TOKYO, JAPAN – Tokyo has been one of the cities vying to become a financial center of Asia, but the … [+] results of its efforts have been underwhelming. (Photo by Adam Pretty/Getty Images)
Getty Images
Not so long ago, when Hong Kong was struggling with the impact of civil unrest and strict Covid-19 controls, other cities in Asia sensed an opportunity to bolster their respective financial center credentials. Not Singapore, which is already an established Asian financial center – and has grown in recent years – but cites such as Tokyo and Taipei.
While some lofty announcements were made, and ambitious plans unveiled, the result has been underwhelming. No other cities in Asia have been able to seriously position themselves as international financial centers, or even regional ones.
This holds true for all sectors of financial services, including cryptocurrency, where once again it is a two-city contest in Asia between Hong Kong and Singapore.
Advertisement
The Curious Case Of Tokyo
Tokyo has been the most ambitious of any Asian city in promoting itself as a financial center. In theory, the idea makes sense. Tokyo is undoubtedly the paramount financial center of Japan, the world’s No. 3 economy, while its stock market has performed extraordinarily well in the past few years. Foreign-direct investment in Japan is at a 15-year high.
Tokyo has enacted certain policies to boost its prospects as a financial center. These include simplified registration procedures for fund managers focusing on overseas investors, exemption in inheritance tax on overseas assets of foreigners under certain conditions, and an expansion of the scope of companies that can claim performance-based compensation paid to executives as a deductible expense.
However, the reality is that Tokyo is still subject to the Japanese tax system, which is high in comparison to Hong Kong and Singapore. Income taxes in Japan can reach a maximum 55%, compared to 16% in Hong Kong and 22% in Singapore.
”For Tokyo to become a hub of asset management business, I do strongly believe that we do need to change tax treatment for individual people,” Monex founder Oki Matsumoto told Bloomberg TV in a recent interview.
Advertisement
Another issue is that English is not widely spoken in Japan, despite increasing government efforts to promote use of the language. Most international financial professionals want to work and live in an environment where English can be used regularly.
Taipei: Imagining Itself As A Financial Center
During the early days of the coronavirus pandemic, the financial policy community in Taiwan was deliberating over the potential for Taipei to become a financial center in Asia. While the Taiwanese government had mooted this idea in the past, this time it seemed like a real opportunity, given the challenges Hong Kong was facing as well as all the positive press Taiwan was getting for its then-stellar containment of Covid-19.
We were present for several of these brainstorming sessions with financial professionals and researchers at think tanks. It became evident quickly that while the Taiwanese government very much liked the idea of Taipei gaining prominence for something besides being a technology hub, it was not prepared to make changes to laws and regulations that would increase the city’s competitiveness as a financial center. High income tax relative to Hong Kong and Singapore was one issue (a maximum of 45%), but arguably more important were the restrictions on certain financial products and onerous requirements for setting up a company.
One idea that emerged from these discussions was trying to establish a financial research hub in Taipei as some hedge funds at the time were reducing headcount in Hong Kong and considering where to send their research teams. From a regulatory standpoint, financial research is not subject to the same tight controls as other aspects of the industry. Taipei is also much less expensive than Hong Kong in almost every respect.
Yet ultimately, the Taiwanese government decided to shelve its financial center idea and redouble its efforts in familiar territory: technology hardware, and especially semiconductors. Perhaps it was for the best: On May 13, the Taiwan Stock Exchange’s main board hit a new high of more than US$2 trillion, the gains driven by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co.’s (TSMC) strong sales performance.
Advertisement
And Then There Were Two
The growth of the digital assets sector in Asia primarily in Hong Kong and Singapore illustrates how these two cities remain the region’s paramount financial hubs. Though some competition exists between the two cities, thus far, their efforts are mostly complementary. Singapore is more focused on cultivating a market for institutional investors, while Hong Kong would like to also serve retail investors (though it is discovering how difficult that will be).
To be sure, Japan has an abiding interest in digital assets, and continues to enact legislation broadly supportive of the sector. It has been a leader in adopting regulations for stablecoins and in February, its cabinet approved a bill that adds crypto to the list of assets Japanese investment funds and venture capital firms can acquire. However, the same tax issues are relevant for the cryptocurrency industry as other financial services segments.
In Hong Kong’s case, it will be imperative to follow developments affecting its legal system as its integrity is foundational for a thriving financial services sector. Three foreign judges have announced their departure from Hong Kong’s top court this month, which follows the passage of a new national security law in March.
Cornell University administrator Warren Petrofsky will serve as the Faculty of Arts and Sciences’ new dean of administration and finance, charged with spearheading efforts to shore up the school’s finances as it faces a hefty budget deficit.
Petrofsky’s appointment, announced in a Friday email from FAS Dean Hopi E. Hoekstra to FAS affiliates, will begin April 20 — nearly a year after former FAS dean of administration and finance Scott A. Jordan stepped down. Petrofsky will replace interim dean Mary Ann Bradley, who helped shape the early stages of FAS cost-cutting initiatives.
Petrofsky currently serves as associate dean of administration at Cornell University’s College of Arts and Sciences.
As dean, he oversaw a budget cut of nearly $11 million to the institution’s College of Arts and Sciences after the federal government slashed at least $250 million in stop-work orders and frozen grants, according to the Cornell Daily Sun.
He also serves on a work group established in November 2025 to streamline the school’s administrative systems.
