Connect with us

Finance

How to block the financial scammers on social media

Published

on

How to block the financial scammers on social media

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Online scams are big business. In the EU, according to the most recent figures, online scammers defrauded consumers out of €4.3bn in 2022. Increasingly, they use sophisticated adverts, including AI-generated “deepfakes” of figures ranging from Elon Musk to the UK personal finance expert Martin Lewis, to lure individuals into disclosing personal data or investing in fraudulent schemes. The vehicle is often social media platforms, which profit indirectly from carrying the ads. No business, least of all some of the world’s most powerful, should be able to profit from fraud on this scale.

Though mechanisms are improving for reimbursing victims, generally by the banking sector, the harm done by such frauds is huge. It includes not just the immediate losses and stress to victims and their banks, but also the erosion of trust in respectable sources of information and the financial industry.

Getting fraudulent material taken down, however, can be a game of “whack a mole” — as the Financial Times discovered when deepfake ads were found on Meta platforms apparently showing its columnist Martin Wolf promoting fraudulent investments. The FT has established that these fakes were seen by millions of users; many may have lost money as a result. As soon as one ad was removed, others popped up from different accounts, with Meta’s systems seemingly unable to keep up, though they do now seem to have been stopped.

Advertisement

Circulation of fraudulent, indeed criminal, material cannot be justified. Given how hard it is to stamp out advertising after the fact, though, this is a case where prevention is better than cure. Social media should have a legal duty not to provide ad space to fraudsters in the first place. They ought to be expected to “know their customers” and be held liable, with proper enforcement and tough penalties, if they fail to block dissemination of fraudulent ads.

The EU is considering legislation on those lines. Member states are discussing proposals from Brussels to introduce a right to automatic reimbursement from PayPal, Visa, Mastercard and banks for customers defrauded by scammers. But an amendment submitted by the Irish finance ministry, and gaining traction in other EU capitals, would go further — by legally requiring online platforms to check that an advertiser is authorised by a regulator to sell financial services, and block it if not.

Brussels frets that the amendment would conflict with a provision in the EU’s Digital Services Act that online platforms are not required to conduct broad-based monitoring of content. There may be squeamishness over antagonising Donald Trump, who wants to defang EU regulation of US tech firms.

Yet having to verify whether financial advertisers are authorised does not constitute large-scale monitoring, and would only be required of very large online platforms or search engines. Some already do it, or have committed to: Google has a financial services certification programme in 17 countries, while Meta agreed with the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority in 2022 to ban financial ads by firms not registered with the regulator. And the EU should prioritise robust consumer protection over the protestations of the US president and his Big tech backers.

A legal obligation to verify financial advertisers would not address the wider problem of celebrity deepfakes being used in scams and promotions linked to products ranging from cookware sets to dental products. But the fact that sellers of financial products must usually be registered with regulators opens a route to blocking a particularly harmful online fraud. The EU, and the UK, should set an example to other jurisdictions and take action now.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Finance

Norway faces dilemma on openness in wealth fund ethical divestments, finance minister says

Published

on

Norway faces dilemma on openness in wealth fund ethical divestments, finance minister says
When Norway’s $2.2 trillion wealth fund — the world’s largest — sells a company’s shares over ethical concerns, should it explain why? This seemingly simple question has ​become a dilemma for its guardians, the finance minister told Reuters, as a government commission reviews the rules that have made the fund a ‌global benchmark for ethical investing.
Continue Reading

Finance

Morgan Stanley sees writing on wall for Citi before major change

Published

on

Morgan Stanley sees writing on wall for Citi before major change

Banks have had a stellar first quarter. The major U.S. banks raked in nearly $50 billion in profits in the first three months of the year, The Guardian reported.

That was largely due to Wall Street bank traders, who profited from a volatile stock exchange, Reuters showed.

But even without the extra bump from stock trading, banks are doing well when it comes to interest, the same Reuters article found. And some banks could stand to benefit even more from this one potential rule change.

Morgan Stanley thinks it could have a major impact on Citi in particular.

Upcoming changes for banks

To understand why Morgan Stanley thinks things are going to change at Citi, you need to understand some recent bank rule changes.

Advertisement

Banks make money by lending out money, which usually comes from depositors. But people need access to their money and the right to withdraw whenever they want.

So, banks keep a percentage of all money deposited to make sure they can cover what the average person needs.

But what happens if there is a major demand for withdrawals, as we saw during the financial crisis of 2008?

That’s where capital requirements come in. After the financial crisis, major banks like Citi were required by law to hold a higher percentage of money in order to avoid major bank failures.

For years, banks had to put aside billions of dollars. Money that couldn’t be lent out or even returned to shareholders.

Advertisement

Now, that’s all about to change.

Morgan Stanley thinks Citigroup could see an uptick in profit. Getty Images

Capital change requirements for major banks

Banks that are considered globally systemically important banking organizations (G-SIBs) have a higher capital buffer than community banks as they usually engage in banking activity that is far more complicated than your average market loan.

The list depends on the size of the bank and its underlying activity, according to the Federal Reserve.

Current global systemically important banks

A proposal from U.S. federal banking regulators could drastically reduce the amount that these large banks have to hold in reserve.

Changes would result in the largest U.S. banks holding an average 4.8% less. While that might seem like a small percentage number, for banks of this size, it equates to billions of dollars, according to a Federal Reserve memo.

Advertisement

The proposed changes were a long time coming, Robert Sarama, a financial services leader at PwC, told TheStreet.

“It’s a bit of a recognition that perhaps the pendulum swung a little too far in the higher capital requirement following the financial crisis, making it harder for banks to participate in some markets,” he said.

Citi’s upcoming relief  

Citi is a G-SIB and as such, is subject to the capital requirement rules. And the fact that it could get 4.8% of its money back to spend elsewhere is why Morgan Stanley is so optimistic about the bank.

In a research note, Morgan Stanley analysts said they expect Citi’s annualized net income to be better than expected due to the upcoming capital relief.

Advertisement

While Citi stated its return on average tangible common equity (ROTCE), a type of financial measure, to be close to 13% by 2028, “the fact that Citi’s near-term and medium-term targets excluding capital relief were only marginally below our expectations including capital relief actually suggest upside to our numbers if Citi can deliver,” the note said.

More bank news

In fact, Citigroup’s own projections are likely conservative and it’s likely to show improvement each year, the analysts expanded.

“We have high conviction that the proposed capital rules will be finalized later this year and expect Citi can eventually revise the medium-term targets higher, suggesting further upside to consensus,” the Morgan Stanley analysts wrote.

Related: Citi just added an AI agent to your wealth management team

Advertisement

This story was originally published by TheStreet on May 11, 2026, where it first appeared in the Investing section. Add TheStreet as a Preferred Source by clicking here.

Continue Reading

Finance

Couple forced to live in caravan buy first home as ‘stars align’ in off-market sale

Published

on

Couple forced to live in caravan buy first home as ‘stars align’ in off-market sale
Natasha, 34, and Luke, 45, settled on their new home last month. (Source: Supplied)

Natasha Luscri and Luke Miller consider themselves among the lucky ones. The couple recently bought their first home in the northwest suburbs of Melbourne.

It wasn’t something they necessarily expected to be able to do, but some good fortune with an investment in silver bullion and making use of government schemes meant “the stars aligned” to get into the market. Luke used the federal government’s super saver scheme to help build a deposit, and the couple then jumped on the 5 per cent deposit scheme, which they say made all the difference.

“We only started looking because of the government deposit scheme. Basically, we didn’t really think it was possible that we could buy something,” Natasha told Yahoo Finance.

RELATED

Last month they settled on their two bedroom unit, which the pair were able to purchase in an off-market sale – something that is becoming increasingly common in the market at the moment.

Advertisement

Rather perfectly, they got it for about $20-30,000 below market rate, Natasha estimated, which meant they were under the $600,000 limit to avoid paying stamp duty under Victoria’s suite of support measures for first home buyers.

“They wanted to sell it quickly. They had no other offers. So we got it for less than what it would have gone for if it had been on market,” Natasha said.

“We didn’t have a lot of cash sitting in an account … I think we just got lucky and made some smart investment decisions which helped.”

It’s a far cry from when the couple couldn’t find a home due to the rental crisis when they were previously living in Adelaide and had to turn to sub-standard options.

“We’ve managed to go from living in a caravan because we were living in Adelaide and we couldn’t find a rental with our dogs … So we’ve gone from living in a caravan, being kind of tertiary homeless essentially because we couldn’t get a rental, to now having been able to purchase our first home,” Natasha explained.

Advertisement

Rate rises beginning to bite for new homeowners

Natasha, 34, and Luke, 45, are among more than 300,000 Australians who have used the 5 per cent deposit scheme to get into the housing market with a much smaller than usual deposit, according to data from Housing Australia at the end of March. However that’s dating back to 2020 when the program first launched, before it was rebranded and significantly expanded in October last year to scrap income or placement caps, along with allowing for higher property price caps.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending