NatWest Group - 20-F annual report

The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc is the holding company of a large global banking and financial services group. Headquartered in Edinburgh, the Group operates in the United Kingdom, the United States and internationally through its two principal subsidiaries, the Royal Bank and NatWest. Both the Royal Bank and NatWest are major UK clearing banks whose origins go back over 275 years. In the United States, the Group’s subsidiary Citizens is a large commercial banking organisation. The Group has a large and diversified customer base and provides a wide range of products and services to personal, commercial and large corporate and institutional customers in over 50 countries.

Following placing and open offers in December 2008 and in April 2009, HM Treasury owned 70.3% of the enlarged ordinary share capital of the company.

In December 2009, the company issued £25.5 billion of new capital to HM Treasury. This new capital took the form of B shares, which do not generally carry voting rights at general meetings of ordinary shareholders but are convertible into ordinary shares and qualify as core tier one capital.

Following the issuance of B shares, HM Treasury’s holding of ordinary shares of the company remained at 70.3% although its economic interest rose to 84.4%.

HM Treasury has agreed not to convert its B shares into ordinary shares to the extent that its holding of ordinary shares following the conversion would represent more than 75% of the company’s issued ordinary share capital.

In March 2010, the company converted 935,228 non-cumulative dollar preference shares in the company into ordinary shares resulting in approximately 1.6 billion ordinary shares being issued.  This increase in the company's issued ordinary share capital resulted in HMT's holding in the company's ordinary shares reducing to approximately 68.4%.

The Group had total assets of £1,696.5 billion and owners’ equity of £77.7 billion at 31 December 2009. The Group’s capital ratios, which included the equity minority interest of the State of the Netherlands and Santander in ABN AMRO, were a total capital ratio of 16.1 per cent., a core Tier 1 capital ratio of 11.0 per cent. and a Tier 1 capital ratio of 14.1 per cent., as at 31 December 2009.

Following a comprehensive strategic review, changes have been made to the Group’s operating segments in 2009. A Non-Core division has been created comprising those lines of business, portfolios and individual assets that the Group intends to run off or sell. Furthermore, Business Services (formerly Group Manufacturing) is no longer reported as a separate division and its costs are now allocated to the customer-facing divisions along with certain central costs. UK Retail & Commercial Banking has been split into three segments (UK Retail, UK Corporate and Wealth). Ulster Bank has become a specific segment. The remaining elements of Europe & Middle East Retail & Commercial Banking, Asia Retail & Commercial Banking and Share of shared assets form part of Non-Core. The segment measure is now Operating profit/(loss) before tax which differs from Contribution used previously; it excludes certain infrequent items and RFS Holdings minority interest, which is not an operating segment of the Group. Comparative data have been restated accordingly.

UK Retail offers a comprehensive range of banking products and related financial services to the personal market. It serves customers through the RBS and NatWest networks of branches and ATMs in the United Kingdom, and also through telephone and internet channels.

UK Corporate is a leading provider of banking, finance, and risk management services to the corporate and SME sector in the United Kingdom. It offers a full range of banking products and related financial services through a nationwide network of relationship managers, and also through telephone and internet channels. The product range includes asset finance through the Lombard brand.

Wealth provides private banking and investment services in the UK through Coutts & Co and Adam & Company, offshore banking through RBS International, NatWest Offshore and Isle of Man Bank, and international private banking through RBS Coutts.

Global Banking & Markets (GBM) is a leading banking partner to major corporations and financial institutions around the world, providing an extensive range of debt and equity financing, risk management and investment services to its customers. The division is organised along six principal business lines: money markets; rates flow trading; currencies and commodities; equities; credit markets and portfolio management & origination.

Global Transaction Servicesranks among the top five global transaction services providers, offering global payments, cash and liquidity management, and trade finance and commercial card products and services. It includes the Group’s corporate money transmission activities in the United Kingdom and the United States as well as Global Merchant Services, the Group’s United Kingdom and international merchant acquiring business.

Ulster Bank is the leading retail and commercial bank in Northern Ireland and the third largest banking group on the island of Ireland. It provides a comprehensive range of financial services through both its Retail Markets division which has a network of branches and operates in the personal and bancassurance sectors, and its Corporate Markets division which provides services to SME business customers, corporates and institutional markets.

US Retail & Commercialprovides financial services primarily through the Citizens and Charter One brands. US Retail & Commercial is engaged in retail and corporate banking activities through its branch network in 12 states in the United States and through non-branch offices in other states. It ranks among the top five banks in New England.

RBS Insurance sells and underwrites retail and SME insurance over the telephone and internet, as well as through brokers and partnerships. Its brands include Direct Line, Churchill and Privilege, which sell general insurance products direct to the customer, as well as Green Flag and NIG.

Through its international division, RBS Insurance sells general insurance, mainly motor, in Germany and Italy. The Intermediary and Broker division sells general insurance products through independent brokers.

Business Services (formerly Group Manufacturing) supports the customer-facing businesses and provides operational technology, customer support in telephony, account management, lending and money transmission, global purchasing, property and other services. Business Services drives efficiencies and supports income growth across multiple brands and channels by using a single, scalable platform and common processes wherever possible. It also leverages the Group’s purchasing power and is the Group’s centre of excellence for managing large-scale and complex change.

Central Functions comprises group and corporate functions, such as treasury, funding and finance, risk management, legal, communications and human resources. The Centre manages the Group’s capital resources and Group-wide regulatory projects and provides services to the operating divisions.

Non-Core Division manages separately assets that the Group intends to run off or dispose. The division contains a range of businesses and asset portfolios primarily from the GBM division including RBS Sempra Commodities, linked to proprietary trading, higher risk profile asset portfolios including excess risk concentrations, and other illiquid portfolios. It also includes a number of other portfolios and businesses including regional markets businesses that the Group has concluded are no longer strategic.

To comply with European Commission State Aid (EC State Aid) requirements the Group has agreed a series of restructuring measures to be implemented over a four year period. This will supplement the measures in the strategic plan previously announced by the Group. These include divesting fully RBS Insurance, Global Merchant Services and RBS Sempra Commodities, as well as divesting the RBS branch-based business in England & Wales and the NatWest branches in Scotland, along with the Direct SME customers across the UK.

On 25 March 2010, the RBS Group announced its intention to launch (i) an offer to exchange certain subordinated debt securities issued by Group members for new senior debt and (ii) tender offers in respect of certain preference shares, preferred securities and perpetual securities issued by Group members. The RBS Group announced the offers on 6 April 2010 and will seek shareholder approvals as required in coordination with the annual general meeting of The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc scheduled to take place on 28 April 2010.

In March 2010, the company converted 935,228 non-cumulative dollar preference shares in the company into ordinary shares resulting in approximately 1.6 billion ordinary shares being issued.  This increase in the company's issued ordinary share capital resulted in HMT's holding in the company's ordinary shares reducing to approximately 68.4%.

Brendan Nelson has been appointed as a non-executive director with effect from 1 April 2010. Brendan will succeed Archie Hunter as Chairman of the Group Audit Committee with effect from the conclusion of the Group's Annual General Meeting on 28 April 2010.

Legal separation of ABN AMRO Bank N.V. occurred on 1 April 2010, with the shares in that entity being transferred by RBS Holdings N.V. to a holding company called ABN AMRO Group N.V., which is owned by the Dutch State. Certain assets within RBS Holdings N.V. continue to be shared by the Consortium Members. RBS Holdings N.V. is a fully operational bank within the Group and is independently rated and licensed and regulated by the Dutch Central Bank.

The Group faces strong competition in all the markets it serves. However, the global banking crisis has reduced either the capacity or appetite of many institutions to lend and has resulted in the withdrawal or disappearance of a number of market participants and significant consolidation of competitors, particularly in the US and UK. Competition for retail deposits has intensified significantly as institutions have re-orientated their funding strategies following the difficulties experienced in the wholesale markets since late 2007.

Competition for corporate and institutional customers in the UK is from UK banks and from large foreign financial institutions who are also active and offer combined investment and commercial banking capabilities. In asset finance, the Group competes with banks and specialised asset finance providers, both captive and non-captive. In European and Asian corporate and institutional banking markets the Group competes with the large domestic banks active in these markets and with the major international banks.

In the small business banking market, the Group competes with other UK clearing banks, specialist finance providers and building societies.

In the personal banking segment the Group competes with UK banks and building societies, major retailers and life assurance companies. In the mortgage market the Group competes with UK banks and building societies. A number of competitors have either left or scaled back their lending in the mortgage and unsecured markets. The Group’s life assurance businesses compete with Independent Financial Advisers and life assurance companies.

In the UK credit card market large retailers and specialist card issuers, including major US operators, are active in addition to the UK banks. In addition to physical distribution channels, providers compete through direct marketing activity and the internet.

In Wealth Management, The Royal Bank of Scotland International competes with other UK and international banks to offer offshore banking services. Coutts and Adam & Company compete as private banks with UK clearing and private banks, and with international private banks. Competition in wealth management remains strong as banks maintain their focus on competing for affluent and high net worth customers.

In Ireland, Ulster Bank competes in retail and commercial banking with the major Irish banks and building societies, and with other UK and international banks and building societies active in the market.

In the United States, Citizens competes in the New England, Mid- Atlantic and Mid West retail and mid-corporate banking markets with local and regional banks and other financial institutions. The Group also competes in the US in large corporate lending and specialised finance markets, and in fixed-income trading and sales. Competition is principally with the large US commercial and investment banks and international banks active in the US.

Set out below are certain risk factors which could affect the Group’s future results and cause them to be materially different from expected results. The Group’s results are also affected by competition and other factors. The factors discussed in this report should not be regarded as a complete and comprehensive statement of all potential risks and uncertainties.

Under the provisions of the Banking Act , substantial powers have been granted to HM Treasury and the Bank of England as part of the special resolution regime to stabilise banks that are in financial difficulties (the “SRR”), which includes certain consultation and consent rights granted to the FSA (the FSA, together with HM Treasury and the Bank of England, the “Authorities”). The SRR confers powers on the Bank of England: (i) to transfer to the private sector all or part of the business of a United Kingdom incorporated institution with permission to accept deposits pursuant to Part IV of the FSMA (a “relevant entity”) or the securities of such relevant entity; (ii) to transfer all or part of the business of the relevant entity to a “bridge bank” established by the Bank of England and also confers a power on HM Treasury to transfer into temporary public ownership (nationalise) the relevant entity or its United Kingdom incorporated holding company. The Banking Act also provides for two new insolvency and administration procedures for relevant entities.

The purpose of the stabilisation options is to address the situation where all or part of the business of a relevant entity has encountered, or is likely to encounter, financial difficulties. Accordingly, the stabilisation options may only be exercised if the FSA is satisfied that (i) a relevant entity such as the company’s United Kingdom banking subsidiaries, including The Royal Bank of Scotland plc (“RBS”) and National Westminster Bank Plc (“NatWest”), is failing, or is likely to fail, to satisfy the threshold conditions set out in Schedule 6 to the FSMA; and (ii) having regard to timing and other relevant circumstances, it is not reasonably likely that (ignoring the stabilisation options) action will be taken that will enable the relevant entity to satisfy those threshold conditions. The threshold conditions are conditions which an FSA-authorised institution must satisfy in order to retain its FSA authorisation. They are relatively wide-ranging and deal with most aspects of a relevant entity’s business, including, but not limited to, minimum capital resource requirements. It is therefore possible that the FSA may trigger one of the stabilisation options before an application for an insolvency or administration order could be made.

The stabilisation options may be exercised by means of powers to transfer property, rights or liabilities of a relevant entity and shares and other securities issued by a relevant entity. HM Treasury may also take the parent company of a relevant entity (such as the company) into temporary public ownership provided that certain conditions set out in Section 82 of the Banking Act are met. Temporary public ownership is effected by way of a share transfer order and can be actioned irrespective of the financial condition of the parent company.

If HM Treasury makes the decision to take the company into temporary public ownership, it may take various actions in relation to any securities issued by the company (the “Securities”) without the consent of holders of the Securities, including (among other things):

Where HM Treasury has made a share transfer order in respect of securities issued by the holding company of a relevant entity, HM Treasury may make an order providing for the property, rights or liabilities of the holding company or of any relevant entity in the holding company group to be transferred and where such property is held on trust, removing or altering the terms of such trust.

Accordingly, there can be no assurance that the taking of any such actions would not adversely affect the rights of holders of the Securities and/or adversely affect the price or value of their investment or that the ability of the company to satisfy its obligations under contracts related to the Securities would be unaffected. In such circumstances, such holders may have a claim for compensation under one of the compensation schemes currently existing under, or contemplated by, the Banking Act if any action is taken in respect of the Securities (for the purposes of determining an amount of compensation, an independent valuer must disregard actual or potential financial assistance provided by the Bank of England or HM Treasury). There can be no assurance that holders of the Securities would thereby recover compensation promptly and/or equal to any loss actually incurred.

If the company was taken into temporary public ownership and a partial transfer of its or any relevant entity’s business was effected, or if a relevant entity were made subject to the SRR and a partial transfer of its business to another entity was effected, the transfer may directly affect the company and/or its Group companies by creating, modifying or cancelling their contractual arrangements with a view to ensuring the provision of such services and facilities as are required to enable the bridge bank or private sector purchaser to operate the transferred business (or any

part of it) effectively. For example, the transfer may (among other things) (i) require the company or Group companies to support and co-operate with the bridge bank or private sector purchaser; (ii) cancel or modify contracts or arrangements between the company or the transferred business and a Group company; or (iii) impose additional obligations on the company under new or existing contracts. There can be no assurance that the taking of any such actions would not adversely affect the ability of the company to satisfy its obligations under the issued Securities or related contracts.

If the company was taken into temporary public ownership and a partial transfer of its or any relevant entity’s business was effected, or if a relevant entity were made subject to the SRR and a partial transfer of its business to another entity was effected, the nature and mix of the assets and liabilities not transferred may adversely affect the company’s financial condition and increase the risk that the company may eventually become subject to administration or insolvency proceedings pursuant to the Banking Act.

While the main provisions of the Banking (Special Provisions) Act 2008 were in force, which conferred certain transfer powers on HM Treasury, the United Kingdom Government took action under that Act in respect of a number of United Kingdom financial institutions, including, in extreme circumstances, full and part nationalisation. There have been concerns in the market in the past year regarding the risks of such nationalisation in relation to the company and other United Kingdom banks. If economic conditions in the United Kingdom or globally were to deteriorate, or the events described in the following risk factors occur to such an extent that they have a materially adverse impact on the financial condition, perceived or actual credit quality, results of operations or business of any of the relevant entities in the Group, the United Kingdom Government may decide to take similar action in relation to the company under the Banking Act. Given the extent of the Authorities’ powers under the Banking Act, it is difficult to predict what effect such actions might have on the Group and any securities issued by the company or Group companies. However, potential impacts may include full nationalisation of the company, the total loss of value in Securities issued by the company and the inability of the company to perform its obligations under the Securities.

If the relevant stabilisation option was effected in respect of the company or the stabilisation options were effected in respect of a relevant entity or its business within the Group, HM Treasury would be required to make certain compensation orders, which will depend on the stabilisation power adopted. For example, in the event that the Bank of England were to transfer some of the business of a relevant entity to a bridge bank, HM Treasury would have to make a resolution fund order including a third party compensation order pursuant to the Banking Act (Third Party Compensation Arrangements for Partial Property Transfers) Regulations 2009. However, there can be no assurance that compensation would be assessed to be payable or that holders of the Securities would recover any compensation promptly and/or equal to any loss actually incurred.

The performance of the Group has been and will continue to be influenced by the economic conditions of the countries in which it operates, particularly the United Kingdom, the United States and other countries throughout Europe, the Middle East and Asia. The outlook for the global economy over the near to medium term remains challenging, particularly in the United Kingdom, the United States and other European economies. In addition, the global financial system has yet to fully overcome the difficulties which first manifested themselves in August 2007 and financial markets conditions have not yet fully normalised. These conditions led to severe dislocation of financial markets around the world and unprecedented levels of illiquidity in 2008 and 2009, resulting in the development of significant problems at a number of the world’s largest corporate institutions operating across a wide range of industry sectors, many of whom are the Group’s customers and counterparties in the ordinary course of its business. In response to this economic instability and illiquidity in the market, a number of governments, including the United Kingdom Government, the governments of the other EU member states and the United States Government, have intervened in order to inject liquidity and capital into the financial system, and, in some cases, to prevent the failure of these institutions.

Despite such measures, the volatility and disruption of the capital and credit markets have continued, with many forecasts predicting only modest levels of GDP growth over the course of 2010. Similar conditions are likely to exist in a number of the Group’s key markets, including those in the United States and Europe, particularly Ireland. These conditions have exerted, and may continue to exert, downward pressure on asset prices and on availability and cost of credit for financial institutions, including the company, and will continue to impact the credit quality of the Group’s customers and counterparties. Such conditions, alone or in combination with regulatory changes or actions of other market participants, may cause the Group to incur losses or to experience further reductions in business activity, increased funding costs and funding pressures, lower share prices, decreased asset values, additional write-downs and impairment charges and lower profitability.

The Group was required to obtain State Aid approval for the aid given to the Group by HM Treasury as part of the placing and open offer undertaken by the company in December 2008 (the “First Placing and Open Offer”), the issuance of £25.5 billion of B shares in the capital of the company which are, subject to certain terms and conditions, convertible into ordinary shares in the share capital of the company (the “B Shares”) to HM Treasury, a contingent commitment by HM Treasury to subscribe for up to an additional £8 billion of B Shares if certain conditions are met and the Group’s participation in the Asset Protection Scheme (the “APS”) (the “State Aid”).

As a result of the First Placing and Open Offer (approved as part of the European Commission’s approval of a package of measures to the banking industry in the United Kingdom in October 2008), the Group was required to cooperate with HM Treasury to submit a forward plan to the

European Commission. This plan was submitted and detailed discussions took place between HM Treasury, the Group and the European Commission. The plan submitted not only had regard to the First Placing and Open Offer, but also the issuance of B Shares to HM Treasury, the commitment by HM Treasury to subscribe for additional B Shares if certain conditions were met and the Group’s participation in the APS. As part of its review, the European Commission was required to assess the State Aid and to consider whether the Group’s long-term viability would be assured, that the Group makes a sufficient contribution to the costs of its restructuring and that measures are taken to limit any distortions of competition arising from the State Aid provided to the Group by the United Kingdom Government. The Group, together with HM Treasury, agreed in principle with the European Competition Commissioner the terms of the State Aid and the terms of a restructuring plan (the “State Aid restructuring plan”). On 14 December 2009, the European Commission formally approved the Group’s participation in the APS, the issuance of £25.5 billion of B Shares to HM Treasury, a contingent commitment by HM Treasury to subscribe for up to an additional £8 billion of B Shares and the State Aid restructuring plan. The prohibition on the making of discretionary dividend (including preference shares and B Shares) or coupon payments on existing hybrid capital instruments for a two-year period commencing no later than 30 April 2010 will prevent the company from paying dividends on its ordinary and preference shares and coupons on other Tier 1 securities for the same duration, and it may impair the Group’s ability to raise new Tier 1 capital through the issuance of ordinary shares and other Securities.

It is possible a third party could challenge the approval decision in the European Courts (within specified time limits). The Group does not believe that any such challenge would be likely to succeed but, if it were to succeed, the European Commission would need to reconsider its decision, which might result in an adverse outcome for the Group, including a prohibition or amendment to some or all of the terms of the State Aid. The European Commission could also impose conditions that are more disadvantageous, potentially materially so, to the Group than those in the State Aid restructuring plan.

The Group is subject to a variety of risks as a result of implementing the State Aid restructuring plan. There is no assurance that the price that the Group receives for any assets sold pursuant to the State Aid restructuring plan will be at a level the Group considers adequate or which it could obtain in circumstances in which the Group was not required to sell such assets in order to implement the State Aid restructuring plan or if such sale were not subject to the restrictions (including in relation to potential purchasers of the United Kingdom branch divestment) contained in the terms thereof. Further, should the Group fail to complete any of the required disposals within the agreed timeframes for such disposals, under the terms of the State Aid clearance, a divestiture trustee can be empowered to conduct the disposals, with the mandate to complete the disposal at no minimum price.

Furthermore, if the Group is unable to comply with the terms of the State Aid approval it could constitute a misuse of aid. In circumstances where the European Commission doubts that the Group is complying with the terms of the State Aid approval, it may open a formal investigation. At the conclusion of this investigation, if the European Commission decides that there has been misuse of aid, it can issue a decision requiring HM Treasury to recover the misused aid which could have a material adverse impact on the Group.

In implementing the State Aid restructuring plan, the Group will lose existing customers, deposits and other assets (both directly through the sale and potentially through the impact on the rest of the Group’s business arising from implementing the State Aid restructuring plan) and the potential for realising additional associated revenues and margins that it otherwise might have achieved in the absence of such disposals. Further, the loss of such revenues and related income may extend the time period over which the Group may pay any amounts owed to HM Treasury under the APS or otherwise. The implementation of the State Aid restructuring plan may also result in disruption to the retained business and give rise to significant strain on management, employee, operational and financial resources, impacting customers and giving rise to separation costs which could be substantial.

The implementation of the State Aid restructuring plan may result in the emergence of one or more new viable competitors or a material strengthening of one or more of the Group’s competitors in the Group’s markets. The effect of this on the Group’s future competitive position, revenues and margins is uncertain and there could be an adverse effect on the Group’s operations and financial condition and its business generally.  If any or all of the risks described above, or any other currently unforeseen risks, materialise, there could be a materially negative impact on the Group’s business, operations, financial condition, capital position and competitive position.

In light of the changed global economic outlook, the Group has embarked on a financial and core business restructuring which is focused on achieving appropriate risk-adjusted returns under these changed circumstances, reducing reliance on wholesale funding and lowering exposure to capital intensive businesses. A key part of this restructuring is the programme announced in February 2009 to run-down and sell the Group’s non-core assets and the continued review of the Group’s portfolio to identify further disposals of certain non-core assets. Assets identified for this purpose and allocated to the Group's Non-Core division totalled £252 billion, excluding derivatives, as at 31 December 2008. At 31 December 2009, this total had reduced to £187 billion, excluding the Group's interest in RBS Sempra Commodities LLP (“RBS Sempra Commodities”), which was transferred to the Non-Core division during 2009. This balance sheet reduction programme will continue alongside the disposals under the State Aid restructuring plan approved by the European Commission.

Because the ability to dispose of assets and the price achieved for such disposals will be dependent on prevailing economic and market conditions, which may remain challenging, there is no assurance that the Group will be able to sell or run-down (as applicable) those businesses it is seeking to exit either on favourable economic terms to the Group or at all. Furthermore, where transactions are entered into for the purpose of selling non-core assets and businesses, they may be subject to conditions precedent, including government and regulatory approvals and completion mechanics that in certain cases may entail consent from customers. There is no assurance that such conditions precedent will be satisfied, or consents and approvals obtained, in a timely manner or at all. There is consequently a risk that the Group may fail to complete such disposals by any agreed longstop date.

Furthermore, in the context of implementing the State Aid restructuring plan, the Group is subject to certain timing and other restrictions which may result in the sale of assets at prices below those which the Group would have otherwise agreed had the Group not been required to sell such assets as part of the State Aid restructuring plan or if such sale were not subject to the restrictions contained in the terms of the State Aid conditions.

Any of the above factors, either in the context of State Aid-related or non-core or other asset disposals, could affect the Group's ability to implement its strategic plan and have a material adverse effect on the Group's business, results of operations, financial condition, capital ratios and liquidity and could result in a loss of value in the Securities.

As part of its refocus on core strengths and its disposal programme, the Group has undertaken and continues to undertake extensive organisational restructuring involving the allocation of assets identified as non-core assets to a separate Non-Core Division, and the run-down and sale of those assets over a period of time. In addition, to comply with State Aid clearance, the Group agreed to undertake a series of measures to be implemented over a four-year period from December 2009, which include disposing of RBS Insurance (subject to potentially maintaining a minority interest until the end of 2014). the company will also divest by the end of 2013 Global Merchant Services, subject to the company retaining up to 20 per cent. of each business within Global Merchant Services if required by the purchaser, and its interest in RBS Sempra Commodities, as well as divesting the RBS branch-based business in England and Wales and the NatWest branches in Scotland, along with the direct small and medium-sized enterprise (“SME”) customers and certain mid-corporate customers across the United Kingdom. On 16 February 2010, the company announced that RBS Sempra Commodities had agreed to sell its Metals, Oil and European Energy business lines, subject to certain conditions including regulatory approvals. The Group and its joint venture partner, Sempra Energy, are continuing to consider ownership alternatives for the remaining North American Power and Gas businesses of RBS Sempra Commodities.

In order to implement the restructurings referred to above, various businesses and divisions within the Group will be re-organised, transferred or sold, or potentially merged with other businesses and divisions within the Group. As part of this process, personnel may be reallocated, where permissible, across the Group, new technology may be implemented, and new policies and procedures may be established in order to accommodate the new shape of the Group. As a result, the Group may experience a high degree of business interruption, significant restructuring charges, delays in implementation, and significant strain on management, employee, operational and financial resources. Any of the above factors could affect the Group’s ability to achieve its strategic objectives and have a material adverse effect on its business, results of operations and financial condition or could result in a loss of value in the Securities.

Liquidity risk is the risk that a bank will be unable to meet its obligations, including funding commitments, as they fall due. This risk is inherent in banking operations and can be heightened by a number of enterprise specific factors, including an over-reliance on a particular source of funding (including, for example, short-term and overnight funding), changes in credit ratings or market-wide phenomena such as market dislocation and major disasters. During the course of 2008 and 2009, credit markets worldwide experienced a severe reduction in liquidity and term-funding. During this time, perception of counterparty risk between banks also increased significantly. This increase in perceived counterparty risk also led to reductions in inter-bank lending, and hence, in common with many other banking groups, the Group’s access to traditional sources of liquidity has been, and may continue to be, restricted.

The Group’s liquidity management focuses on maintaining a diverse and appropriate funding strategy for its assets, controlling the mismatch of maturities and carefully monitoring its undrawn commitments and contingent liabilities. However, the Group’s ability to access sources of liquidity (for example, through the issue or sale of financial and other instruments or through the use of term loans) during the recent period of liquidity stress has been constrained to the point where it, like other banks, has had to rely on shorter term and overnight funding with a consequent reduction in overall liquidity, and to increase its recourse to liquidity schemes provided by central banks. While during the course of 2009 money market conditions improved, with the Group seeing a material reduction of funding from central banks and the issuance of non-government guaranteed term debt, further tightening of credit markets could have a negative impact on the Group. The Group, in line with other financial institutions, may need to seek funds from alternative sources, potentially at higher costs of funding than has previously been the case.

In addition, there is also a risk that corporate and institutional counterparties with credit exposures may look to reduce all credit exposures to banks, given current risk aversion trends. It is possible that credit market dislocation becomes so severe that overnight funding from non-government sources ceases to be available.

Like many banking groups, the Group relies on customer deposits to meet a considerable portion of its funding. Furthermore, as part of its ongoing strategy to improve its liquidity position, the Group is actively seeking to increase the proportion of its funding represented by customer deposits. However, such deposits are subject to fluctuation due to certain factors outside the Group’s control, such as a loss of confidence, increasing competitive pressures or the encouraged or mandated repatriation of deposits by foreign wholesale or central bank depositors, which could result in a significant outflow of deposits within a short period of time. There is currently heavy competition among United Kingdom banks for retail customer deposits, which has increased the cost of procuring new deposits and impacted the Group’s ability to grow its deposit base. An inability to grow, or any material decrease in, the Group’s deposits could, particularly if accompanied by one of the other factors described above, have a negative impact on the Group’s ability to satisfy its liquidity needs unless corresponding actions were taken to improve the liquidity profile of other deposits or to reduce assets. In particular, the liquidity position of the Group may be negatively impacted if it is unable to achieve the run-off and sale of non-core and other assets as expected. Any significant delay in those plans may require the Group to consider disposal of other assets not previously identified for disposal to achieve its funded balance sheet target level.

The governments of some of the countries in which the Group operates have taken steps to guarantee the liabilities of the banks and branches operating in their respective jurisdiction. Whilst in some instances the operations of the Group are covered by government guarantees alongside

other local banks, in other countries this may not necessarily always be the case. This may place the Group’s subsidiaries operating in those countries, such as Ulster Bank Ireland Ltd, which did not participate in such government guarantee schemes, at a competitive disadvantage to the other local banks and therefore may require the Group to provide additional funding and liquidity support to these operations.

There can be no assurance that these measures, alongside other available measures, will succeed in improving the funding and liquidity in the markets in which the Group operates, or that these measures, combined with any increased cost of any funding currently available in the market, will not lead to a further increase in the Group’s overall cost of funding, which could have an adverse impact on the Group’s financial condition and results of operations or result in a loss of value in the Securities.

Governmental support schemes may be subject to cancellation, change or withdrawal or may fail to be renewed, which may have a negative impact on the availability of funding in the markets in which the Group operates.

Governmental support schemes may be subject to cancellation, change or withdrawal (on a general or individual basis, subject to relevant contracts) or may fail to be renewed, based on changing economic and political conditions in the jurisdiction of the relevant scheme. To the extent government support schemes are cancelled, changed or withdrawn in a manner which diminishes their effectiveness, or to the extent such schemes fail to generate additional liquidity or other support in the relevant markets in which such schemes operate, the Group, in common with other banking groups, may continue to face limited access to, have insufficient access to, or incur higher costs associated with, funding alternatives, which could have a material adverse impact on the Group’s business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects or result in a loss of value in the Securities.

Risks arising from changes in credit quality and the recoverability of loans and amounts due from counterparties are inherent in a wide range of the Group’s businesses. Whilst some economies stabilised over the course of 2009, the Group may continue to see adverse changes in the credit quality of its borrowers and counterparties, for example, as a result of their inability to refinance their indebtedness, with increasing delinquencies, defaults and insolvencies across a range of sectors (such as the personal and banking and financial institution sectors) and in a number of geographies (such as the United Kingdom, the United States, the Middle East and the rest of Europe, particularly Ireland). This trend has led and may lead to further and accelerated impairment charges, higher costs, additional write-downs and losses for the Group or result in a loss of value in the Securities.

The Group’s ability to engage in routine funding transactions has been and will continue to be adversely affected by the actual or perceived failure or worsening credit of its counterparties, including other financial institutions and corporate borrowers. The Group has exposure to many different industries and counterparties and routinely executes transactions with counterparties in the financial industry, including brokers and dealers, commercial banks, investment banks, mutual and hedge funds and other institutional clients. As a result, defaults by, or even the perceived creditworthiness of or concerns about, one or more corporate borrowers, financial services institutions or the financial services industry generally, have led to market-wide liquidity problems, losses and defaults and could lead to further losses or defaults, by the Group or by other institutions. Many of these transactions expose the Group to credit risk in the event of default of the Group’s counterparty or client and the Group does have significant exposures to certain individual counterparties (including counterparties in certain weakened sectors and markets). In addition, the Group’s credit risk is exacerbated when the collateral it holds cannot be realised or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the loan or derivative exposure that is due to the Group, which is most likely to occur during periods of illiquidity and depressed asset valuations, such as those recently experienced. Any such losses could have a material adverse effect on the Group’s results of operations and financial condition or result in a loss of value in the Securities.

Financial markets continue to be subject to significant stress conditions, where steep falls in perceived or actual asset values have been accompanied by a severe reduction in market liquidity, as exemplified by recent events affecting asset-backed collateralised debt obligations, residential mortgage-backed securities and the leveraged loan market. In dislocated markets, hedging and other risk management strategies have proven not to be as effective as they are in normal market conditions due in part to the decreasing credit quality of hedge counterparties, including monoline and other insurance companies and credit derivative product companies. Severe market events have resulted in the Group recording large write-downs on its credit market exposures in 2007, 2008 and 2009. Any deterioration in economic and financial market conditions could lead to further impairment charges and write-downs. Moreover, market volatility and illiquidity (and the assumptions, judgements and estimates in relation to such matters that may change over time and may ultimately not turn out to be accurate) make it difficult to value certain of the Group’s exposures. Valuations in future periods, reflecting, among other things, then-prevailing market conditions and changes in the credit ratings of certain of the Group’s assets, may result in significant changes in the fair values of the Group’s exposures, even in respect of exposures, such as credit market exposures, for which the Group has previously recorded write-downs. In addition, the value ultimately realised by the Group may be materially different from the current or estimated fair value. Any of these factors could require the Group to recognise further significant write-downs or realise increased impairment charges, any of which may adversely affect its capital position, its financial condition and its results of operations or result in a loss of value in the Securities.

Further information about the write-downs which the Group has incurred and the assets it has reclassified can be found in the Risk, capital and liquidity management section of the Business review.

The Group has credit exposure arising from over-the-counter derivative contracts, mainly credit default swaps (“CDSs”), which are carried at fair value. The fair value of these CDSs, as well as the Group’s exposure to the risk of default by the underlying counterparties, depends on the valuation and the perceived credit risk of the instrument against which protection has been bought. Since 2007, monoline and other insurers and other market counterparties (including credit derivative product companies) have been adversely affected by their exposure to residential mortgage linked and corporate credit products, whether synthetic or otherwise, and their actual and perceived creditworthiness has deteriorated

rapidly, which may continue. If the financial condition of these counterparties or their actual or perceived creditworthiness deteriorates further, the Group may record further credit valuation adjustments on the credit protection bought from these counterparties under the CDSs in addition to those already recorded and such adjustments may have a material adverse impact on the Group’s financial condition and results of operations.

Changes in interest rates, foreign exchange rates, credit spreads, bond, equity and commodity prices and other market factors have significantly affected and will continue to affect the Group’s business.

Some of the most significant market risks the Group faces are interest rate, foreign exchange, credit spread, bond, equity and commodity price risks. Changes in interest rate levels, yield curves and spreads may affect the interest rate margin realised between lending and borrowing costs, the effect of which may be heightened during periods of liquidity stress, such as those experienced in the past year. Changes in currency rates, particularly in the sterling-US dollar and sterling-euro exchange rates, affect the value of assets, liabilities, income and expenses denominated in foreign currencies and the reported earnings of the company’s non-United Kingdom subsidiaries (principally Citizens Financial Group, Inc. (“Citizens”) and RBS Securities Inc.) and may affect income from foreign exchange dealing. The performance of financial markets may affect bond, equity and commodity prices and, therefore, cause changes in the value of the Group’s investment and trading portfolios. This has been the case during the period since August 2007, with market disruptions and volatility resulting in significant reductions in the value of such portfolios. While the Group has implemented risk management methods to mitigate and control these and other market risks to which it is exposed, it is difficult, particularly in the current environment, to predict with accuracy changes in economic or market conditions and to anticipate the effects that such changes could have on the Group’s financial performance and business operations.

The company and other Group members have been subject to a number of downgrades in the recent past. Any future reductions in the long-term or short-term credit ratings of the company or one of its principal subsidiaries (particularly RBS) would further increase its borrowing costs, require the Group to replace funding lost due to the downgrade, which may include the loss of customer deposits, and may also limit the Group’s access to capital and money markets and trigger additional collateral requirements in derivatives contracts and other secured funding arrangements. Furthermore, given the extent of the United Kingdom Government ownership and support provided to the Group through HM Treasury’s guarantee scheme (announced by the United Kingdom Government on 8 October 2008) (the “Credit Guarantee Scheme”), any downgrade in the United Kingdom Government’s credit ratings could adversely affect the Group’s own credit ratings and may have the effects noted above. All credit rating agencies have reaffirmed the United Kingdom Government’s AAA rating, although S&P changed its outlook to “negative” on 21 May 2009. Fitch reaffirmed the United Kingdom Government’s stable outlook on 31 July 2009 and Moody’s reiterated the United Kingdom Government’s stable outlook on 26 October 2009. Credit ratings of the company, RBS, ABN AMRO Holding N.V. (which was renamed “RBS Holdings N.V.” on 1 April 2010) (“ABN AMRO”), The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V. (which was renamed from “ABN AMRO Bank N.V.” on 6 February 2010), Ulster Bank and Citizens are also important to the Group when competing in certain markets, such as over-the-counter derivatives. As a result, any further reductions in the company’s long-term or short-term credit ratings or those of its principal subsidiaries could adversely affect the Group’s access to liquidity and competitive position, increase its funding costs and have a negative impact on the Group’s earnings and financial condition or result in a loss of value in the Securities.

Effective management of the Group’s capital is critical to its ability to operate its businesses, to grow organically and to pursue its strategy of returning to standalone strength. The Group is required by regulators in the United Kingdom, the United States and in other jurisdictions in which it undertakes regulated activities, to maintain adequate capital resources. The maintenance of adequate capital is also necessary for the Group’s financial flexibility in the face of continuing turbulence and uncertainty in the global economy. Accordingly, the purpose of the issuance of the £25.5 billion of B Shares, the grant of the Contingent Subscription (as defined below) and the previous placing and open offers was to allow the Group to strengthen its capital position. The FSA’s recent liquidity policy statement articulates that firms must hold sufficient eligible securities to survive a liquidity stress and this will result in banks holding a greater amount of government securities, to ensure that these institutions have adequate liquidity in times of financial stress.

In addition, on 17 December 2009, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (the “Basel Committee”) proposed a number of fundamental reforms to the regulatory capital framework in its consultative document entitled "Strengthening the resilience of the banking sector". If the proposals made by the Basel Committee are implemented, these could result in the Group being subject to significantly higher capital requirements. The proposals include: (a) the build-up of a counter-cyclical capital buffer in excess of the regulatory minimum capital requirement, which is large enough to enable the Group to remain above the minimum capital requirement in the face of losses expected to be incurred in a feasibly severe downturn; (b) an increase in the capital requirements for counterparty risk exposures arising from derivatives, repo-style transactions and securities financing transactions; (c) the imposition of a leverage ratio as a supplementary measure to the existing Basel II risk-based measure; (d) the phasing out of hybrid capital instruments as Tier 1 capital and the requirement that the predominant form of Tier 1 capital must be common shares and retained earnings; and (e) the imposition of  global minimum liquidity standards that include a requirement to hold a stock of unencumbered high quality liquid assets sufficient to cover cumulative net cash outflows over a 30-day period under a prescribed stress scenario. The proposed reforms are subject to a consultative process and an impact assessment and are not likely to be implemented before the end of 2012. The Basel Committee will also consider appropriate transition and grandfathering arrangements.

These and other future changes to capital adequacy and liquidity requirements in the jurisdictions in which it operates may require the Group to raise additional Tier 1, Core Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital by way of further issuances of securities, including in the form of Ordinary Shares or B Shares and could result in existing Tier 1 and Tier 2 securities issued by the Group ceasing to count towards the Group’s regulatory capital, either at the same level as present or at all. The requirement to raise additional Core Tier 1 capital could have a number of negative consequences for the company and its shareholders, including impairing the company’s ability to pay dividends on or make other distributions in respect of Ordinary Shares and diluting the ownership of existing shareholders of the company. If the Group is unable to raise the requisite Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital, it may be required to further reduce the amount of its risk-weighted assets and engage in the disposition of core and other non-core businesses, which may not occur on a timely basis or achieve prices which would otherwise be attractive to the Group. In addition, pursuant to the State Aid approval, should the Group’s Core Tier 1 capital ratio decline to below 5 per cent. at any time before 31 December 2014, or should the Group fall short of its funded balance sheet target level (after adjustments) for 31 December 2013 by £30 billion or more, the Group will be required to reduce its risk-weighted assets by a further £60 billion in excess of its plan through further disposals of identifiable businesses and their

associated assets. As provided in the Acquisition and Contingent Capital Agreement (as defined below), the Group would also be subject to restrictions on payments on its hybrid capital instruments should its Core Tier 1 ratio fall below 6 per cent. or if it would fall below 6 per cent. as a result of such payment.

As at 31 December 2009, the Group’s Tier 1 and Core Tier 1 capital ratios were 14.1 per cent. and 11.0 per cent., respectively, calculated in accordance with FSA definitions (see page 69). Any change that limits the Group’s ability to manage effectively its balance sheet and capital resources going forward (including, for example, reductions in profits and retained earnings as a result of write-downs or otherwise, increases in risk-weighted assets, delays in the disposal of certain assets or the inability to syndicate loans as a result of market conditions, a growth in unfunded pension exposures or otherwise) or to access funding sources, could have a material adverse impact on its financial condition and regulatory capital position or result in a loss of value in the Securities.

The value of certain financial instruments recorded at fair value is determined using financial models incorporating assumptions, judgements and estimates that may change over time or may ultimately not turn out to be accurate.

Under IFRS, the Group recognises at fair value: (i) financial instruments classified as “held-for-trading” or “designated as at fair value through profit or loss”; (ii) financial assets classified as “available-for-sale”; and (iii) derivatives. Generally, to establish the fair value of these instruments, the Group relies on quoted market prices or, where the market for a financial instrument is not sufficiently active, internal valuation models that utilise observable market data. In certain circumstances, the data for individual financial instruments or classes of financial instruments utilised by such valuation models may not be available or may become unavailable due to changes in market conditions, as has been the case during the recent financial crisis. In such circumstances, the Group’s internal valuation models require the Group to make assumptions, judgements and estimates to establish fair value. In common with other financial institutions, these internal valuation models are complex, and the assumptions, judgements and estimates the Group is required to make often relate to matters that are inherently uncertain, such as expected cash flows, the ability of borrowers to service debt, residential and commercial property price appreciation and depreciation, and relative levels of defaults and deficiencies. Such assumptions, judgements and estimates may need to be updated to reflect changing facts, trends and market conditions. The resulting change in the fair values of the financial instruments has had and could continue to have a material adverse effect on the Group’s earnings and financial condition. Also, recent market volatility and illiquidity have challenged the factual bases of certain underlying assumptions and have made it difficult to value certain of the Group’s financial instruments. Valuations in future periods, reflecting prevailing market conditions, may result in further significant changes in the fair values of these instruments, which could have a negative effect on the Group’s results of operations and financial condition or result in a loss of value in the Securities.

Recent consolidation among banking institutions in the United Kingdom, the United States and throughout Europe is changing the competitive landscape for banks and other financial institutions.  If financial markets continue to be volatile, more banks may be forced to consolidate. This consolidation, in combination with the introduction of new entrants into the United States and United Kingdom markets from other European and Asian countries, could increase competitive pressures on the Group. In addition, certain competitors may have access to lower cost funding and/or be able to offer retail deposits on more favourable terms than the Group and may have stronger multi-channel and more efficient operations as a result of greater historical investments. Furthermore, the Group’s competitors may be better able to attract and retain clients and talent, which may have a negative impact on the Group’s relative performance and future prospects.

Furthermore, increased government ownership of, and involvement in, banks generally may have an impact on the competitive landscape in the major markets in which the Group operates. Although, at present, it is difficult to predict what the effects of this increased government ownership and involvement will be or how they will differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, such involvement may cause the Group to experience stronger competition for corporate, institutional and retail clients and greater pressure on profit margins. Future disposals and restructurings by the Group and the compensation structure and restrictions imposed on the Group may also have an impact on its ability to compete effectively. Since the markets in which the Group operates are expected to remain highly competitive in all areas, these and other changes to the competitive landscape could adversely affect the Group’s business, margins, profitability and financial condition or result in a loss of value in the Securities.

Under the terms of the First Placing and Open Offer, the company provided certain undertakings aimed at ensuring that the subscription by HM Treasury of the relevant ordinary shares and preference shares and the RBS Group’s participation in the Credit Guarantee Scheme offered by HM Treasury as part of its support for the United Kingdom banking industry are compatible with the common market under EU law. These undertakings include (i) supporting certain initiatives in relation to mortgage lending and lending to SMEs until 2011, (ii) regulating management remuneration and (iii) regulating the rate of growth of the RBS Group’s balance sheet. Under the terms of the placing and open offer undertaken by the company in April 2009, the RBS Group’s undertakings in relation to mortgage lending and lending to SMEs were extended to larger commercial and industrial companies in the United Kingdom. Pursuant to these arrangements, the company agreed to make available to creditworthy borrowers on commercial terms, £16 billion above the amount the company had budgeted to lend to United Kingdom businesses and £9 billion above the amount the company had budgeted to lend to United Kingdom homeowners in the year commencing 1 March 2009.

In relation to the 2009 commitment period, which ended on 28 February 2010, the RBS Group’s net mortgage lending to UK homeowners was £12.7 billion above the amount it had originally budgeted to lend. In relation to its business lending commitment, the RBS Group achieved £60 billion of gross new lending to businesses, including £39 billion to SMEs but, in the economic environment prevailing at the time, many customers were strongly focused on reducing their borrowings and repayments consequently increased. Moreover, the withdrawal of foreign lenders was less pronounced than anticipated, there was a sharp increase in capital market issuance and demand continued to be weak. As a result, the RBS Group’s net lending did not reach the £16 billion targeted.

In March 2010, the company agreed with the United Kingdom government certain adjustments to the lending commitments for the 2010 commitment period (the 12 month period commencing 1 March 2010), to reflect expected economic circumstances over the period. As part of the amended lending commitments, the company has committed, among other things, to make available gross new facilities, drawn or undrawn, of £50 billion to UK businesses in the period 1 March 2010 to 28 February 2011. In addition, the company has agreed with the United Kingdom government to make available £8 billion of net mortgage lending in the 2010 commitment period. This is a decrease of £1 billion on the net

mortgage lending target that previously applied to the 2010 commitment period which ends on 28 February 2011, to reflect that the mortgage lending commitment for the 2009 commitment period was increased from £9 billion to £10 billion.

The RBS Group has also agreed to certain other commitments, which are material for the structure of the RBS Group and its operations, under the State Aid restructuring plan approved by the European Commission in relation to State Aid.

In addition, the RBS Group, together with HM Treasury, has agreed with the European Commission a prohibition on the making of discretionary dividends (including on preference shares and B Shares) or coupon payments on existing hybrid capital instruments for a two-year period from a date commencing no later than 30 April 2010 (which the RBS Group has subsequently announced shall be 30 April 2010). It is possible that the RBS Group may, in future, be subject to further restrictions on payments on such hybrid capital instruments, whether as a result of undertakings given to regulatory bodies, changes to capital requirements such as the proposals published by the Basel Committee on 17 December 2009 or otherwise. The RBS Group has also agreed to certain other undertakings in the Acquisition and Contingent Capital Agreement.

The undertakings described above may serve to limit the RBS Group’s operations. See “HM Treasury (or UKFI on its behalf) may be able to exercise a significant degree of influence over the Group.”

The Group’s ability to implement its strategy depends on the ability and experience of its senior management, which may include directors, and other key employees. The loss of the services of certain key employees, particularly to competitors, could have a negative impact on the Group’s business. The Group’s future success will also depend on its ability to attract, retain and remunerate highly skilled and qualified personnel competitively with its peers. This cannot be guaranteed, particularly in light of heightened regulatory oversight of banks and heightened scrutiny of, and (in some cases) restrictions placed upon, management compensation arrangements, in particular those in receipt of Government funding (such as the company). The Group has made a commitment to comply with the FSA Remuneration Code. These rules came into force on 1 January 2010 and are in line with the agreement reached by the G-20, setting global standards for the implementation of the Financial Stability Board’s remuneration principles. The Group agreed that it will be at the leading edge of implementing the G-20 principles and granted UK Financial Investments Limited (“UKFI”) consent rights over the shape and size of its aggregate bonus pool for the 2009 performance year. The level of the 2009 bonus pool and the deferral and claw-back provisions implemented by the Group may impair the ability of the Group to attract and retain suitably qualified personnel in various parts of the Group’s businesses.

The Group is also altering certain of the pension benefits it offers to staff. Some employees continue to participate in defined benefit arrangements. The following two changes have been made to the main defined benefit pension plans: (i) a yearly limit on the amount of any salary increase that will count for pension purposes; and (ii) a reduction in the severance lump sum for those who take an immediate undiscounted pension for redundancy. In addition to the effects of such measures on the Group’s ability to retain senior management and other key employees, the marketplace for skilled personnel is becoming more competitive, which means the cost of hiring, training and retaining skilled personnel may continue to increase. The failure to attract or retain a sufficient number of appropriately skilled personnel could place the Group at a significant competitive disadvantage and prevent the Group from successfully implementing its strategy, which could have a material adverse effect on the Group’s financial condition and results of operations or result in a loss of value in the Securities.

In addition, certain of the Group’s employees in the United Kingdom, continental Europe and other jurisdictions in which the Group operates are represented by employee representative bodies, including trade unions. Engagement with its employees and such bodies is important to the Group and a breakdown of these relationships could adversely affect the Group’s business, reputation and results. As the Group implements cost-saving initiatives and disposes of, or runs-down, certain assets or businesses (including as part of its expected restructuring plans), it faces increased risk in this regard and there can be no assurance that the Group will be able to maintain good relations with its employees or employee representative bodies in respect of all matters. As a result, the Group may experience strikes or other industrial action from time to time, which could have a material adverse effect on its business and results of operations and could cause damage to its reputation.

The Group is subject to financial services laws, regulations, corporate governance requirements, administrative actions and policies in each location in which it operates. All of these are subject to change, particularly in the current market environment, where there have been unprecedented levels of government intervention and changes to the regulations governing financial institutions, including recent nationalisations in the United States, the United Kingdom and other European countries. As a result of these and other ongoing and possible future changes in the financial services regulatory landscape (including requirements imposed by virtue of the Group’s participation in government or regulator-led initiatives), the Group expects to face greater regulation in the United Kingdom, the United States and other countries in which it operates, including throughout the rest of Europe. Compliance with such regulations may increase the Group’s capital requirements and costs and have an adverse impact on how the Group conducts its business, on the products and services it offers, on the value of its assets and on its results of operations and financial condition or result in a loss of value in the Securities.

Other areas where governmental policies and regulatory changes could have an adverse impact include, but are not limited to:

The Group capitalises goodwill, which is calculated as the excess of the cost of an acquisition over the net fair value of the identifiable assets, liabilities and contingent liabilities acquired. Acquired goodwill is recognised initially at cost and subsequently at cost less any accumulated impairment losses. As required by IFRS, the Group tests goodwill for impairment annually or more frequently, at external reporting dates, when events or circumstances indicate that it might be impaired. An impairment test involves comparing the recoverable amount (the higher of value in use and fair value less cost to sell) of an individual cash generating unit with its carrying value. The value in use and fair value of the Group’s cash generating units are affected by market conditions and the performance of the economies in which the Group operates. Where the Group is required to recognise a goodwill impairment, it is recorded in the Group’s income statement, although it has no effect on the Group’s regulatory capital position. For the year ended 31 December 2009, the Group recorded a £363 million accounting write down of goodwill and other intangibles relating to prior year acquisitions (see page 257).

The Group maintains a number of defined benefit pension schemes for past and a number of current employees. Pensions risk is the risk that the liabilities of the Group’s various defined benefit pension schemes which are long term in nature will exceed the schemes’ assets, as a result of which the Group is required or chooses to make additional contributions to the schemes. The schemes’ assets comprise investment portfolios that are held to meet projected liabilities to the scheme members. Risk arises from the schemes because the value of these asset portfolios and returns from them may be less than expected and because there may be greater than expected increases in the estimated value of the schemes’ liabilities. In these circumstances, the Group could be obliged, or may choose, to make additional contributions to the schemes, and during recent periods, the Group has voluntarily made such contributions. Given the current economic and financial market difficulties and the prospect that they may continue over the near and medium term, the Group may experience increasing pension deficits or be required or elect to make further contributions to its pension schemes and such deficits and contributions could be significant and have a negative impact on the Group’s capital position, results of operations or financial condition or result in a loss of value in the Securities. The next funding valuation of the Group’s major defined benefit pension plan, The Royal Bank of Scotland Group Pension Fund, will take place with an effective date of 31 March 2010.

The Group’s operations are diverse and complex, and it operates in legal and regulatory environments that expose it to potentially significant litigation, regulatory investigation and other regulatory risk. As a result, the Group is, and may in the future be, involved in various disputes, legal proceedings and regulatory investigations in the United Kingdom, the EU, the United States and other jurisdictions, including class action litigation, anti-money laundering investigations and review by the European Commission under State Aid rules. Furthermore, the Group, like many other financial institutions, has come under greater regulatory scrutiny over the last year and expects that environment to continue for the foreseeable future, particularly as it relates to compliance with new and existing corporate governance, employee compensation, conduct of business, anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism laws and regulations, as well as the provisions of applicable sanctions programmes. Disputes, legal proceedings and regulatory investigations are subject to many uncertainties, and their outcomes are often difficult to predict, particularly in the earlier stages of a case or investigation. Adverse regulatory action or adverse judgments in litigation could result in restrictions or limitations on the Group’s operations or result in a material adverse effect on the Group’s reputation or results of operations or result in a loss of value in the Securities. For details about certain litigation and regulatory investigations in which the Group is involved, see Note 32 on the Financial statements.

The Group’s operations are dependent on the ability to process a very large number of transactions efficiently and accurately while complying with applicable laws and regulations where it does business. The Group has complex and geographically diverse operations and operational risk and losses can result from internal and external fraud, errors by employees or third parties, failure to document transactions properly or to obtain proper authorisation, failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements and conduct of business rules (including those arising out of anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism legislation, as well as the provisions of applicable sanctions programmes), equipment failures, natural disasters or the inadequacy or failure of systems and controls, including those of the Group’s suppliers or counterparties. Although the Group has

implemented risk controls and loss mitigation actions, and substantial resources are devoted to developing efficient procedures, to identify and rectify weaknesses in existing procedures and to train staff, it is not possible to be certain that such actions have been or will be effective in controlling each of the operational risks faced by the Group. Any weakness in these systems or controls, or any breaches or alleged breaches of applicable laws or regulations, could have a materially negative impact on the Group’s business, reputation and results of operations and the price of any Securities. Notwithstanding anything contained in this risk factor, it should not be taken as implying that the company will be unable to comply with its obligations as a company with securities admitted to the Official List of the United Kingdom Listing Authority (the “Official List”) nor that it, or its relevant subsidiaries, will be unable to comply with its or their obligations as supervised firms regulated by the FSA.

The Group’s activities are subject to tax at various rates around the world computed in accordance with local legislation and practice. Action by governments to increase tax rates or to impose additional taxes or to restrict the tax reliefs currently available to the Group would reduce the Group’s profitability. Revisions to tax legislation or to its interpretation might also affect the Group’s results in the future.

UKFI manages HM Treasury’s shareholder relationship with the company. Although HM Treasury has indicated that it intends to respect the commercial decisions of the Group and that the Group will continue to have its own independent board of directors and management team determining its own strategy, should its current intentions change, HM Treasury's position as a majority shareholder (and UKFI’s position as manager of this shareholding) means that HM Treasury or UKFI may be able to exercise a significant degree of influence over, among other things, the election of directors and the appointment of senior management. In addition, as the provider of the APS, HM Treasury has a range of rights that other shareholders do not have. These include rights under the terms of the APS over the Group's remuneration policy and practice. The manner in which HM Treasury or UKFI exercises HM Treasury’s rights as majority shareholder or in which HM Treasury exercises its rights under the APS could give rise to conflict between the interests of HM Treasury and the interests of other shareholders. The Board has a duty to promote the success of the company for the benefit of its members as a whole.

Future claims in the Group’s general and life assurance business may be higher than expected as a result of changing trends in claims experience resulting from catastrophic weather conditions, demographic developments, changes in the nature and seriousness of claims made, changes in mortality, changes in the legal and compensatory landscape and other causes outside the Group’s control. These trends could affect the profitability of current and future insurance products and services. The Group reinsures some of the risks it has assumed and is accordingly exposed to the risk of loss should its reinsurers become unable or unwilling to pay claims made by the Group against them.

Reputational risk, meaning the risk to earnings and capital from negative public opinion, is inherent in the Group’s business. Negative public opinion can result from the actual or perceived manner in which the Group conducts its business activities, from the Group’s financial performance, from the level of direct and indirect government support or from actual or perceived practices in the banking and financial industry. Negative public opinion may adversely affect the Group’s ability to keep and attract customers and, in particular, corporate and retail depositors. The Group cannot ensure that it will be successful in avoiding damage to its business from reputational risk.

In the United Kingdom, the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (the “Compensation Scheme”) was established under the FSMA and is the United Kingdom’s statutory fund of last resort for customers of authorised financial services firms. The Compensation Scheme can pay compensation to customers if a firm is unable, or likely to be unable, to pay claims against it and may be required to make payments either in connection with the exercise of a stabilisation power or in exercise of the bank insolvency procedures under the Banking Act. The Compensation Scheme is funded by levies on firms authorised by the FSA, including the Group. In the event that the Compensation Scheme raises funds from the authorised firms, raises those funds more frequently or significantly increases the levies to be paid by such firms, the associated costs to the Group may have a material impact on its results of operations and financial condition. During the financial year ended 31 December 2009, the Group has accrued £135 million for its share of Compensation Scheme management expenses levies for the 2009/10 and 2010/2011 Compensation Scheme years.

In addition, to the extent that other jurisdictions where the Group operates have introduced or plan to introduce similar compensation, contributory or reimbursement schemes (such as in the United States with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation), the Group may make further provisions and may incur additional costs and liabilities, which may negatively impact its financial condition and results of operations or result in a loss of value in the Securities.

The performance of the Group is significantly influenced by the geopolitical and economic conditions prevailing at any given time in the countries in which it operates, particularly the United Kingdom, the United States and other countries in Europe and Asia. For example, the Group has a presence in countries where businesses could be exposed to the risk of business interruption and economic slowdown following the outbreak of a pandemic, or the risk of sovereign default following the assumption by governments of the obligations of private sector institutions. Similarly, the Group faces the heightened risk of trade barriers, exchange controls and other measures taken by sovereign governments which may impact a borrower’s ability to repay. Terrorist acts and threats and the response to them of governments in any of these countries could also adversely affect levels of economic activity and have an adverse effect upon the Group’s business.

The restructuring plan in place for the integration and separation of ABN AMRO (called The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V. with effect from 6 February 2010) into and among the businesses and operations of the Consortium Members (as defined below) is complex, involving substantial reorganisation of ABN AMRO’s operations and legal structure. The restructuring plan is being implemented and significant elements have been completed within the planned timescales and the integration of the Group’s businesses continues. As part of this reorganisation, on 6 February 2010, the majority of the businesses of ABN AMRO acquired by the Dutch State were legally demerged from the ABN AMRO businesses acquired

by the Group and were transferred into a newly established company, ABN AMRO Bank N.V. (formerly named ABN AMRO II N.V.). This company was transferred to ABN AMRO Group N.V., a company wholly owned by the Dutch State, on 1 April 2010. Certain assets and liabilities of ABN AMRO acquired by the Dutch State were not part of the transfer which occurred on 1 April 2010 and remain within ABN AMRO (now The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V.). These will be transferred to the Dutch State as soon as possible. In addition, certain assets within ABN AMRO (The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V.) continue to be under shared ownership by the Consortium Members.

The Group may not realise the benefits of the acquisition or the restructuring when expected or to the extent projected. The occurrence of any of these events, including as a result of staff losses or performance issues, or as a result of further disposals or restructurings by the Group, may have a negative impact on the Group’s financial condition and results of operations.

In accordance with IFRS, the Group has recognised deferred tax assets on losses available to relieve future profits from tax only to the extent that it is probable that they will be recovered. The deferred tax assets are quantified on the basis of current tax legislation and accounting standards and are subject to change in respect of the future rates of tax or the rules for computing taxable profits and allowable losses. Failure to generate sufficient future taxable profits or changes in tax legislation or accounting standards may reduce the recoverable amount of the recognised deferred tax assets.

There is currently no restriction in respect of deferred tax assets recognised by the Group for regulatory purposes. Changes in regulatory rules may restrict the amount of deferred tax assets that can be recognised and such changes could lead to a reduction in the Group’s Core Tier 1 capital ratio. In particular, on 17 December 2009, the Basel Committee published a consultative document setting out certain proposed changes to capital requirements (see risk factor above headed “The Group’s business performance could be adversely affected if its capital is not managed effectively or if there are changes to capital adequacy and liquidity requirements”). Those proposals included a requirement that deferred tax assets which rely on future profitability of the Group to be realised should be deducted from the common equity component of Tier 1 and therefore not count towards Tier 1 capital.

RBS has also entered into a credit derivative and a financial guarantee contract with The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V., which is a subsidiary undertaking of RBSG, under which it has sold credit protection over the exposures held by The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V. and its subsidiaries that are subject to the APS. These agreements may adversely affect the Issuer Group's results as: (a) they cover 100% of losses on these assets whilst the APS provides 90% protection if losses on the whole APS portfolio exceed the first loss; and (b) the basis of valuation of the APS and the financial guarantee contract are asymmetrical: the one measured at fair value and the other at the higher of cost less amortisation and the amount determined in accordance with IAS 37 “Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets”.

Since the APS is a unique form of credit protection over a complex range of diversified assets and exposures (the “Covered Assets”) in a number of jurisdictions and there is significant uncertainty about the duration and severity of the recent economic recession, there may be unforeseen issues and risks that may arise as a result of the Group’s participation in the APS and the impact of the APS on the Group’s business, operations and financial condition cannot be predicted with certainty. Such issues or risks may have a material adverse effect on the Group. Moreover, the Group’s choice of assets or exposures to be covered by the APS was based on predictions at the time of its accession to the APS regarding the performance of counterparties and assumptions about market dynamics and asset and liability pricing, all or some of which may prove to be inaccurate. There is, therefore, a risk that the Covered Assets will not be those with the greatest future losses or with the greatest need for protection and, as a result, the Group’s financial condition, income from operations and the value of any Securities may still suffer due to further impairments and credit write-downs.

The Group’s participation in the APS, together with the issue of £25.5 billion of B Shares in December 2009 and, if required, the £8 billion Contingent B Shares (as defined below), has improved its consolidated capital ratios. In the event that the Group’s Core Tier 1 capital ratio declines to below 5 per cent., and if certain conditions are met, HM Treasury is committed to subscribe (the “Contingent Subscription”) for up to an additional £8 billion of B Shares (the “Contingent B Shares”) and, in connection with such subscription, would receive further enhanced dividend rights under the associated series 1 dividend access share in the capital of the company (the “Dividend Access Share”). However, notwithstanding the Group’s participation in the APS and the issue of the £25.5 billion of B Shares and, if required, the issue of the £8 billion Contingent B, the Group remains exposed to a substantial first loss amount of £60 billion in respect of the Covered Assets and for 10 per cent. of Covered Assets losses after the first loss amount. In addition, as mentioned in the previous risk factor, the assets or exposures covered by the APS may not be those with the greatest future losses or with the greatest need for protection. Moreover, the Group continues to carry the risk of losses, impairments and write-downs with respect to assets not covered by the APS. Therefore, there can be no assurance that any regulatory capital benefits and the additional Core Tier 1 capital will be sufficient to maintain the Group’s capital ratios at the requisite levels in the event of further losses (even with the £8 billion Contingent B Shares). If the Group is unable to improve its capital ratios sufficiently or to maintain its capital ratios in the event of further losses, its business, results of operations and financial condition will suffer, its credit ratings may fall, its ability to lend and access funding will be further limited and its cost of funding may increase. The occurrence of any or all of such events may cause the price of the

Securities to decline substantially and may result in intervention by the Authorities, which could include full nationalisation or other resolution procedures under the Banking Act. Any compensation payable to holders of the Securities would be subject to the provisions of the Banking Act, and investors may receive no value for their Securities.

In the event that the Group’s Core Tier 1 capital ratio declines to below 5 per cent., HM Treasury is committed to subscribe for up to an additional £8 billion of Contingent B Shares if certain conditions are met. If such conditions are not met, and the Group is unable to issue the £8 billion Contingent B Shares, the Group may be unable to find alternative methods of obtaining protection for stressed losses against severe or prolonged recessionary periods in the economic cycle and improving its capital ratios, with the result that the Group may face increased risk of full nationalisation or other resolution procedures under the Banking Act.

In the event that the Group’s Core Tier 1 capital ratio declines to below 5 per cent., HM Treasury is committed to subscribe for up to an additional £8 billion of Contingent B Shares if certain conditions are met. Such conditions include that the European Commission’s decision that the State Aid is compatible with article 87 of the consolidated version of the Treaty establishing the European Community continues to be in force, that the European Commission has not opened a formal investigation under article 88(2) of such Treaty in relation to the possible misuse of State Aid, that there has been no breach by the company of the State Aid Commitment Deed and that no Termination Event has occurred.

If such conditions are not met, and the Group is unable to issue the £8 billion Contingent B Shares, the Group may be unable to find alternative methods of obtaining protection for stressed losses against severe or prolonged recessionary periods in the economic cycle and improving its capital ratios, with the result that the Group may face increased risk of full nationalisation or other resolution procedures under the Banking Act.

In these circumstances, if the Group is unable to issue the £8 billion Contingent B Shares, the Group will need to assess its strategic and operational position and will be required to find alternative methods for achieving the requisite capital ratios. Such methods could include an accelerated reduction in risk-weighted assets, disposals of certain businesses, increased issuance of Tier 1 capital securities, increased reliance on alternative government-supported liquidity schemes and other forms of government assistance. There can be no assurance that any of these alternative methods will be available or would be successful in increasing the Group’s capital ratios to the desired or requisite levels. If the Group is unable to issue the £8 billion Contingent B Shares, the Group’s business, results of operations, financial condition and capital position and ratios will suffer, its credit ratings may drop, its ability to lend and access funding will be further limited and its cost of funding may increase. The occurrence of any or all of such events may cause the price of the Securities to decline substantially and may result in intervention by the Authorities or other regulatory bodies in the other jurisdictions in which RBS and its subsidiaries operate, which could include full nationalisation, other resolution procedures under the Banking Act or revocation of permits and licences necessary to conduct the Group’s businesses. Any compensation payable to holders of Securities would be subject to the provisions of the Banking Act, and investors may receive no value for their Securities (see the risk factor headed “the company and its United Kingdom bank subsidiaries may face the risk of full nationalisation or other resolution procedures under the Banking Act 2009” above).

The Covered Assets comprise a wide variety and a very large number of complex assets and exposures. As a result of the significant volume, variety and complexity of assets and exposures and the resulting complexity of the Scheme Documents, there is a risk that the Group may have included assets or exposures within the Covered Assets that are not eligible for protection under the APS, with the result that such assets or exposures may not be protected by the APS. Furthermore, if Covered Assets are not correctly or sufficiently logged or described for the purposes of the APS, protection under the APS may, in certain circumstances and subject to certain conditions, not be available or may be limited, including by potentially being limited to the terms of the assets “as logged”. If a Covered Asset is disposed of prior to the occurrence of a failure to pay, a bankruptcy or a restructuring, as described in the UK Asset Protection Scheme Terms and Conditions (the “Scheme Conditions”) (a “Trigger”) in respect of that Covered Asset, the Group will also lose protection under the APS in respect of that disposed asset or, if the Covered Asset is disposed of in part, in respect of that disposed part of the Covered Asset or in some circumstances all of the Covered Asset, in each case with no rebate of the fee payable to HM Treasury, unless an agreement otherwise is reached with HM Treasury at the relevant time. Moreover, since the terms of the credit protection available under the APS are broad and general (given the scale and purpose of the APS and the wide variety and very large number of complex assets and exposures intended to be included as Covered Assets) and also very complex and in some instances operationally restrictive, certain Scheme Conditions may not apply to particular assets, exposures or operational scenarios or their applicability may be uncertain (for example, in respect of overdrafts). In addition, many of these provisions apply from 31 December 2008 and therefore may not have been complied with between this date and the date of the Group’s accession to the APS on 22 December 2009. In each case this may result in a loss or reduction of protection. There are certain limited terms and conditions of the Scheme Conditions which are framed in such a way that may give rise to lack of legal certainty. Furthermore, if a member of the Group becomes aware after due and reasonable enquiry that there has been any material or systemic criminal conduct on the part of the Group (including its directors, officers and employees) relating to or affecting any of the Covered Assets, some or all of those assets may cease to be protected by the APS. HM Treasury may also require the withdrawal or the company may itself consider it necessary to withdraw Covered Assets held in certain jurisdictions where disclosure of certain information to HM Treasury may result in a breach of banking secrecy, confidentiality, data protection or similar laws. In addition, at the time of accession to the APS, approximately £3 billion of derivative and structured finance assets were identified as having been included in the APS which, for technical reasons, did not or which were anticipated at some stage not to, satisfy the eligibility requirements specified in the Scheme Documents. HM Treasury and the company agreed to negotiate in good faith to establish as soon as practicable whether (and if so, to what extent) coverage should extend to these derivative assets. These negotiations remain ongoing. The £3 billion of derivative and structured finance assets referred to above were in addition to approximately £1.2 billion of Covered Assets across a broad range of asset classes which were withdrawn from the APS at the time of accession.

The effect of (i) failures to be eligible and/or to log or correctly describe Covered Assets, (ii) disposals of Covered Assets prior to a Trigger, (iii) the uncertainty of certain Scheme Conditions and the exclusion of certain assets and exposures from the APS and potential lack of legal certainty, (iv) the occurrence of material or systemic criminal conduct on the part of the company or its representatives relating to or affecting Covered Assets or breach of banking secrecy, confidentiality, data protection or similar laws and (v) failure or potential failure of HM Treasury and the company to

reach agreement in respect of whether (and if so, to what extent) cover should extend to certain ineligible assets, may (or, in respect of assets which HM Treasury and the company have agreed are ineligible, will) impact the enforceability and/or level of protection available to the Group and may materially reduce the protection anticipated by the Group for its stressed losses. Further, there is no ability to nominate additional or alternative assets or exposures in place of those which turn out not to be covered under the APS. If the Group is then unable to find alternative methods for improving and maintaining its capital ratios, its business, results of operations and financial condition will suffer, its credit ratings may drop, its ability to lend and access funding will be further limited and its cost of funding may increase. The occurrence of any or all of such events may cause the price of the Securities to decline substantially and may result in intervention by the Authorities, which could include full nationalisation or other resolution procedures under the Banking Act. Any compensation payable to holders of Securities would be subject to the provisions of the Banking Act, and investors may receive no value for their Securities.

The Group is subject to limitations on actions it can take in respect of the Covered Assets and certain related assets and to extensive continuing obligations under the Scheme Conditions relating to governance, asset management, audit and reporting. The Group’s compliance with the Scheme Conditions is dependent on its ability to (i) implement efficiently and accurately new approval processes and reporting, governance and management systems in accordance with the Scheme Conditions and (ii) comply with applicable laws and regulations where it does business. The Group has complex and geographically diverse operations, and operational risk in the context of the APS may result from errors by employees or third-parties, failure to document transactions or procedures properly or to obtain proper authorisations in accordance with the Scheme Conditions, equipment failures or the inadequacy or failure of systems and controls. Although the Group has devoted substantial financial and operational resources, and intends to devote further substantial resources, to developing efficient procedures to deal with the requirements of the APS and to training staff, it is not possible to be certain that such actions will be effective to control each of the operational risks faced by the Group or to provide the necessary information in the necessary time periods in the context of the APS. Since the Group’s operational systems were not originally designed to facilitate compliance with these extensive continuing obligations, there is a risk that the Group will fail to comply with a number of these obligations. This risk is particularly acute in the period immediately following the APS becoming effective. Certain of the reporting requirements, in particular, are broad in their required scope and challenging in their required timing. There is, as a result, a real possibility that the Group, at least initially, will not be able to achieve full compliance. Where the Group is in breach of its continuing obligations under the Scheme Conditions in respect of any of the Covered Assets, related assets or other obligations, or otherwise unable to provide or verify information required under the APS within the requisite time periods, recovery of losses under the APS may be adversely impacted, may lead to an indemnity claim and HM Treasury may in addition have the right to exercise certain step-in rights, including the right to require the Group to appoint a step-in manager who may exercise oversight, direct management rights and certain other rights including the right to modify certain of the Group’s strategies, policies or systems. Therefore, there is a risk that Covered Assets in relation to which the Group has failed to comply with its continuing obligations under the Scheme Conditions, will not be protected or fully protected by the APS. As there is no ability to nominate additional or alternative assets or exposures for cover under the APS, the effect of such failures will impact the level of protection available to the Group and may reduce or eliminate in its entirety the protection anticipated by the Group for its stressed losses, in which case its business, results of operations and financial condition will suffer, its credit ratings may drop, its ability to lend and access funding will be further limited and its cost of funding may increase. The occurrence of any or all of such events may cause the price of the Securities to decline substantially and may result in intervention by the Authorities, which could include full nationalisation or other resolution procedures under the Banking Act. Any compensation payable to holders of Securities would be subject to the provisions of the Banking Act, and investors may receive no value for their Securities.

HM Treasury may, following consultation with the Group, modify or replace certain of the Scheme Conditions in such a manner as it considers necessary (acting reasonably) to:

HM Treasury can only effect a modification or replacement of a Scheme Condition if (i) it is consistent with each of the Scheme Principles, (ii) there has been no formal notification from the FSA that such modification would result in any protection provided to the Group under the APS ceasing to satisfy certain requirements for eligible credit risk mitigation and (iii) HM Treasury has considered in good faith and had regard to any submissions, communications or representations of or made by the Group regarding the anticipated impact of the proposed modification under any non-United Kingdom capital adequacy regime which is binding on the company or a Covered Entity.

Such modifications or replacements may be retrospective and may result in a loss of or reduction in the protection expected by the Group under the APS in relation to certain Covered Assets, an increase in the risk weightings of the Covered Assets (either in the United Kingdom or overseas), a material increase in the continuing reporting obligations or asset management conditions applicable to the Group under the Scheme Conditions or a material increase in the expenses incurred or costs payable by the Group under the APS. Modifications by HM Treasury of the Scheme Conditions could result in restrictions or limitations on the Group’s operations. The consequences of any such modifications by HM Treasury are impossible to quantify and are difficult to predict and may have a material adverse effect on the Group’s financial condition and results of operations.

One of the key objectives of the APS and the issuance of £25.5 billion of B Shares in December 2009 and, if required, the £8 billion Contingent B Shares was to improve capital ratios at a consolidated level for the Group and at an individual level for certain relevant Group members. The Group has entered and may in the future enter into further back-to-back arrangements with Group members holding assets or exposures to be covered by the APS in order to ensure the capital ratios of these entities are also improved by virtue of the APS. As the APS and certain of the associated back-to-back arrangements are a unique form of credit protection over a complex range of diversified Covered Assets in a number of jurisdictions, there is a risk that the interpretation of the relevant regulatory capital requirements by one or more of the relevant regulatory authorities may differ from that assumed by the Group, with the result that the anticipated improvement to the Group’s capital ratios will not be fully achieved. There is a further risk that, given that the current regulatory capital requirements and the regulatory bodies governing these requirements are subject to unprecedented levels of review and scrutiny both globally and locally, regulatory capital treatment that differs from that assumed by the Group in respect of the APS, the treatment of the B Share issuance or the back-to-back arrangement may also occur because of changes in law or regulation, regulatory bodies or interpretation of the regulatory capital regimes applicable to the Group and/or the APS and/or the B Shares and/or the back-to-back arrangements described above. If participation in the APS and the issuance of £25.5 billion of B Shares and, if required, the £8 billion Contingent B Shares are not sufficient to maintain the Group’s capital ratios, this could cause the Group’s business, results of operations and financial condition to suffer, its credit rating to drop, its ability to lend and access to funding to be further limited and its cost of funding to increase. The occurrence of any or all of such events may cause the price of the Securities to decline substantially and may result in intervention by the Authorities, which could include full nationalisation or other resolution procedures under the Banking Act. Any compensation payable to holders of Securities would be subject to the provisions of the Banking Act and investors may receive no value for their Securities.

The costs of participating in the APS incurred by the Group to HM Treasury include a fee of £700 million per annum, payable in advance for the first three years of the APS and £500 million per annum thereafter until the earlier of (i) the date of termination of the APS and (ii) 31 December 2099. The fee may be paid in cash or, subject to HM Treasury consent, by the waiver of certain United Kingdom tax reliefs that are treated as deferred tax assets (pursuant to three agreements which provide the right, at the company’s option, subject to HM Treasury consent, to satisfy all or part of the annual fee in respect of the APS and £8 billion of Contingent B Shares, and the exit fee payable in connection with any termination of the Group’s participation in the APS, by waiving the right to certain United Kingdom tax reliefs that are treated as deferred tax assets (“Tax Loss Waiver”)) or be funded by a further issue of B Shares to HM Treasury. The Group has paid in cash the fee of £1.4 billion in respect of 2009 and 2010. On termination of the Group’s participation in the APS, the fees described in the risk factor below headed “The Group may have to repay any net pay-outs made by HM Treasury under the APS in order to terminate its participation in the APS” will apply. Furthermore, the Group may be subject to additional liabilities in connection with the associated intra group arrangements. Significant costs either have been or will also be incurred in (i) establishing the APS (including a portion of HM Treasury’s costs attributed to the Group by HM Treasury), (ii) implementing the APS, including the Group’s internal systems building and as a consequence of its on-going management and administration obligations under the Scheme Conditions, such as complying with (a) the extensive governance, reporting, auditing and other continuing obligations of the APS and (b) the asset management objective which is generally applied at all times to the Covered Assets and will require increased lending in certain circumstances and (iii) paying the five-year annual fee for the £8 billion of Contingent B Shares of £320 million less 4 per cent. of: (a) the value of any B Shares subscribed for under the Contingent Subscription; and (b) the amount by which the Contingent Subscription has been reduced pursuant to any exercise by the company of a partial termination of the Contingent Subscription (payable in cash or, with HM Treasury’s consent, by waiving certain United Kingdom tax reliefs that are treated as deferred tax assets (pursuant to the Tax Loss Waiver), or funded by a further issue of B Shares to HM Treasury). In addition, there will be ongoing expenses associated with compliance with the Scheme Conditions, including the company’s and HM Treasury’s professional advisers’ costs and expenses. These expenses are expected to be significant due to the complexity of the APS, the need to enhance the Group’s existing systems in order to comply with reporting obligations required by the APS and the Group’s obligations under the Scheme Conditions to pay HM Treasury’s and its advisers’ costs in relation to the APS. In addition, the Group has certain other financial exposures in connection with the APS including (i) an obligation to indemnify HM Treasury, any governmental entity or their representatives and (ii) for the minimum two-year period from a Trigger until payment is made by HM Treasury under the APS, exposure to the funding costs of retaining assets and exposures on its balance sheet whilst receiving interest based on the “Sterling General Collateral Repo Rate” as displayed on the Bloomberg service, or such other rate as may be notified by HM Treasury from time to time as reflecting its costs of funds. The aggregate effect of the joining, establishment and operational costs of the APS and the on-going costs and expenses, including professional advisers’ costs, may significantly reduce or even eliminate the anticipated amounts to be received by the Group under the APS.

The amounts received under the APS (which amounts are difficult to quantify precisely) may be less than the costs of participation, as described above. There are other, non-cash, anticipated benefits of the Group’s participation, which include the regulatory capital benefits referred to above and the potential protection from future losses, which are themselves also difficult to quantify.

During its participation in the APS, RBS will pay an annual participation fee to HM Treasury. The annual fee, which is payable in advance, is £700 million per annum for the first three years of the Group’s participation in the APS and £500 million per annum thereafter until the earlier of (i) the date of termination of the APS and (ii) 31 December 2099. The Group has paid in cash the fee of £1.4 billion in respect of 2009 and 2010. Pursuant to the Accession Agreement and the Tax Loss Waiver, subject to HM Treasury consent, all or part of the exit fee (but not the refund of the net payments the Group has received from HM Treasury under the APS) may be paid by the waiver of certain United Kingdom tax reliefs that are treated as deferred tax assets (pursuant to the Tax Loss Waiver). The directors of the company may, in the future, conclude that the cost of this annual fee, in combination with the other costs of the Group’s participation in the APS, outweighs the benefits of the Group’s continued participation and therefore that the Group’s participation in the APS should be terminated. However, in order to terminate the Group’s participation in the APS, the Group must have FSA approval and pay an exit fee which is an amount equal to (a) the larger of (i) the cumulative aggregate fee of £2.5 billion and (ii) 10 per cent. of the annual aggregate reduction in Pillar I capital requirements in respect of the assets covered by the APS up to the time of exit less (b) the aggregate of the annual fees paid up to the date of exit. In the event that the Group has received payments from HM Treasury under the APS in respect of losses on any Covered Assets in respect of which a Trigger occurs (“Triggered Assets”), it must either negotiate a satisfactory exit payment to exit the APS, or absent such agreement, refund to HM Treasury any net payments made by HM Treasury under the APS in respect of losses on the Triggered Assets.

The effect of the payment of the exit fee and potentially the refund of the net pay-outs it has received from HM Treasury under the APS may significantly reduce or even eliminate the anticipated further regulatory capital benefits to the Group of its participation in the APS or if FSA approval for the proposed termination is not obtained and could have an adverse impact on the Group’s financial condition and results of operation

or result in a loss of value in the Securities. Alternatively, if the Group is unable to repay to HM Treasury in full the exit fee and potentially the net pay-outs it has received under the APS and, therefore, unable to terminate its participation in the APS, the Group will be required under the Scheme Conditions to continue to pay the annual fee to HM Treasury until 31 December 2099, which could have an adverse impact on the Group’s financial condition and results of operation or result in a loss of value in the Securities.

If HM Treasury seeks to exercise its right to appoint one or more step-in managers in relation to the management and administration of Covered Assets held by ABN AMRO or its wholly-owned subsidiaries, ABN AMRO will, in certain circumstances, need to seek consent from the Dutch Central Bank to allow it to comply with such step-in. If this consent is not obtained by the date (which will fall no less than 10 business days after the notice from HM Treasury) on which the step-in rights must be effective, and other options to effect compliance are not possible (at all or because the costs involved prove prohibitive), those assets would need to be withdrawn by the Group from the APS where permissible under the Scheme Conditions or, otherwise, with HM Treasury consent. If the Group cannot withdraw such Covered Assets from the APS, it would be likely to lose protection in respect of these assets under the APS and/or may be liable under its indemnity to HM Treasury. If the Group loses cover under the APS in respect of any Covered Asset held by ABN AMRO or its wholly-owned subsidiaries, any losses incurred on such asset will continue to be borne fully by the Group and may have a material adverse impact on its financial condition, profitability and capital ratios. Similar issues apply in certain other jurisdictions but the relevant Covered Assets are of a lower quantum.

Under the Scheme Conditions, the Group has extensive governance, asset management, audit and information obligations aimed at ensuring (amongst other things) that (i) there is no prejudice to, discrimination against, or disproportionate adverse effect on the management and administration of Covered Assets when compared with the management and administration of other assets of the Group that are outside of the APS and (ii) HM Treasury is able to manage and assess its exposure under the APS, perform any other functions within HM Treasury’s responsibilities or protect or enhance the stability of the United Kingdom financial system. Any information obtained by HM Treasury through its information rights under the APS may be further disclosed by HM Treasury to other government agencies, the United Kingdom Parliament, the European Commission, and more widely if HM Treasury determines that doing so is required, for example, to protect the stability of the United Kingdom financial system.

Moreover, HM Treasury has the right under the Scheme Conditions to appoint one or more step-in managers (identified or agreed to by HM Treasury) to exercise certain step-in rights upon the occurrence of certain specified events. The step-in rights are extensive and include certain oversight, investigation, approval and other rights, the right to require the modification or replacement of any of the systems, controls, processes and practices of the Group and extensive rights in relation to the direct management and administration of the Covered Assets. For further information on these rights. If the Group does not comply with the instructions of the step-in manager, once appointed, the Group may lose protection under the APS in respect of all or some of the Covered Assets. The step-in manager may be a person identified by HM Treasury and not by the company.

The payment obligations of HM Treasury under the Scheme Documents are capable of being transferred to any third party (provided the transfer does not affect the risk weightings the Group is entitled to apply to its exposures to Covered Assets). The step-in rights, together with all other monitoring, administration and enforcement rights, powers and discretions of HM Treasury under the Scheme Documents, are capable of being transferred to any government entity.

The obligations of the Group and the rights of HM Treasury may, individually or in the aggregate, impact the way the Group runs its business and may serve to limit the Group’s operations with the result that the Group’s business, results of operations and financial condition will suffer.

On 22 December 2009, the company issued £25.5 billion of B Shares to HM Treasury. The B Shares are convertible, at the option of the holder at any time, into Ordinary Shares at an initial conversion price of £0.50 per Ordinary Share. Although HM Treasury has agreed not to convert any B Shares it holds if, as a result of such conversion, it would hold more than 75 per cent. of the Ordinary Shares, if HM Treasury were to acquire additional ordinary shares otherwise than through the conversion of the B Shares, such additional acquisitions could significantly increase HM Treasury’s ownership interest in the company to above 75 per cent. of the company’s ordinary issued share capital, which would put the company in breach of the FSA’s Listing Rules requirement that at least 25 per cent. of its issued ordinary share capital must be in public hands. Although the company may apply to the UK Listing Authority for a waiver in such circumstances, there is no guarantee that such a waiver would be granted, the result of which could be the delisting of the company from the Official List and potentially other exchanges where its Securities are currently listed and traded. In addition, HM Treasury will not be entitled to vote in respect of the B Shares or in respect of the Dividend Access Share to the extent, but only to the extent, that votes cast on such B Shares and/or on such Dividend Access Share, together with any other votes which HM Treasury is entitled to cast in respect of any other Ordinary Shares held by or on behalf of HM Treasury, would exceed 75 per cent. of the total votes eligible to be cast on a resolution presented at a general meeting of the company. In addition, holders of the B Shares will only be entitled to receive notice of and to attend any general meeting of the company and to speak to or vote upon any resolution proposed at such meeting if a resolution is proposed which either varies or abrogates any of the rights and restrictions attached to the B Shares or proposes the winding up of the company (and then in each such case only to speak and vote upon any such resolution).

The Group expects that significant senior management and key employee time and resources will have to be committed to the ongoing operation of the APS, including governance, asset management and reporting and generally to ensure compliance with the Scheme Conditions. The time and resources required to be committed to the APS by the Group’s senior management and other key employees is likely to place significant additional demands on senior management in addition to the time and resources required to be dedicated to the rest of the Group’s business. In addition, and separately from the Group’s participation in the APS, significant headcount reductions are being introduced at all levels of

management in the context of a restructuring of the Group. The Group’s ability to implement its overall strategy depends on the availability of its senior management and other key employees. If the Group is unable to dedicate sufficient senior management resources to the Group’s business outside the APS, its business, results of operations and financial condition will suffer.

