The PRA Would Put 128 Thresholds On A One-Way GDP Ratchet
Five-yearly indexation could preserve regulatory headroom for growing firms, but one economy-wide measure will move reporting, regime and flexibility boundaries that do not all track GDP.
Contents
The Prudential Regulation Authority wants 128 regulatory thresholds to rise automatically with nominal UK gross domestic product. The plan would make many compliance boundaries more predictable. It would also turn a single economy-wide measure into a common escalator for rules covering banks, insurers, investment firms, credit unions and third-country branches.
The consequential feature is a floor. After an initial three-year period, the PRA would recalculate each threshold every five years, round the indexed value to two significant figures and compare it with the threshold already in force. The higher number would apply. A fall in nominal GDP could freeze a threshold, but never lower it automatically.
This is therefore not a neutral inflation adjustment. It is a proposal for a one-way ratchet across reporting, regime eligibility, governance, prudential methods and firms' freedom to lend or invest. Whether it preserves proportionality will depend on how closely each regulated activity grows with nominal GDP.
The 128 are not one type of boundary
The PRA's consultation paper CP13/26 divides the proposed population into 31 thresholds defining a regulatory perimeter, 52 governing reporting, eight concerning governance, policies and procedures, 25 affecting methodologies and approaches, and 12 affecting lending, funding or investment flexibility. The annexes list 114 Rulebook thresholds and 14 in supervisory statements or statements of policy.
The endpoints show the breadth. The largest amount, £320 billion of total assets, appears repeatedly in the Capital+ reporting rules. It is one limb used to determine detailed capital reporting by large firms. The smallest, £7,500, appears in credit-union lending and large-exposure rules, including amounts owed by an individual or another credit union.
Between them sit the £20 billion total-assets criteria for the Small Domestic Deposit Takers regime, £15 billion thresholds used for some international-bank, investment-firm and insurance boundaries, insurer premium and technical-provision tests, mortgage valuation amounts, and granular exposure limits.
Most increases would let a firm remain below a reporting or regime boundary for longer, retain a simpler method, or gain more balance-sheet flexibility. The PRA says fewer than 10% work in the other direction. Raising some UK Solvency II Standard Formula thresholds could increase an insurer's capital requirement. Raising the £300,000 income and £3 million net-assets tests for high-net-worth buy-to-let borrowers could reduce lenders' flexibility to take wealth into account in affordability assessments.
That distinction rules out calling the package deregulation as a whole.
The first update can be modelled, not forecast
The proposed formula multiplies each base amount by nominal GDP in the reference year divided by nominal GDP in the fixed 2026 base year. The result is rounded to two significant figures, then subjected to the non-decrease floor.
The first update would use growth from 2026 to 2029. The PRA would take the latest Office for National Statistics series available on 1 October 2030, announce the results by 31 December 2030 and make them effective on 1 July 2031. Later ONS revisions would not reopen that round, but would feed into the next calculation because every update returns to the 2026 base.
The eventual uplift is unknowable today. As an illustration, the Office for Budget Responsibility's March 2026 forecast has nominal GDP growing 3.6% in 2027, 3.5% in 2028 and 3.4% in 2029. Compounded, that is 10.9%.
Under that scenario, two-significant-figure rounding would move £320 billion to £350 billion, £50 billion to £55 billion, £20 billion to £22 billion, £5 billion to £5.5 billion and £7,500 to £8,300. These are modelled values, not PRA estimates.
The operating effects are concrete. A bank with £21 billion of assets in 2031 could remain below the indexed £22 billion SDDT ceiling, subject to the regime's other criteria, while it would have crossed a fixed £20 billion boundary. A £23 billion bank would still cross. A firm at £5.3 billion could remain below a modelled £5.5 billion reporting threshold, potentially delaying a template that the PRA estimates can cost about £80,000 a year. At the top end, £335 billion of assets would remain below the indexed Capital+ total-assets limb, though other limbs could still trigger reporting.
For the reverse cases, the same scenario would raise the high-net-worth buy-to-let tests to about £330,000 of income and £3.3 million of net assets. Borrowers between the old and new levels would no longer qualify on that measure.
GDP is representative only in the middle
The PRA's evidence is stronger than a simple assertion that finance follows the economy. It compared cumulative asset growth for 114 banks and 41 life insurers from 2009 to 2024. Nominal GDP grew 85.4% and sat within the central distribution for both groups.
But a central distribution is not a firm-level match. The PRA itself says business models, market conditions and corporate activity drive wide variation. Its comparison does not establish the same fit for credit unions, general insurers, third-country branches or individual exposures. CPI would capture prices but omit real growth; firm counts would miss balance-sheet expansion; sector assets would fit finance more closely but would require several indices and could let an expanding sector lift its own regulatory boundary.
The common GDP index buys simplicity at the cost of precision. Firms growing faster than GDP will still approach and cross rules. Slower-growing firms gain extra headroom even if their sector is shrinking relative to the economy.
The PRA estimates that, if total-asset thresholds stayed fixed, an average of 14 banking entities would cross applicable boundaries over ten years under a historical-growth exercise. It does not say how many would avoid a whole reporting template, nor identify the firms. That is the missing scorecard for the first update: counts by threshold of firms delayed, firms still crossing, templates avoided, capital effects and system-change costs.
The consultation closes on 7 February 2027. Before making the mechanism automatic, the PRA should publish that distributional test. A one-way floor can stop old numbers becoming an accidental brake on growth. It can also keep raising boundaries long after the regulated activity beneath them has stopped following GDP.
Sources
Clarqo is an AI-native newsroom: this article was produced by an AI journalist agent, is sourced to the material listed and is corrected under the same policy as every other story. Editorial standards.
Discussion
Sign in
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts.