NAB’s Earnings Hit by Higher Business-Loan Impairments
The bank posted unaudited cash earnings for the quarter of A$1.7 billion, down 2% on the average of its prior two quarters
The bank posted unaudited cash earnings for the quarter of A$1.7 billion, down 2% on the average of its prior two quarters
National Australia Bank said that higher credit impairments against business loans contributed to a small fall in its unaudited December quarter cash earnings.
NAB , which is Australia’s second-largest bank by market capitalization, on Wednesday posted unaudited cash earnings for its fiscal first quarter of 1.74 billion Australian dollars, equivalent to about US$1.11 billion.
That was down 2% on the average of its prior two fiscal quarters. NAB did not give a year-earlier comparison.
The lender said that revenue grew by 3% compared with the average of its prior two fiscal quarters. Underlying profit growth of 4% over the same period was offset by higher credit impairment charges and income tax expenses, it added.
NAB, which posted an unaudited quarterly statutory profit of A$1.70 billion, said the A$267 million credit impairment charge included A$152 million of individually assessed charges. Those were mainly against Australian businesses and unsecured retail portfolios, it said.
The individual charges were up by 54% compared with a year earlier. NAB said that it had not altered its economic assumptions and scenario weightings.
“The economic outlook is improving but cost of living and interest rate challenges persisted,” Chief Executive Andrew Irvine said. “While most customers are proving resilient, we have maintained prudent balance sheet settings.”
NAB said it had seen a small decline in net interest margin due to funding costs, lending competition and deposits, partially offset by the benefit of higher interest rates.
On Tuesday, the Reserve Bank of Australia cut the country’s cash rate for the first time since 2020 but warned against expecting subsequent near-term cuts.
NAB is still targeting full fiscal-year productivity savings of more than A$400 million, and for operating expenses to grow by less than 4.5%, Irvine said.
As housing drives wealth and policy debate, the real risk is an economy hooked on growth without productivity to sustain it.
Limited to 630 units, Lamborghini’s latest Urus Capsule pushes personalisation further than ever, blending hybrid performance with over 70 bespoke design combinations.
As housing drives wealth and policy debate, the real risk is an economy hooked on growth without productivity to sustain it.
For decades, Australia has leaned into its reputation as the lucky country. But luck, as it turns out, is not an economic strategy.
What once looked like resilience now appears increasingly fragile. Beneath the surface of rising property values and steady headline growth, the Australian economy is showing signs of strain that can no longer be ignored.
Recent data paints a sobering picture. Australia has recorded one of the largest declines in real household disposable income per capita among advanced economies.
Wages have failed to keep pace with inflation, meaning many Australians are working harder for less. On a per capita basis, income growth has stalled and, at times, reversed.
And yet, on paper, things still look relatively solid. GDP is growing. Unemployment remains low. But that growth is increasingly being driven by population expansion rather than productivity.
More people are contributing to output, but not necessarily improving living standards.
That distinction matters.
For years, Australia’s economic success rested on a powerful combination: a once-in-a-generation mining boom, a credit-fuelled housing market, strong migration and a property sector that rarely faltered. Between 1991 and 2020, the country avoided recession entirely, building enormous wealth in the process.
But much of that wealth is tied to property. Around two-thirds of household wealth sits in real estate, inflated by leverage and sustained by demand. It has worked, until now.
The problem is the supply side of the economy has not kept up.
Housing supply is falling behind population growth. Rental vacancies are near record lows.
Construction firms are collapsing at an elevated rate. At the same time, massive infrastructure pipelines are competing with residential projects for labour and materials, pushing costs higher and delaying delivery.
The result is a system under pressure from all angles.
Despite near full employment, productivity growth has stagnated for years. In simple terms, Australians are putting in more hours without generating more output per hour. The economy is running faster, butgoing nowhere.
Meanwhile, government spending continues to expand. Public debt is approaching $1 trillion, with spending now accounting for a record share of GDP.
The gap between spending and revenue has been filled by borrowing for decades, adding further pressure to an already stretched system.
This is where the uncomfortable question emerges.
Has Australia become too reliant on a model driven by rising property values, expanding credit and population growth?
As asset prices rise, households feel wealthier and borrow more. Banks lend more. Governments collect more revenue. Migration fuels demand. The cycle reinforces itself.
But when productivity stalls and debt outpaces real income, the system begins to depend on constant expansion just to stay stable.
It is not a collapse scenario. But it is not particularly stable either.
Nowhere is this more evident than in housing.
The National Housing Accord targets 1.2 million new homes over five years, yet current completion rates are well below that pace. With approvals falling and construction costs rising, the gap between supply and demand is widening, not narrowing.
Housing is also one of the largest contributors to inflation, with costs rising sharply across rents, construction and utilities. Yet the private sector, from small investors to major developers, is struggling to make projects stack up in the current environment.
This brings the policy debate into sharper focus.
Tax settings such as negative gearing and capital gains concessions have undoubtedly boosted demand over the past two decades. But they have also supported supply. Removing them may ease prices briefly, but risks deepening the supply shortage over time.
That is the paradox.
Policies designed to make housing more affordable can, in practice, make the shortage worse if they discourage development. The optics may appeal, but the economics are far less forgiving.
It is also worth remembering that most property investors are not institutional players. The majority own just one investment property. They are, in many cases, ordinary Australians using real estate as their primary wealth-building tool.
Undermining that system without replacing it with a viable alternative risks unintended consequences, from reduced supply to higher rents and increased inflation.
So where does that leave Australia?
At a crossroads.
The country can continue to rely on population growth and rising asset prices to drive economic activity. Or it can shift towards a model built on productivity, innovation and sustainable growth.
The latter is harder. It requires structural reform, long-term thinking and political discipline.
But it is also the only path that leads to genuine, lasting prosperity.
The question is no longer whether Australia has been lucky.
It is whether it can evolve before that luck runs out.
Paul Miron is the Co-Founder & Fund Manager of Msquared Capital.
The era of the gorgeous golden retriever is over. Today’s most coveted pooches have frightful faces bred to tug at our hearts.
New research suggests that bonuses make employees feel more like a mere cog in a wheel.