblance of global consensus was conspicuous by its absence elsewhere, however.

European investors remain upbeat about their own equity markets, pumping $6.6bn into ETFs focused on the region in the past three months, according to the BlackRock data. In contrast, US investors are unconvinced, with further selling in September taking three-month outflows from European equity ETFs to $2.7bn.

A similar picture has emerged in Japan, where Asia-Pacific investors have ploughed $9.3bn into Tokyo-focused ETFs in the past two months, even as US and European investors have withdrawn $4.6bn.

“Japan and Europe have a very strong home bias. International investment in both these markets has dropped off,” said Karim Chedid, head of investment strategy for BlackRock’s iShares arm in the Emea region.

In Japan’s case, Chedid said this was because “the domestic investor is still early in the journey of buying their own market. They have been sitting in cash: when Japan was in deflation they did not need to buy equities,” a development he saw as structural.

In contrast, some foreign investors saw “more headwinds coming from the Bank of Japan [being] expected to continue normalising its policy,” by nudging its still ultra-low policy rate a little higher.

As for Europe, Chedid said “if you look at the macro[economic] picture we have seen in the last month, Europe macro start to disappoint and US macro start to surprise on the upside.

“I think that has driven a bit of a wedge towards investors’ sentiment towards Europe in the last month, but the European investor is still buying lots of European equities, particularly taking the view that the European Central Bank is going to accelerate its rate cuts”, something that would be “a tailwind for the European equity market”.

Overall monthly inflows into the global ETF industry hit $141bn in September, according to BlackRock, up from $129bn in August, keeping it on course to smash all records this year.

Equity ETFs accounted for $102bn of these inflows led, as ever, by US-focused funds, which took in $57bn.

Fixed income flows slowed to $34.6bn while commodity ETFs attracted $1.7bn, led by gold funds which have now seen inflows for five straight months — although they still remain in net outflow territory for the year.

Chedid attributed the revival of interest in gold among ETF investors to rising geopolitical volatility alongside a backdrop of falling global interest rates — traditionally helpful to a non-yielding asset.

A UK airport has ditched some of its much-hated security rules.

Bournemouth Airport passengers will be able to keep more of their items in their luggage when travelling through.

2

Most airports still require travellers to take both laptops and liquids out of their bags when going through security. 

This can result in much longer queues especially at peak times.

However, the small UK airport has said that this is no longer the case.

Instead, they can both remain in any luggage going through the scanners.

An statement released by the airport reads: “Bournemouth Airport has completed the process of installing and testing new security screening equipment to improve passenger security.

“For hand luggage this means that with immediate effect, passengers flying from Bournemouth Airport can now leave Liquids and large electrical items such as laptops in their cabin baggage.

“Passengers flying from Bournemouth Airport will no longer need to present liquids separately in a clear plastic bag however, liquids are still restricted to containers of up to 100ml.”

Sun Travel has contacted Bournemouth Airport for comment.

The current liquid rules remain in place across the UK which is that all liquids must be under 100ml, and all fit into a small plastic bag.

This had hoped to be scrapped earlier this year across the UK.

Despite a number of UK airports scrapping the rules, the government u-turned just days later.

There is no confirmed date when this will be lifted again.

When it is, Brits will be able to take as much as 2l of liquids in their hand luggage without restriction.

And holidaymakers will still have to check the rules when going abroad.

Other airports who don’t follow the rules will require tourists to still carry liquids under 100ml.

But there is even better news for Bournemouth Airport, with Jet2 launching 16 new routes from the airport next year.

Spanish destinations will include the Alicante, Ibiza, Menorca, Majorca, Fuerteventura, Gran Canaria, Lanzarote and Tenerife.

Corfu, Heraklion, Rhodes and Zante in Greece will also be added, as well as Turkey‘s Antalya and Dalaman, along with Faro and Funchal in Portugal.

And the airport has revealed plans for a £5million expansion, with predictions to welcome a record one million passengers.

Here is a clever way to swerve the liquids restrictions.

And we’ve reviewed the best hand luggage bags that people rave about for avoiding baggage fees.

2

Professional Indemnity Insurance (PII) provider BareRock has launched a counselling and wellbeing support programme for its advice firm policyholders.

The programme aims to support the mental health and wellbeing of individuals within BareRock’s club member firms who are dealing with the strain of high-stress complaint situations, by covering the costs of professional counselling.

Under the new initiative, BareRock will fund up to 10 one-hour counselling sessions per claim, subject to a £2,000 cap, with no policy excess payable by the club member firm.

This is designed to help business owners, senior leaders and employees who often find themselves directly involved in managing complex and pressure-filled complaints while juggling multiple responsibilities in highly regulated businesses.

The initiative will be incorporated into BareRock’s offering at no extra cost during the last quarter of 2024.

It will be available to existing and new policyholders.

