Nomura Holdings 20-F 2010
Documents found in this filing:
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
For the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010
For the transition period from to
Date of event requiring this shell company report
Commission file number: 1-15270
Nomura Horudingusu Kabushiki Kaisha
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Nomura Holdings, Inc.
(Translation of registrants name into English)
Takumi Kitamura, 81-3-5255-1000, 81-3-3274-4496
(Name, Telephone, E-mail and/or Facsimile number and Address of Company Contact Person)
Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
(Title of Class)
Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act:
(Title of Class)
Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the issuers classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report.
As of March 31, 2010, 3,669,044,614 shares of Common Stock were outstanding, including 66,855,920 shares represented by 66,855,920 American Depositary Shares.
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. x Yes ¨ No
If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. ¨ Yes x No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ¨ No ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of accelerated filer and large accelerated filer in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial statements included in this filing:
If Other has been checked in response to the previous question, indicate by check mark which financial statement item the registrant has elected to follow. ¨ Item 17 ¨ Item 18
If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). ¨ Yes x No
TABLE OF CONTENTS
As used in this annual report, references to Nomura are to The Nomura Securities Co., Ltd. when the references relate to the period prior to, and including, September 30, 2001 and to Nomura Holdings, Inc. when the references relate to the period after, and including, October 1, 2001. See History and Development of the Company under Item 4.A of this annual report. Also, as used in this annual report, references to we, our and us are to Nomura and, except as the context otherwise requires, its subsidiaries.
As used in this annual report, yen or ¥ means the lawful currency of Japan, and dollar or $ means the lawful currency of the United States of America.
As used in this annual report, ADS means an American Depositary Share, currently representing one share of Nomuras common stock, and ADR means an American Depositary Receipt evidencing one or more ADSs. See Rights of Holders of ADSs under Item 10.B of this annual report.
Amounts shown in this annual report have been rounded to the nearest indicated digit unless otherwise specified. In tables and graphs with rounded figures, sums may not add up due to rounding.
Item 3. Key Information
A. Selected Financial Data.
The following table shows selected financial information as of and for the years ended March 31, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010 which is derived from our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. These financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (U.S. GAAP). Certain reclassifications of previously reported amounts have been made to conform to the current period presentation.
The selected consolidated financial information set forth below should be read in conjunction with Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects, in this annual report and our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in this annual report.
Fluctuations in exchange rates between the Japanese yen and U.S. dollar will affect the U.S. dollar equivalent of the yen price of our shares and ADSs and the U.S. dollar amounts received on conversion of cash dividends. We have translated certain Japanese yen amounts presented in this annual report into U.S. dollars solely for your convenience. The rate we used for the translations was ¥93.40 equal to $1.00, which was the noon buying rate in New York City for cable transfers in foreign currencies as certified for customs purposes by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on March 31, 2010. These translations do not imply that the yen amounts actually represent, or have been or could be converted into, equivalent amounts in U.S. dollars.
The noon buying rate for Japanese yen on June 25, 2010 was $1.00 = ¥89.35
B. Capitalization and Indebtedness.
C. Reasons for the Offer and Use of Proceeds.
D. Risk Factors.
You should carefully consider the risks described below before making an investment decision. If any of the risks described below actually occurs, our business, financial condition, results of operations or cashflow could be adversely affected. In that event, the trading prices of our shares could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment. In addition to the risks listed below, risks not currently known to us or that we now deem immaterial may also harm us and affect your investment.
Recent financial and credit crises and recessionary economies around the world have had, and may continue to have, adverse effects on our businesses, financial condition and results of operations
During 2008, particularly the second half of the year, the business environment was extremely adverse. Despite signs of recovery in the first half of 2009, the business environment remains extremely uncertain in the
medium to long term. Starting in mid-2007 in the United States and Europe, and particularly during the second half of 2008, the financial services industry and global securities markets were materially and adversely affected by significant declines in the values of nearly all asset classes and by a serious lack of liquidity. This was initially triggered by declines in the values of subprime mortgages in the U.S. market, but spread to all mortgage and real estate asset classes, to leveraged loans and to nearly all asset classes, including equities. While the markets have generally stabilized and improved over the course of 2009, the values of many asset classes have not returned to previous levels. Further, the markets have been facing new challenges arising out of concerns over certain sovereign risks and our business environment remains extremely uncertain in the medium to long term.
Market conditions have also led to the failure or merger of a number of prominent financial institutions, primarily in the United States. Financial institution failures or problems have resulted in further losses as a consequence of defaults on securities issued by them and defaults on derivatives and other contracts entered into with such entities. The geographic reach of such consequences has extended globally. In addition, the United States, large parts of Europe and Japan have experienced a significant downturn in their economies as a whole. Business activity across a wide range of industries and regions continues to be significantly reduced and many companies continue to be in serious difficulty due to the lack of demand for their products or services, primarily due to significantly reduced consumer spending, lack of liquidity in the credit markets and high unemployment rates. Any failure to achieve desired results from the recent government aid or stimulus programs around the world, or any phase-out or termination of such programs, could further adversely affect our business environment.
In response to these challenges in the business environment, we have been implementing several strategic initiatives. We are seeking to expand our client base, focusing on growing market share in client-driven flow businesses and continuing to review and reduce asset size through targeted disposition of assets not suited to our business focus. We are implementing cost reduction through selective downsizing with a concentration on core businesses in the short-term, as well as reengineering our business processes in the longer-term. There can be no assurance, however, that we will be able to carry out any of these strategic initiatives or that, even if they are carried out, they will have the intended effect or will be effective in addressing the difficulties we have or we may have under the current business environment. Also, there can be no assurance that the economic environment will not worsen in the future (as exemplified by the Greek debt crisis that manifested in the first half of calendar year 2010, adversely affecting the credibility of the euro currency and fostering financial doubts with regards to other countries), in which case our financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.
Market fluctuations could harm our businesses
Our businesses are materially affected by conditions in the financial markets and economic conditions in Japan and elsewhere around the world. Market downturns can occur not only as a result of purely economic factors, but also as a result of war, acts of terrorism, international tensions, natural disasters or other similar events. A sustained market downturn can adversely affect our business and can result in substantial losses. Even in the absence of a prolonged market downturn, we may incur substantial losses due to market volatility or governmental fiscal and monetary policy changes in Japan and other jurisdictions where we conduct business.
Our brokerage and asset management revenues may decline
A market downturn could result in a decline in the revenues concerning our intermediary business because of a decline in the volume and value of securities that we broker for our clients. Also, with regard to our asset management business, in most cases, we charge fees for managing our clients portfolios that are based on the value of their portfolios. A market downturn that reduces the value of our clients portfolios, increases the amount of withdrawals or reduces the amount of new investments in these portfolios would reduce the revenue we receive from our asset management businesses.
Our investment banking revenues may decline
Unfavorable financial or economic conditions would likely reduce the number and size of transactions for which we provide securities underwriting, financial advisory and other investment banking services. Our investment banking revenues, which include fees from these services, are directly related to the number and size of the transactions in which we participate and would therefore decrease if there is a sustained market downturn.
We may incur significant losses from our trading and investment activities
We maintain large trading and investment positions in fixed income, equity and other markets, both for our own account and for the purpose of facilitating our clients trades. Our positions consist of various types of assets, including financial derivatives transactions in equity, interest rate, currency, credit, commodity and other markets, as well as in loans and real estate. Fluctuations in the markets where these assets are traded can adversely affect the value of these assets. To the extent that we own assets, or have long positions, a market downturn could result in losses if the value of these long positions decreases. Furthermore, to the extent that we have sold assets we do not own, or have short positions, an upturn in the prices of the assets could expose us to potentially significant losses. Although we have worked to mitigate these position risks with a variety of hedging techniques, these market movements could result in losses. We can incur losses if the markets move in a way we have not anticipated, as a result of specific events such as the Russian economic crisis in 1998, and the global financial and credit crisis in the autumn of 2008. Also, we may face losses if the level of volatility of the markets where the foregoing assets are traded differs from our expectation, which may occur particularly in the emerging markets.
Our businesses have been and may continue to be affected by changes in market volatility levels. Certain of our trading businesses depend on market volatility to provide trading and arbitrage opportunities, and decreases in volatility may reduce these opportunities and adversely affect the results of these businesses. On the other hand, increased volatility, while it can increase trading volumes and spreads, also increases risk as measured by value at risk, or VaR, and may expose us to increased risks in connection with our market-making and proprietary businesses or cause us to reduce the size of these businesses in order to avoid increasing our VaR.
Furthermore, we commit capital to take relatively large positions for underwriting or warehousing assets to facilitate certain capital market transactions. Also, we structure and possess pilot funds for developing financial investment products and invest seed money to set up and support financial investment products. We may incur significant losses from these positions in the event of significant market fluctuations.
In addition, if we are the party providing collateral in a transaction, significant declines in the value of the collateral can increase our costs and reduce our profitability; and if we are the party receiving collateral, such declines can reduce our profitability by reducing the level of business done with our clients and counterparties.
Holding large and concentrated positions of securities and other assets may expose us to large losses
Holding a large amount of securities concentrated in specific assets can increase our risks and expose us to large losses in our businesses such as market-making, block trading, underwriting, asset securitization and acquiring newly-issued convertible bonds through third-party allotment. We have committed substantial amounts of capital to these businesses. This often requires us to take large positions in the securities of a particular issuer or issuers in a particular industry, country or region. In addition, we may incur substantial losses due to market fluctuations on asset-backed securities such as commercial mortgage-backed securities.
Extended market declines can reduce liquidity and lead to material losses
Extended market declines can reduce the level of market activity and the liquidity of the assets traded in the market. If we cannot properly close out our associated positions, particularly with respect to over-the-counter derivatives, we may incur substantial losses due to the difficulty of monitoring prices in a less liquid market.
Our hedging strategies may not prevent losses
We use a variety of instruments and strategies to hedge our exposure to various types of risk. If our hedging strategies are not effective, we may incur losses. We base many of our hedging strategies on historical trading patterns and correlations. For example, if we hold an asset, we may hedge this position by taking another asset which has, historically, moved in a direction that would offset a change in value of the former asset. However, historical trading patterns and correlations may not continue, as seen in the case of the global financial and credit crisis in the autumn of 2008, and these hedging strategies may not be fully effective in mitigating our risk exposure because we are exposed to all types of risk in a variety of market environments.
Our risk management policies and procedures may not be fully effective in managing market risk
Our policies and procedures to identify, monitor and manage risks may not be fully effective. Some of our methods of managing risk are based upon observed historical market behavior. This historical market behavior may not continue in future periods. As a result, we may suffer large losses by being unable to predict future risk exposures that could be significantly greater than the historical measures indicate. Other risk management methods that we use also rely on our evaluation of information regarding markets, clients or other matters, which is publicly available or otherwise accessible by us. This information may not be accurate, complete, up-to-date or properly evaluated, in which case we may be unable to properly assess our risks, and thereby suffer large losses. Furthermore, certain factors, such as market volatility, may render our risk evaluation model unsuitable for the new market environment. In such event, we may become unable to evaluate or otherwise manage our risks adequately.
Market risk may increase other risks that we face
In addition to the potentially adverse effects on our businesses described above, market risk could exacerbate other risks that we face. For example, the risks associated with new products developed through financial engineering/innovation may be increased by market risk.
Also, if we incur substantial trading losses caused by our exposure to market risk, our need for liquidity could rise sharply while our access to cash may be impaired as a result of market perception of our credit risk. Furthermore, in a market downturn, our clients and counterparties could incur substantial losses of their own, thereby weakening their financial condition and, as a result, increasing our credit risk exposure to them.
We may have to recognize impairment charges with regard to the amount of goodwill and intangible assets recorded on our consolidated balance sheets
We have purchased all or a part of the equity interests in, or certain operations from, certain other companies in order to pursue our business expansion, and expect to continue to do so when and as we deem appropriate. We account for each of those and similar purchases and acquisitions in conformity with U.S. GAAP, as a business combination, and allocate their acquisition costs to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed, and record the remaining amount as goodwill.
We may have to record impairment charges with regard to the amount of goodwill and intangible assets. Any impairment charges for goodwill or intangible assets we recognize, if recorded, may adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Liquidity risk could impair our ability to fund operations and jeopardize our financial condition
Liquidity, or having ready access to cash, is essential to our businesses. In addition to maintaining a readily available cash position, we seek to enhance our liquidity through repurchase and securities lending transactions,
access to long-term debt, issuance of long-term bonds, diversification of our short-term funding sources such as commercial paper, and by holding a portfolio of highly liquid assets. We bear the risk that we may lose liquidity under certain circumstances, including the following:
We may be unable to access the debt capital markets
We depend on continuous access to the short-term credit markets and the debt capital markets to finance our day-to-day operations. An inability to raise money in the long-term or short-term debt markets, or to engage in repurchase agreements and securities lending, could have a substantial negative effect on our liquidity. For example, lenders could refuse to extend the credit necessary for us to conduct our business based on their assessment of our long-term or short-term financial prospects if:
In addition to the above, our ability to borrow in the debt markets could also be impaired by factors that are not specific to us, such as increases in banks nonperforming loans which reduce their lending capacity, a severe disruption of the financial and credit markets which, among others, can lead to widening credit spreads and thereby increase our borrowing costs, or negative views about the general prospects for the investment banking, brokerage or financial services industries generally.
We may be unable to access the short-term debt markets
We depend primarily on the issuance of commercial paper and short-term bank loans as a principal source of unsecured short-term funding of our operations. Our liquidity depends largely on our ability to refinance these borrowings on a continuous basis. Investors who hold our outstanding commercial paper and other short-term debt instruments have no obligation to provide refinancing when the outstanding instruments mature. We may be unable to obtain short-term financing from banks to make up any shortfall.
We may be unable to sell assets
If we are unable to borrow in the debt capital markets or if our cash balances decline significantly, we will need to liquidate our assets or take other actions in order to meet our maturing liabilities. In volatile or uncertain market environments, overall market liquidity may decline. In a time of reduced market liquidity, we may be unable to sell some of our assets, which may adversely affect our liquidity or we may have to sell assets at depressed prices, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. Our ability to sell our assets may be impaired by other market participants seeking to sell similar assets into the market at the same time.
Lowering of our credit ratings could increase our borrowing costs
Our borrowing costs and our access to the debt capital markets depend significantly on our credit ratings. Rating agencies may reduce or withdraw their ratings or place us on credit watch with negative implications. This could increase our borrowing costs and limit our access to the capital markets. This, in turn, could reduce our earnings and adversely affect our liquidity.
Further, other factors which are not specific to us may increase our funding cost, such as negative market perception of Japanese fiscal soundness.
Event risk may cause losses in our trading and investment assets as well as market and liquidity risk
Event risk refers to potential losses in value we may suffer through unpredictable events that cause large unexpected market price movements. These include not only events such as the Russian economic crisis in 1998,
the terrorist attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001, U.S. subprime issues since 2007, and the global financial and credit crisis in the autumn of 2008, in each case adversely affecting our business, but also more generally the following types of events that could cause losses on our trading and investment assets:
Losses caused by financial or other problems of third parties may expose us to credit risk
Our counterparties are from time to time indebted to us as a result of transactions or contracts, including loans, commitments to lend, other contingent liabilities, and derivatives transactions such as swaps and options.
We may incur material losses when our counterparties default on their obligations to us due to bankruptcy, deterioration in their creditworthiness, lack of liquidity, operational failure, an economic or political event, or other reasons. This risk may arise from:
Problems related to third party credit risk may include the following:
Defaults by a large financial institution could adversely affect the financial markets generally and us specifically
The commercial soundness of many financial institutions is closely interrelated as a result of credit, trading, clearing or other relationships among the institutions. As a result, concern about the credit standing of, or a default by, one institution could lead to significant liquidity problems or losses in, or defaults by, other institutions. This may adversely affect financial intermediaries, such as clearing agencies, clearing houses, banks, securities firms and exchanges, with which we interact on a daily basis. Actual defaults, increases in perceived default risk and other similar events could arise in the future and could have an adverse effect on the financial markets and on us. Our finance operations may be damaged if major financial institutions, Japanese or otherwise, fail or experience severe liquidity or solvency problems.
There can be no assurance as to the accuracy of the information about, or the sufficiency of the collateral we use in managing, our credit risk
We regularly review our credit exposure to specific clients or counterparties and to specific countries and regions that we believe may present credit concerns. Default risk, however, may arise from events or circumstances that are difficult to detect, such as fraud. We may also fail to receive full information with respect to the risks of a counterparty. In addition, in cases where we have extended credit against collateral, we may fall into a deficiency in value in the collateral. For example, if sudden declines in market values reduce the value of our collateral, we may become undersecured.
Our clients and counterparties may be unable to perform their obligations to us as a result of political or economic conditions
Country, regional and political risks are components of credit risk, as well as market risk. Political or economic pressures in a country or region, including those arising from local market disruptions or currency crises, may adversely affect the ability of clients or counterparties located in that country or region to obtain credit or foreign exchange, and therefore to perform their obligations owed to us.
The financial services industry is intensely competitive and rapidly consolidating
Our businesses are intensely competitive, and we expect them to remain so. We compete on the basis of a number of factors, including transaction execution, our products and services, innovation, reputation and price. In recent years, we have experienced intense price competition, particularly in brokerage, investment banking and other businesses.
Competition with commercial banks, commercial bank-owned securities subsidiaries and non-Japanese firms in the Japanese market is increasing
Since the late 1990s, the financial services sector in Japan has been undergoing deregulation. Banks and other types of financial services firms can compete with us to a greater degree than they could before deregulation in the areas of financing and investment trusts. Among others, securities subsidiaries of commercial banks and non-Japanese firms have been affecting our market shares in the underwriting business, corporate advisory services in connection with M&A, and retail business.
Increased domestic and global consolidation in the financial services industry means increased competition for us
In recent years, there has been substantial consolidation and convergence among companies in the financial services industry. In particular, a number of large commercial banks, insurance companies and other broad-based financial services firms have established or acquired broker-dealers or have merged with other financial institutions in Japan and overseas. Particularly in Japan, a number of securities companies have allied with or been acquired by commercial banks, and non-Japanese commercial banks are enhancing their securities subsidiaries in Japan. Most of our major Japanese competitors are now owned by, or allied with, bank holding groups. Through such business alliances and consolidations, these other securities companies and commercial banks have the ability to offer a wide range of products, including loans, deposit-taking, insurance, brokerage, asset management and investment banking services within their group. This diversity of services offered may enhance their competitive position compared with us. They also have the ability to supplement their investment banking and brokerage businesses with commercial banking, insurance and other financial services revenues in an effort to gain market share. Our policy to remain independent from commercial banks may result in the loss of market share as these large, consolidated firms expand their business.
Our ability to expand internationally will depend on our ability to compete successfully with financial services firms in international markets
We believe that significant opportunities and challenges will arise for us outside of Japan. In order to take advantage of these opportunities, we will have to compete successfully with financial services firms based in important non-Japanese markets, including the United States, Europe and Asia. Some of these financial services firms are larger, better capitalized and have a stronger local presence and a longer operating history in these markets. As a means to bolster our international operations, we acquired certain Lehman operations, including some of the Lehman employees in Europe and the Middle East and a majority of the Lehman employees in Asia, as well as certain specialized service companies in India in 2008. There can be no assurance, however, that we
will successfully achieve the targeted synergies or other intended benefits from the acquisition of former Lehman operations as contemplated. In addition, we are currently rebuilding our operations in the United States. In particular, we are increasing headcount to service client-related businesses, including cross-border transactions such as sales in Europe or Asia of products originated in the United States and vice versa. We believe that U.S. build-out will be important to our global success due to continued global demand for U.S. products, and failure to expand and strengthen our operations in the United States may materially and adversely affect our global strategy.
Operational risk may disrupt our businesses, result in regulatory action against us or limit our growth
We face, for example, the following types of operational risk which could result in financial losses, disruption in our business, litigation from relevant parties, intervention in our business by the regulatory authorities, or damage to our reputation:
Our business is subject to substantial legal, regulatory and reputational risks
Substantial legal liability or a significant regulatory action against us could have a material financial effect or cause reputational harm to us, which in turn could seriously damage our business prospects. Also, material changes in regulations applicable to us or to our market could adversely affect our business.
Our exposure to legal liability is significant
We face significant legal risks in our businesses. These risks include liability under securities or other laws in connection with securities underwriting and offering transactions, liability arising from the purchase or sale of any securities or other products, disputes over the terms and conditions of complex trading arrangements or the validity of contracts for our transactions and legal claims concerning our financial advisory and merchant banking business.
During a prolonged market downturn, we would expect claims against us to increase. We may also face significant litigation. The cost of defending such litigation may be substantial and our involvement in litigation may damage our reputation. In addition, even legal transactions might be subject to social criticism according to the particulars or situations of such transactions. These risks may be difficult to assess or quantify and their existence and magnitude may remain unknown for substantial periods of time.
Extensive regulation of our businesses limits our activities and may subject us to significant penalties and losses
The financial services industry is subject to extensive regulation. We are subject to regulation by governmental and self-regulatory organizations in Japan and in virtually all other jurisdictions in which we operate, and such governmental and regulatory scrutiny may increase as our operations expand. These regulations are designed to ensure the integrity of the financial markets and to protect clients and other third
parties who deal with us. These regulations are not necessarily designed to protect our shareholders and often limit our activities, through net capital, client protection and market conduct requirements. We face the risk that regulatory authorities may intervene in our businesses through extended investigation and surveillance activity, adoption of costly or restrictive new regulations or judicial or administrative proceedings that may result in substantial penalties. We could be fined, prohibited from engaging in some of our business activities, ordered to improve our internal governance procedures, or be subject to the temporary or long-term suspension or revocation of our legal authorization to conduct business. Our reputation could also suffer from the adverse publicity that any administrative or judicial sanction against us may create. As a result of any such sanction, we may lose business opportunities for a period of time, even after the sanction is lifted, if and to the extent that our clients, especially public institutions, decide not to engage us for their financial transactions.
Material changes in regulations applicable to us or to our market could adversely affect our business
If regulations that apply to our businesses are introduced, modified or removed, we could be adversely affected directly or through resulting changes in market conditions. For example, in accordance with the amendments to the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (the FIEA), effective from December 1, 2004, banks and certain other financial institutions became able to act as agents of securities companies in the securities brokerage business. In addition, in accordance with the amendments to the FIEA effective from June 1, 2009, firewalls between commercial banks and securities firms were partially deregulated. Therefore, we may face increased competition as our competitors will be able to cooperate more closely with their affiliated commercial banks.
We currently calculate and disclose our consolidated capital adequacy ratio by applying the Financial Services Agency (FSA) capital adequacy rules applicable to bank holding companies with international operations, as allowed under the guideline published by the FSA. In July 2009, the Basel Committee approved a basic package of measures designed to strengthen its rules for capital adequacy measures, commonly referred to as Basel II, upon which the above-mentioned FSAs capital adequacy rules are based. Also, in December 2009, the Basel Committee announced consultative proposals to strengthen the resilience of the banking sector, laying out a new framework of capital and liquidity regulations in response to the global financial crisis. For more information about such measures, see Consolidated Regulatory Requirements under Item 5.B. of this annual report. Although specific rules implementing such measures designed to strengthen Basel II as well as the FSAs rules implementing such measures in Japan are yet to be finalized, as a result of the implementation of those new measures, our capital adequacy ratio may decrease or we may be required to liquidate assets, raise additional capital or otherwise restrict our business activities in a manner that could adversely increase our funding costs or could otherwise adversely affect our operating or financing activities or the interests of our shareholders.
The FSA amended the Comprehensive Guidelines for Supervision of the Financial Instruments Business Operators, etc. which became effective on March 4, 2010. Such amendment includes, among others, restrictions on the compensation systems of corporate groups of financial instruments firms engaging in international operations, including Nomura, which are designed to reduce excessive risk taking by their executives and employees. In addition, to improve the stability and transparency of Japans financial system and to ensure the protection of investors, another bill to amend the FIEA was passed by the Diet on May 12, 2010. The amendment is scheduled to become effective within one year, and is intended to strengthen group-wide regulation and supervision by introducing consolidated supervision of securities companies the size of which exceeds specified parameters. For more information about such amendments, see RegulationJapan under Item 4.B. of this annual report.
In addition, in response to the financial markets crisis, governments and regulatory authorities in various jurisdictions, such as the U.S. and the U.K., have made and continue to make numerous proposals to reform the regulatory framework for, or impose a tax or levy upon, the financial services industry to enhance its resilience against future crises, contribute to the relevant economy generally or for other purposes. For example, on June 25, 2010, a bi-partisan committee of the U.S. Congress agreed on a financial regulatory reform bill which,
among others, would: (i) restrict banks proprietary trading as well as investments in hedge funds and private equity funds; (ii) authorize a special assessment on financial institutions with more than $50 billion in assets, and hedge funds with more than $10 billion in assets; (iii) empower regulators to liquidate failing financial companies; (iv) provide for a broader regulatory oversight of hedge funds and credit rating agencies; (v) and create a tight new regulatory framework for derivatives. The committee bill is expected to be approved by both the House of Representatives and the Senate, allowing President Barack Obama to sign it into law before July 4, 2010. In the UK Emergency Budget Statement delivered on June 22, 2010, the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed a levy on the total liabilities of UK banks, which would include the UK entities of non-UK banks and banking groups. This is in line with initiatives on national bank levies recently taken by the Council of European Union and relates more broadly to a proposal regarding new taxes on financial institutions submitted to the governments of the Group of Twenty (G-20) by the International Monetary Fund. The impact of the regulations and legislation on us and our industry is still unknown and various countries where we operate (including Japan) could introduce similar measures. Tightening of regulations or introduction of new tax or levy applicable to us and our industry in many countries could adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.
Misconduct or fraud by an employee, director or officer, or any third party, could occur, and our reputation in the market and our relationships with clients could be harmed
We face the risk that misconduct by an employee, director or officer, or any third party, could occur which may adversely affect our business. Misconduct by an employee, director or officer can include, for example, entering into transactions in excess of authorized limits, acceptance of risks that exceed our limits, or concealment of unauthorized or unsuccessful activities. The misconduct could also involve, for example, the improper use or disclosure of our or our clients confidential information, such as insider trading, which could result in regulatory sanctions, legal liability and serious reputational or financial damage to us. We may not always be able to detect or deter misconduct by an employee, director or officer and the precautions we take to detect and prevent misconduct may not be effective in all cases. If any administrative or judicial sanction is issued against us as a result of such misconduct, we may lose business opportunities for a period of time, even after the sanction is lifted, if and to the extent that our clients, especially public institutions, decide not to engage us for their financial transactions.
Third parties may also engage in fraudulent activities, including devising a fraudulent scheme to induce our investment, loans, guarantee or any other form of our financial commitment, both direct and indirect. Because of the broad range of businesses that we engage in and the large number of third parties with whom we deal in our day-to-day business operations, such fraud or any other misconduct may be difficult to prevent or detect. We may not be able to recover the financial losses caused by such activities and our reputation may also be damaged by such activities.
Unauthorized disclosure of personal information held by us may adversely affect our business
We keep and manage personal information obtained from clients in connection with our business. In recent years, there have been many reported cases of personal information and records in the possession of corporations and institutions being improperly accessed or disclosed. We may have to provide compensation for economic loss and emotional distress arising out of a failure to protect such information in accordance with the Act on the Protection of Personal Information and rules, regulations and guidelines relating thereto.
Although we exercise care in protecting the confidentiality of personal information and take steps to safeguard such information, if any material unauthorized disclosure of personal information does occur, our business could be adversely affected in a number of ways. For example, we could be subject to complaints and lawsuits for damages from clients if they are adversely affected as a result of the release of their personal information. In addition, we could incur additional expenses associated with changing our security systems, either voluntarily or in response to administrative guidance or other regulatory initiatives, or in connection with
public relations campaigns designed to prevent or mitigate damage to our corporate or brand image or reputation. Any damage to our reputation caused by such unauthorized disclosure could lead to a decline in new clients and/or a loss of existing clients, as well as to increased costs and expenses in dealing with any such problems.
We are a holding company and depend on payments from our subsidiaries
We depend on dividends, distributions and other payments from our subsidiaries to fund dividend payments and to fund all payments on our obligations, including debt obligations. Regulatory and other legal restrictions may limit our ability to transfer funds freely, either to or from our subsidiaries. In particular, many of our subsidiaries, including our broker-dealer subsidiaries, are subject to laws and regulations that authorize regulatory bodies to block or reduce the flow of funds to the parent holding company, or that prohibit such transfers altogether in certain circumstances. These laws and regulations may hinder our ability to access funds that we may need to make payments on our obligations.
We may not be able to realize gains we expect, and may even suffer losses, on our private equity investments
We engage in private equity business in Japan and outside of Japan through fully owned subsidiaries and other consolidated entities which have third party pooling of funds. Decline of fair values of our investment positions, which could arise from deteriorating business performance of investee companies or any deterioration in the market conditions of these sectors, may cause material losses to us. Further, our inability to dispose of our private equity investments at the level and time we may wish could have a material impact on our operating results and financial condition.
We may not be able to dispose of our operating investments at the time or with the speed we would like
We hold substantial operating investments, which refer to investments in equity securities of companies not affiliated with us which we hold on a long-term basis in order to promote existing and potential business relationships. A substantial portion of these investments consists of equity securities of public companies in Japan. Under U.S. GAAP, depending on market conditions, we may record significant unrealized gains or losses on our operating investments, which would have a substantial impact on our consolidated statements of operations. Depending on the conditions of the Japanese equity markets, we may not be able to dispose of these equity securities when we would like to do so, as quickly as we may wish or at the desired values.
Equity investments in affiliates and other investees accounted for under the equity method in our consolidated financial statements may decline significantly over a period of time and result in us incurring an impairment loss
We have affiliates and investees, accounted for under the equity method in our consolidated financial statements, whose shares are publicly traded. Under U.S. GAAP, if there is a decline in the fair value, i.e., the market price, of the shares we hold in such affiliates over a period of time, and we determine that the decline is other-than-temporary, then we record an impairment loss for the applicable fiscal period.
We may face an outflow of clients assets due to losses of cash reserve funds or bonds we offered
We offer many types of products to meet various needs of our clients with different risk profiles. Cash reserve funds, such as money management funds and money reserve funds are categorized as low-risk products. Such cash reserve funds may fall below par value as a result of losses caused by the rise of interest rates or the withdrawals or defaults on bonds contained in the portfolio. In addition, bonds that we offer may default or experience delays in their obligation to pay interest and/or principal. Such losses in the products we offer may result in the loss of client confidence and lead to an outflow of client assets from our custody.
Because of daily price range limitations under Japanese stock exchange rules, you may not be able to sell your shares of Nomuras common stock at a particular price on any particular trading day, or at all
Stock prices on Japanese stock exchanges are determined on a real-time basis by the equilibrium between bids and offers. These exchanges are order-driven markets without specialists or market makers to guide price formation. For the purpose of protecting investors from excessive volatility, these exchanges set daily upward and downward price fluctuation limits for each stock, based on the previous days closing price. Although transactions may continue at the upward or downward limit price if the limit price is reached on a particular trading day, no transactions may take place outside these limits. Consequently, an investor wishing to sell at a price above or below the relevant daily limit may not be able to sell his or her shares at such price on a particular trading day, or at all.