Advertisement
Earlier, at the University of Pennsylvania, Petrofsky managed capital initiatives and organizational redesigns in a number of administrative roles.
Petrofsky is poised to lead similar efforts at the FAS, which relaunched its Resources Committee in spring 2025 and created a committee to consolidate staff positions amid massive federal funding cuts.
As part of its planning process, the committee has quietly brought on external help. Over several months, consultants from McKinsey & Company have been interviewing dozens of administrators and staff across the FAS.
Petrofsky will also likely have a hand in other cost-cutting measures across the FAS, which is facing a $365 million budget deficit. The school has already announced it will keep spending flat for the 2026 fiscal year, and it has dramatically reduced Ph.D. admissions.
In her email, Hoekstra praised Petrofsky’s performance across his career.
Advertisement
“Warren has emphasized transparency, clarity in communication, and investment in staff development,” she wrote. “He approaches change with steadiness and purpose, and with deep respect for the mission that unites our faculty, researchers, staff, and students. I am confident that he will be a strong partner to me and to our community.”
—Staff writer Amann S. Mahajan can be reached at [email protected] and on Signal at amannsm.38. Follow her on X @amannmahajan.
My spreadsheet reviewed a WalletHub ranking of financial distress for the residents of 100 U.S. cities, including 17 in California. The analysis compared local credit scores, late bill payments, bankruptcy filings and online searches for debt or loans to quantify where individuals had the largest money challenges.
When California cities were divided into three geographic regions – Southern California, the Bay Area, and anything inland – the most challenges were often found far from the coast.
The average national ranking of the six inland cities was 39th worst for distress, the most troubled grade among the state’s slices.
Bakersfield received the inland region’s worst score, ranking No. 24 highest nationally for financial distress. That was followed by Sacramento (30th), San Bernardino (39th), Stockton (43rd), Fresno (45th), and Riverside (52nd).
Advertisement
Southern California’s seven cities overall fared better, with an average national ranking of 56th largest financial problems.
However, Los Angeles had the state’s ugliest grade, ranking fifth-worst nationally for monetary distress. Then came San Diego at 22nd-worst, then Long Beach (48th), Irvine (70th), Anaheim (71st), Santa Ana (85th), and Chula Vista (89th).
Monetary challenges were limited in the Bay Area. Its four cities average rank was 69th worst nationally.
San Jose had the region’s most distressed finances, with a No. 50 worst ranking. That was followed by Oakland (69th), San Francisco (72nd), and Fremont (83rd).
The results remind us that inland California’s affordability – it’s home to the state’s cheapest housing, for example – doesn’t fully compensate for wages that typically decline the farther one works from the Pacific Ocean.
Advertisement
A peek inside the scorecard’s grades shows where trouble exists within California.
Credit scores were the lowest inland, with little difference elsewhere. Late payments were also more common inland. Tardy bills were most difficult to find in Northern California.
Bankruptcy problems also were bubbling inland, but grew the slowest in Southern California. And worrisome online searches were more frequent inland, while varying only slightly closer to the Pacific.
Note: Across the state’s 17 cities in the study, the No. 53 average rank is a middle-of-the-pack grade on the 100-city national scale for monetary woes.
Jonathan Lansner is the business columnist for the Southern California News Group. He can be reached at jlansner@scng.com
The up-and-coming fintech scored a pair of fourth-quarter beats.
Diversified fintech Chime Financial(CHYM +12.88%) was playing a satisfying tune to investors on Thursday. The company’s stock flew almost 14% higher that trading session, thanks mostly to a fourth quarter that featured notably higher-than-expected revenue guidance.
Sweet music
Chime published its fourth-quarter and full-year 2025 results just after market close on Wednesday. For the former period, the company’s revenue was $596 million, bettering the same quarter of 2024 by 25%. The company’s strongest revenue stream, payments, rose 17% to $396 million. Its take from platform-related activity rose more precipitously, advancing 47% to $200 million.
Image source: Getty Images.
Meanwhile, Chime’s net loss under generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) more than doubled. It was $45 million, or $0.12 per share, compared with a fourth-quarter 2024 deficit of $19.6 million.
Advertisement
On average, analysts tracking the stock were modeling revenue below $578 million and a deeper bottom-line loss of $0.20 per share.
In its earnings release, Chime pointed to the take-up of its Chime Card as a particular catalyst for growth. Regarding the product, the company said, “Among new member cohorts, over half are adopting Chime Card, and those members are putting over 70% of their Chime spend on the product, which earns materially higher take rates compared to debit.”
Today’s Change
(12.88%) $2.72
Current Price
$23.83
Advertisement
Key Data Points
Market Cap
$7.9B
Day’s Range
$22.30 – $24.63
52wk Range
Advertisement
$16.17 – $44.94
Volume
562K
Avg Vol
3.3M
Advertisement
Gross Margin
86.34%
Double-digit growth expected
Chime management proffered revenue and non-GAAP (adjusted) earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) guidance for full-year 2026. The company expects to post a top line of $627 million to $637 million, which would represent at least 21% growth over the 2024 result. Adjusted EBITDA should be $380 million to $400 million. No net income forecasts were provided in the earnings release.
It isn’t easy to find a niche in the financial industry, which is crowded with companies offering every imaginable type of service to clients. Yet Chime seems to be achieving that, as the Chime Card is clearly a hit among the company’s target demographic of clientele underserved by mainstream banks. This growth stock is definitely worth considering as a buy.