The news was announced on World Mental Health Day today (10 October).

BareRock CEO and founder Jonathan Newell said: “We are constantly seeking ways to enhance our offering and provide meaningful value to our club members where it’s needed most.

“By offering compassionate support on a human level, alongside technical and strategic assistance during complaint situations, we can help our club members better manage the emotional and mental toll of dealing with stressful complaint situations.

“This mental health and wellbeing support is a great demonstration of our commitment to our customers and to the FCA’s vulnerable customers guidance.”

BareRock’s counselling services aim to support individuals as they navigate the challenges of their roles.

The programme helps develop strategies for better stress management, work-life balance and mental-health prioritisation.

Corporate Personal Wellbeing (CPW) is BareRock’s preferred partner in delivering these professional counselling sessions.

3.3K

Environmental scientists have found hazardous levels of manufactured chemicals in rainwater, leading to the dramatic conclusion that rainwater is “no longer safe to drink anywhere on Earth,” according to an August 2022 report from Insider. Morgan McFall-Johnsen’s article reported results from a global study of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) conducted by researchers from Stockholm University and the Institute of Biogeochemistry and Pollutant Dynamics at ETH Zurich. In an August 2022 report published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, scientists concluded that “in many areas inhabited by humans,” PFAS contamination levels in rainwater, surface water, and soil “often greatly exceed” the strictest international guidelines for acceptable levels of perfluoroalkyl acids.

To reach this conclusion, the researchers compared levels of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) in rainwater from around the world with the drinking water guidelines established by environmental agencies in the United States and Denmark, “which are the most stringent advisories known globally,” the researchers reported. Based on the latest US guidelines for PFOA in drinking water, “rainwater everywhere would be judged unsafe to drink,” the lead author of the study, Ian Cousins, stated in a post on the Stockholm University website. Cousins drew even more dire conclusions in an August 2022 interview: “We have crossed a planetary boundary,” the researcher told Agence France-Presse, “We have made the planet inhospitable to human life . . . [N]othing is clean anymore.”

The PFAS the researchers examined are known informally as “forever chemicals” because they take a long time to break down, “allowing them to build up in people, animals, and environments,” Insider reported. Prior research has linked these chemicals to prostate, kidney, and testicular cancer and additional health risks, including developmental delays in children, decreased fertility in women and men, reduced vaccine efficacy, and high cholesterol.

In June 2022, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued interim updated drinking water health advisories for PFOA and PFOS. According to the agency, the updated advisory levels were “based on new science,” including findings that “some negative health effects may occur with concentrations of PFOA or PFOS in water that are near zero.” As Insider reported, the EPA had previously set seventy parts per trillion as acceptable levels for PFOA and PFOS in drinking water. In its June 2022 advisory, the EPA set interim guidelines to 0.004 parts per trillion for PFOA and 0.02 parts per trillion for PFOS.

The news that rainwater is no longer safe to drink due to PFAS contamination has received limited corporate news coverage. In an August 2022 article about the EPA’s decision to label two “forever chemicals” as hazardous, the Washington Post mentioned that “even some rainwater is tainted with PFAS at dangerously high levels, according to one recent study.” In April 2022, before the publication of the Stockholm University/ETH Zurich study, a New York Times report on the prevalence of PFAS made passing reference to how these substances have “found their way into rainwater, soil, sediment, ice caps, and outdoor and indoor plants.” Beyond the most prestigious US newspapers, the study’s findings have received more detailed coverage from USA Today, the Discovery Channel, and Medical News Today.

Corporate outlets have done more to cover a developing series of lawsuits against chemical manufacturing companies that use PFAS in their products. In December 2022, the Wall Street Journal reported that, in response to growing “criticism and litigation” over alleged health and environmental impacts, the multinational conglomerate 3M will “stop making forever chemicals and cease using them by the end of 2025.” As this volume goes to press, several states—including California, Maine, New Mexico, Maryland, and Rhode Island—have brought or are bringing litigation against 3M and other companies for significant harm to residents and natural resources caused by “forever chemicals.” CNBC reported that the PFAS trial “could set the tone for future lawsuits.” In June 2023, three US-based chemical companies—DuPont, and two spin-off companies, Chemours and Corteva—reached a $1.18 billion deal to resolve complaints of polluting drinking water systems with potentially harmful “forever chemicals.” The same month, researchers at the University of California, San Francisco, published a study in the Annals of Global Health using internal industry documents to show that the companies responsible for “forever chemicals” have known for decades that these substances pose significant threats to human health and the environment.

Morgan McFall-Johnsen, “Rainwater Is No Longer Safe to Drink Anywhere on Earth Due to ‘Forever Chemicals’ Linked to Cancer, Study Suggests,” Insider, August 13, 2022.

Student Researcher: Grace Harty (North Central College)

Faculty Evaluator: Steve Macek (North Central College)