Il Financial Times si è occupato di recente delle grandi banche italiane e del ruolo che in esse rivestono le Fondazioni, con giudizi non certo lusinghieri, come per esempio il seguente: “In spite of being among the weakest capitalised banks in Europe, Unicredit, Intesa San Paolo and Monte dei paschi are adamant they will not launch rights issues to meet new global capital standards. “Dividend policy will be the real point of decision and flexibility instead,” said one senior bank executive. Another bank director said: “In order to beef up capital, halving the historic dividend pay-out ratio is perfectly possible.” (..)
Cutting the dividend will be politically sensitive in Italy, where provincial banking foundations continue to hold large stakes in even the biggest banks. These foundations have long relied on the banks’ dividend pay-outs to fund social ventures. In spite of the extended phase-in period for the new Basel rules, many banks believe the markets will favour institutions that meet the new requirements early, prompting them to consider how they can top up capital quickly.
E ancora: “But Italy’s banks believe they can be compliant by 2013 with both the 7 per cent Basel III ratio and an expected “systemic buffer” for big banks of up to 2 per cent more, largely by cutting dividends.
Verrebbe in mente l’arcinota proposizione dell’incontentabile, colui che vuole avere la botte piena, la moglie ubriaca e l’uva sulla vite. Ovvero Fondazioni che cialtroneggiano di banche solide, per le quali non devono sborsare capitali a rafforzamento del patrimonio, che si rafforzerà con gli utili: quegli stessi utili destinati a fornire grassi dividendi.
Naturalmente, da riversare al territorio.
John Maynard 