It is difficult to value accurately the cost to the Group if it opts, subject to HM Treasury consent, to satisfy the annual fee in respect of both the APS and the Contingent Subscription and any exit fee (payable to terminate the Group’s participation in the APS) by waiving certain United Kingdom tax reliefs that are treated as deferred tax assets pursuant to the Tax Loss Waiver. The cost will depend on unascertainable factors including the extent of future losses, the extent to which the Group regains profitability and any changes in tax law. In addition to suffering greater tax liabilities in future years as a result of the Tax Loss Waiver, the Group may also be subject to further tax liabilities in the United Kingdom and overseas in connection with the APS and the associated intra-group arrangements which would not otherwise have arisen. The Tax Loss Waiver provides that the Group will not be permitted to enter into arrangements which have a main purpose of reducing the net cost of the Tax Loss Waiver. It is unclear precisely how these restrictions will apply, but it is possible that they may limit the operations and future post-tax profitability of the Group.

The Scheme Conditions require that certain information in relation to the Covered Assets be disclosed to HM Treasury to enable HM Treasury to quantify, manage and assess its exposure under the APS. The FSA has issued notices to the Group requiring the information that HM Treasury required under the Scheme Documents prior to the Group’s accession to and participation in the APS (and certain other information which HM Treasury requires under the Scheme Documents following the Group’s accession), be provided to it through its powers under the FSMA and the Banking Act. To the extent regulated by the FSA, the Group has a legal obligation to comply with these disclosure requests from the FSA. However, in complying with these disclosure obligations and providing such information to the FSA, the Group may, in certain jurisdictions, incur the risk of civil suits or regulatory action (which could include fines) to the extent that disclosing information related to the Covered Assets results in the Group breaching common law or statutory confidentiality laws, contractual undertakings, data protection laws, banking secrecy and other laws restricting disclosure. There can be no guarantee that future requests for information will not be made by the FSA in the same manner. Requests made directly by HM Treasury pursuant to the terms of the APS are likely to expose the Group to a greater risk of such suits or regulatory action. Adverse regulatory action or adverse judgments in litigation could result in a material adverse effect on the Group’s reputation or results of operations or result in a loss of value in the Securities. Alternatively, in order to avoid the risk of such civil suits or regulatory actions or to avoid the risk of criminal liability, the Group may choose to or (in the case of criminal liability) be required to remove Covered Assets from the APS so as not to be required to disclose to HM Treasury, such information, with the result that such assets will not be protected by the APS. The effect of the removal of such Covered Assets will impact the level of protection available to the Group and may materially reduce the protection anticipated by the Group for its stressed losses, in which case its business, results of operations and financial condition will suffer.

Where the Group discloses information to HM Treasury as set out above, HM Treasury may disclose that information to a number of third parties for certain specified purposes. Such disclosures by HM Treasury may put the Group in breach of common law or statutory confidentiality laws, contractual undertakings, data protection laws, banking secrecy or other laws restricting disclosure.

As discussed on page 2, the results of ABN AMRO are fully consolidated in the Group’s financial statements. Consequently, the results of RBS for the year ended 31 December 2009 and 2008 include the results of ABN AMRO for the full year, and for the year ended 31 December 2007 include the results of ABN AMRO for 76 days. The interests of the State of the Netherlands and Santander in RFS Holdings are included in minority interests.

Operating loss before tax for the year was £2,595 million compared with a loss of £40,836 million in 2008. The reduction in the loss is primarily a result of a substantial increase in non-interest income and a substantial fall in the write-down of goodwill and other intangible assets partially offset by a significant increase in impairment losses and lower net interest income.

After tax, minority interests and preference share and other dividends, the loss attributable to ordinary and B shareholders was £3,607 million, compared with an attributable loss of £24,306 million in 2008.

Total income increased 50% to £38,690 million in 2009 primarily reflecting a significant reduction in credit and other market losses and a gain on redemption of own debt. Increased market volatility and strong customer demand in a positive trading environment also contributed to this improvement. While income was down marginally in UK Corporate and held steady in Retail & Commercial Banking and RBS Insurance, a significant improvement occurred in Global Banking & Markets, reflecting the reduced credit and other market losses and a more buoyant trading market during the year compared to 2008.

Net interest income fell by 12% to £16,504 million, with average loans and advances to customers stable and average customer deposits down 1%. Group net interest margin fell from 2.12% to 1.83% largely reflecting the pressure on liability margins, given rates on many deposit products already at floors in the low interest rate environment, and strong competition, particularly for longer-term deposits and the build up of the Group’s liquidity portfolio.

Non-interest income increased to £22,186 million from £7,193 million in 2008, largely reflecting the sharp improvement in income from trading activities, as improved asset valuations led to lower credit market losses and GBM benefited from the restructuring of its business to focus on core customer franchises. The Group also recorded a gain of £3,790 million on a liability management exercise to redeem a number of Tier 1 and upper Tier 2 securities. However, fees and commissions fell as a result of the withdrawal of the single premium payment protection insurance product and the restructuring of UK current account overdraft fees, offset by higher fees in businesses attributable to RFS Holdings minority interest..

Total operating expenses decreased from £54,202 million in 2008 to £21,478 million, largely resulting from the substantial decrease in the write-down of goodwill and other intangible assets, down to £363 million compared with £32,581 million in 2008. Staff costs, excluding curtailment gains, were up 13% with most of the movement relating to adverse movements in foreign exchange rates and some salary inflation. Changes in incentive compensation, primarily in Global Banking & Markets, represented most of the remaining change. This was offset by a gain of £2,148 million arising from the curtailment of prospective pension benefits in the defined benefit scheme and certain other subsidiary schemes. The Group cost:income ratio improved to 56%, compared with 210% in 2008.

Bancassurance and general insurance claims, after reinsurance, increased by 10% to £4,857 million.

Impairment losses increased to £14,950 million from £8,072 million in 2008, with Core bank impairments rising by £2,182 million, Non-Core by £4,285 million and RFS Holdings minority interest by £411 million. Signs that impairments might be plateauing appear to have been borne out in the latter part of the year, and there are indications that the pace of downwards credit rating migration for corporates is slowing. Nonetheless, the financial circumstances of many consumers and businesses remain fragile, and rising refinancing costs, whether as a result of monetary tightening or of increased regulatory capital requirements, could expose some customers to further difficulty.

Impairments represented 2.0% of gross loans and advances, excluding reverse repos, in 2009 compared with 0.8% in 2008.

Risk elements in lending and potential problem loans at 31 December 2009 represented 5.5% of loans and advances, excluding reverse repos, compared with 2.5% a year earlier. Provision coverage was 44%, compared with 51% at 31 December 2008 as a consequence of the growth in risk elements in lending being concentrated in secured, property-related loans. These loans require relatively lower provisions in view of their collateralised nature.

The effective tax rate for 2009 was 14.3% compared with 5.7% in 2008.

Basic earnings per ordinary and B share, including discontinued operations, improved from a loss of 146.7p to a loss of 6.4p.

Total assets of £1,696.5 billion at 31 December 2009 were down £705.2 billion, 29%, compared with 31 December 2008, principally reflecting substantial repayments of customer loans and advances, as corporate customer demand fell and corporates looked to deleverage their balance sheets. Lending to banks also fell in line with significantly reduced wholesale funding activity. There were also significant falls in the value of derivative assets, with a corresponding reduction in derivative liabilities.

Loans and advances to banks decreased by £46.4 billion, 34%, to £91.8 billion with reverse repurchase agreements and stock borrowing (‘reverse repos’) down by £23.7 billion, 40% to £35.1 billion and lower bank placings, down £22.7 billion, 29%, to £56.7 billion, largely as a result of reduced wholesale funding activity in Global Banking & Markets.

Loans and advances to customers were down £146.3 billion, 17%, at £728.4 billion. Within this, reverse repos increased by 4%, £1.7 billion to £41.0 billion. Excluding reverse repos, lending decreased by £148.0 billion to £687.4 billion or by £141.8 billion, 17%, before impairment provisions.

Capital ratios at 31 December 2009 were 11.0% (Core Tier 1), 14.1% (Tier 1) and 16.1% (Total).

Operating loss before tax was £40,836 million compared with an operating profit before tax of £9,832 million in 2007. The results have been adversely affected by the write-down of goodwill and other assets, a substantial decline in non-interest income, a number of specific losses such as counterparty failures, and a marked increase in the credit impairment charge, reflecting weakness in financial markets and a deteriorating global economy.

Loss attributable to ordinary shareholders was £24,306 million, compared with an attributable profit of £7,303 million in 2007.

Total operating expenses rose to £54,202 million, with cost growth in the Group’s core retail and commercial banking franchises offset by efficiency programmes. Integration and restructuring costs were £1,357 million compared with £108 million in 2007. Write-down of goodwill and other assets was £32,581 million.

Bancassurance and general insurance claims, after reinsurance, decreased by 4% to £4,430 million, reflecting improved risk selection, better claims management and the non-recurrence of the severe floods experienced in 2007 and as a result of movements in financial market values.

These impairments have no cash impact, and minimal impact on the Group’s capital ratios.

Integration and restructuring costs totalled £1,357 million, primarily reflecting the integration of ABN AMRO into the Group, while the amortisation of purchased intangibles increased to £582 million from £124 million.

The Group recorded a tax credit of £2,323 million in 2008, compared with a tax charge of £2,044 million in 2007. The effective tax rate for 2008 was 5.7% compared with 20.8% in 2007.

Basic earnings per ordinary share, including discontinued operations, decreased from 64.0p to (146.7p).

The number of shares in issue increased to 39,456 million at 31 December 2008, compared with 10,006 million in issue at 31 December 2007, reflecting the Group’s capital raisings in June and December and the capitalisation issue in lieu of the interim dividend for 2008.

Volume and rate variances have been calculated based on movements in average balances over the period and changes in interest rates on average interest-earning assets and average interest-bearing liabilities. Changes due to a combination of volume and rate are allocated pro rata to volume and rate movements.

Net fees and commissions fell by £436 million primarily due to the withdrawal of the single premium payment protection insurance product and the restructuring of current account overdraft fees within UK Retail during the year, as well as to reduced fees received in Non-Core. This was partially offset by improved performance in GBM (£112 million) and US Retail & Commercial (£50 million).

Income from trading activities rose substantially during the year by £12,358 million, principally due to lower credit market losses reflecting improved underlying asset prices compared with 2008. Increased market volatility and strong customer demand in a positive trading environment also contributed to this improvement.

In the second quarter of 2009 the Group recorded a gain of £3,790 million on a liability management exercise to redeem a number of Tier 1 and upper Tier 2 securities.

Other operating income increased by £63 million. This improvement reflected a small gain in the fair value of securities and other assets and liabilities compared with a loss of £1.4 billion in 2008. This was partially offset by lower profits on sales of securities and properties and reduced dividend income, together with a loss on sale of subsidiaries and associates of £0.1 billion compared with a profit of £0.9 billion in 2008, which included a gain of £600 million on the sale of Angel Trains.

Insurance net premium income fell by £782 million principally reflecting lower bancassurance fees, and lower general insurance premiums.

Non-interest income, decreased by 61%, £11,104 million to £7,193 million. Non-interest income was severely affected by the weakness in financial markets experienced over the course of the year. While the decline was particularly marked in Global Banking & Markets and Non-Core credit markets and equities businesses, with reduced business volumes and mounting mark-to-market trading losses, UK Retail also saw non-interest income fall in the latter part of the year as declining consumer confidence led to lower demand for credit and other financial products.

Excluding general insurance premium income, non-interest income fell by £11,343 million to £867 million.

Income from trading activities was down from £1,292 million to a loss of £8,477 million. Currency trading activities benefited from increased volatility in the markets. However, this improvement was more than offset by substantial credit market write downs during the year.

Staff costs, excluding pension schemes curtailment gains, were up £1,373 million with most of the movement relating to adverse movements in foreign exchange rates and some salary inflation. Changes in incentive compensation, primarily in Global Banking & Markets, represented most of the remaining change.

Pension curtailment gains of £2,148 million were recognised in 2009 arising from changes to prospective pension benefits in the defined benefit scheme and certain other subsidiary schemes.

Premises and equipment costs rose by £494 million primarily due to the impact of expanded Group premises in London and the US.

Other expenses fell by £120 million due to integration benefits in GBM partially offset by increased deposit insurance levies in the US.