Or is the whole amount potentially going to be excluded when you calculate your rotate end of the year to assess delivery on that target. Thank you. Okay, thank you very much, #####. Why don’t I take those two and I’m sure ###### will add it if he wants to. So you’re right, there has been some considerable movement on the UK NIM, particularly over the last quarter. As I said, clearly that’s driven by customer deposit behaviour. I would highlight for you that as we look at UK NIM, we are actually looking at quite a narrow measure. So in comparison to our peers, remember, they would be including all of the corporate income and asset base within there. And so really you should be looking, as you make comparisons to the rest of the UK, you should be looking across both the UK and the corporate NIM position.
We don’t disclose the average rate paid on our deposits, although what we have given you this time to be more helpful is a split of our deposit balances and indeed how that has trended over time. And it’s showing very clearly that movement into term, as you would expect, and as many have commented from bank of England data on your second question. So to be clear, what we are not doing is giving any kind of PBT forecast for the fourth quarter here. It wouldn’t be appropriate for us to do so. Not least, we haven’t concluded our assessment of the structural actions that we may take. Merely what we’re calling out is a few things. Firstly, we’re clearly going into the fourth quarter with good Roti momentum. We’ve delivered 12.5% year to date, somewhat ahead of consensus.
However, the fourth quarter does have some seasonal impacts in it. So typically we see lower CIB income, typically we see higher impairment in US cards in particular, simply because of the seasonality in spending. We also see impacts from the bank levy. And we’ve just given you an indication that we see a continuation of deposit trends in the UK. So not saying anything more than that in that typically you expect Roti to be lower in the fourth quarter than in the preceding three. And to the extent that we take decisions in that fourth quarter, that may impact the Roti now, as we do so, we are very focused on future returns for the business. So our overall objective here is to improve the returns of the business through time. Clearly, efficiency and effectiveness is a key part of that.
So we’re just calling out our intention to continue that cost focus for the business. Yeah, and I cannot emphasize that last point that #### I cannot emphasize too much that last point which #### made, which is that think about this in terms of the investor update in February and the longer term plan for productivity and efficiency in this bank. If I could just follow up on the roti point first, please. I mean, the year to date you’ve done 4.4 billion profit. Your average tangible is probably going to be something like 47 billion for the year. So you’re pretty much all the way there to delivering a 10% royalty on the nine months to date. But to get to a point where you’re flagging to us that you might not do greater than ten for the full year unless I’m missing something there, the maths implies potentially very material restructuring charges.
Am I missing something there? It does seem in the context of a debate where I had some investors asking whether you might be announcing a surprise buy, this is obviously kind of top of mind for your investor base. How are you going to be balancing these things? Are we looking at potentially greater than a bit of restructuring or cost to achieve or whatever? We’re going to be titling it in the fourth quarter. That’s by the maths even, except the point about seasonality et. So, I understand the maths of what you’re putting in front of me. I’m going to say the same thing that we have not yet concluded on those plans. To the extent that we do, we will update the market further at full year, both in terms around the costs, but also the ongoing impact that we would expect them to have, just as investors do.
Distributions are top of our mind too, as ###### pointed out. So as we take these decisions, we will be extremely mindful. And as you said previously, we go into the fourth quarter very deliberately at the top end of our capital range. And on the deposit cost point. If I could on that as well, please. If I frame it slightly differently, how do you expect investors to be able to take a view on what might happen with the buk NIM unless we’re armed with some basic information about what you’re currently paying on deposits relative to the types of offers that are out there in the market. You’ll flag competitive offers as a key driver for the fact you’re re guiding them lower and seeing deposit attrition, but we don’t know how much better those rates are relative to what you’re currently paying or had been paying earlier in the.
So it’s very difficult for us to take a view on what’s going to without. So, all I would say is that we price competitively, but not uncommercially. If you look at our savings, pricing is very clearly indicated both on our website and indeed in any branch. You will see that we are competitively positioned across our term deposits, across our Isas, across our instant access, for example, rainy day saver. So we don’t genuinely believe that there’s something mispriced in our savings franchise. We’re happy with it. From quarter to quarter, you will see other competitors operating in a different way. Okay, thanks.
Operator: Okay, next question, please. The next question comes from [Indiscernible]from BNP Paribas. Please. Go ahead, guy. Your line is now open. Hi. Morning, everyone. A couple of questions on deposits.
Q – Unidentified Analyst: Firstly, the UK and then outside the UK. So first I’m trying to understand the comment that pricing played out as expected. Are you talking for Barclays or for the industry? As I would think about pricing and then movements and deposits for individual institutions as very much linked, had you priced up more in line with some peers than the balance move, wouldn’t have been such a headwind. So perhaps you could clarify that point. I’m just trying to think about in the context of how you might want to react more to protect balances in the future in a competitive marketplace and then outside the UK, clearly that was much stronger. Could you just give a bit more color around what you’re seeing, what the strategy is there and sort of are you having to pay up or is this very much profitable deposit growth that you’re seeing outside the UK?
Thank you. Okay, thanks guy. I’ll take both of those. So what I meant by the pricing was, as we expected, clearly we knew at Q Two, when we reported to you the price changes we were going to make, and therefore that deposit bucket, the one that’s called bank rate, is broadly as we expected it to be. Now, what subsequently happened to both the level and mix of deposits is much more driven by the external competitive environment. And that’s what we are calling out very similarly to what I just said to #####. We are happy with the overall level of our savings pricing. Our strategy is to encourage our customers to develop healthy savings habits. We are pricing to, as far as possible, maintain our franchise rather than attract hot money. And we will price competitively, but not uncommercially.
So to the extent that we see competitive pricing going in that direction, then obviously we would not follow it. I think the other thing just to put in the mix, as everybody is looking at the impact of buk NIM, please do not discount the impact of impairment. So all of this behaviour, this conservatism and behavior is also flowing through into the impairment line. And buk impairment has been lower than consensus for nine successive quarters. So just worth bearing that in mind. Second point that you asked about, which is around the deposit elsewhere in a high rate, persistently high inflationary environment, we would expect to see high level deposits flow from retail customers towards corporates. That’s exactly what we see. And given our franchise, that is what you’re observing.
So UK corporate deposits are very stable. You see some migration, but very stable in totality. And what we’ve seen in the quarter is a continued inflow more from global corporates. That’s particularly fairly long tenor term funding, competitively priced, but good for the deposit franchise overall. So, very much a continuation of what we called out actually in Q Two and indeed Q One.
Anna Cross: If I may just step in and emphasize the point #### made about the link between deposits and impairment. I think to me it’s one of the interesting things that we’ve seen, where we’ve seen people using their deposits to pay down debt, whether it’s mortgages or other things. One, it showed that they had the ability to do it. So obviously it’s helpful with impairments, but it also gives you an idea of the type of credit quality of customer we have, which I think is a good thing. So, as #### said, nine quarters continuously of positive surprises, meaning lower impairments than consensus in buk and people using deposits to pay down debt. It’s all a good thing about credit quality. Okay, thank you. Thank you, guy. Next question, please.
