ARTICLE
13 August 2012

Regulators Adopt Common Approach To CBAs

CC
CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang

Contributor

CMS is a Future Facing firm with 79 offices in over 40 countries and more than 5,000 lawyers globally. Combining local market insight with a global perspective, CMS provides business-focused advice to help clients navigate change confidently. The firm's expertise and innovative approach anticipate challenges and develop solutions. CMS is committed to diversity, inclusivity, and corporate social responsibility, fostering a supportive culture. The firm addresses key client concerns like efficiency and regulatory challenges through services like Law-Now, offering real-time eAlerts, mobile access, an extensive legal archive, specialist zones, and global events.

On 25 July, the Joint Regulators Group (the "JRG") adopted a common approach to discounting in cost-benefit analyses which involve private investment for a public benefit.
United Kingdom Corporate/Commercial Law

On 25 July, the Joint Regulators Group (the "JRG") adopted a common approach to discounting in cost-benefit analyses which involve private investment for a public benefit. 
 
The use of a cost-benefit analysis is common when a regulator is considering intervening in a market in which there is no profit incentive for firms to invest but where investment would bring benefits to consumers or the wider public.  In such circumstances, the JRG members agree, regulators' analysis of costs should include a discount for all costs, including the investing firm's financing costs.  The common approach therefore takes into account the cost to the firm of financing its capital outlay.  The level of this discount is based on the firm's own Weighted Average Cost of Capital.
 
For certain regulators, including Ofcom, this marks a change in approach to cost-benefit analyses. Ofcom have traditionally excluded financing costs from discounting when weighing up the costs of investment.  The comparative effect of the new approach will generally be to reduce the net present value (for discounted cash flow purposes) of an investment, a figure which can play a crucial role in the decision as to whether to intervene.
 
The JRG is composed of regulators from a wide range of sectors including rail, energy, aviation, communications and post.  The statement issued by the JRG is for guidance; as always, regulators must have regard to their own duties and the particular context of their sector.  It is worth noting that the common approach to discounting is based on the methodology employed by the water industry regulator, Ofwat.  Ofcom have been known to depart from common regulatory practice led by Ofwat in the past and have been supported by the Competition Commission in doing so (see the Competition Commission's recent determination in British Telecommunications plc v Office of Communications Competition Appeal Tribunal case number 1187/3/3/11).  The impact of the best practice guidance in any given sector therefore remains to be determined.
 
The JRG statement can be viewed here.

This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron McKenna's free online information service. To register for Law-Now, please go to www.law-now.com/law-now/mondaq

Law-Now information is for general purposes and guidance only. The information and opinions expressed in all Law-Now articles are not necessarily comprehensive and do not purport to give professional or legal advice. All Law-Now information relates to circumstances prevailing at the date of its original publication and may not have been updated to reflect subsequent developments.

The original publication date for this article was 03/08/2012.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More