Under Japans unit share system, holders of our shares constituting less than one unit are subject to transfer, voting and other restrictions
Pursuant to the Companies Act of Japan, or the Companies Act, relating to joint stock corporations and certain related legislation, our Articles of Incorporation provide that 100 shares of our stock constitute one unit. The Companies Act imposes significant restrictions and limitations on holdings of shares that constitute less than a whole unit. Holders of shares constituting less than one unit do not have the right to vote or any other right relating to voting. Under the unit share system, any holders of shares constituting less than a unit has the right to require us to purchase their shares. Also, any holders of shares constituting less than a unit may require us to sell them such number of shares as may be necessary to raise such holders share ownership to a whole unit. Shares constituting less than a unit are transferable under the Companies Act, but may not be traded on any Japanese stock exchange.
As a holder of ADSs, you will have fewer rights than a shareholder has and you will have to act through the depositary to exercise these rights
The rights of the shareholders under Japanese law to take actions including voting their shares, receiving dividends and distributions, bringing derivative actions, examining the companys accounting books and records and exercising appraisal rights are available only to holders of record. Because the depositary, through its custodian agent, is the record holder of the shares underlying the ADSs, only the depositary can exercise those rights in connection with the deposited shares. The depositary will make efforts to vote the shares underlying your ADSs as instructed by you and will pay you the dividends and distributions collected from us. However, in your capacity as an ADS holder, you will not be able to bring a derivative action, examine our accounting books and records or exercise appraisal rights except through the depositary.
Rights of shareholders under Japanese law may be more limited than under the laws of other jurisdictions
Our Articles of Incorporation, our Regulations of the Board of Directors and the Companies Act govern our corporate affairs. Legal principles relating to such matters as the validity of corporate procedures, directors and executive officers fiduciary duties and shareholders rights may be different from those that would apply if we were a non-Japanese company. Shareholders rights under Japanese law may not be as extensive as shareholders rights under the laws of other jurisdictions, including jurisdictions within the United States. You may have more difficulty in asserting your rights as a shareholder than you would as a shareholder of a corporation organized in another jurisdiction.
Our shareholders of record on a record date may not receive the dividend they anticipate
The customary dividend payout practice of publicly listed companies in Japan may significantly differ from that widely followed or otherwise deemed necessary or fair in foreign markets. Our dividend payout practice is no exception. We ultimately determine the actual dividend payment amount to our shareholders of record as of a
record date, including whether we will make any dividend payment to such shareholders at all, only after such record date. For the foregoing reasons, our shareholders of record on a record date may not receive the dividends they anticipate. Furthermore, we do not announce any dividend forecast.
It may not be possible for investors to effect service of process within the United States upon us or our directors or executive officers, or to enforce against us or those persons judgments obtained in United States courts predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the federal securities laws of the United States
We are a limited liability, joint-stock corporation incorporated under the laws of Japan. Most of our directors and executive officers reside in Japan. Many of our assets and the assets of these persons are located in Japan and elsewhere outside the United States. It may not be possible, therefore, for U.S. investors to effect service of process within the United States upon us or these persons or to enforce against us or these persons judgments obtained in the United States courts predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the federal securities laws of the United States. We believe that there is doubt as to the enforceability in Japan, in original actions or in actions for enforcement of judgment of U.S. courts, of liabilities predicated solely upon the federal securities laws of the United States.
Special Note Regarding Forward-looking Statements
This annual report contains forward-looking statements that are based on our current expectations, assumptions, estimates and projections about our business, our industry and capital markets around the world. These forward-looking statements are subject to various risks and uncertainties. Generally, these forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as may, will, expect, anticipate, estimate, plan or similar words. These statements discuss future expectations, identify strategies, contain projections of our results of operations or financial condition, or state other forward-looking information.
Known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors may cause our actual results, performance, achievements or financial position to differ materially from any future results, performance, achievements or financial position expressed or implied by any forward-looking statement contained in this annual report. Such risks, uncertainties and other factors are set forth in this Item 3.D and elsewhere in this annual report.
Item 4. Information on the Company
A. History and Development of the Company.
Nomura was incorporated in Japan on December 25, 1925 under the Commercial Code of Japan when the securities division of The Osaka Nomura Bank, Ltd. became a separate entity specializing in the trading and distribution of debt securities in Japan. Nomura was the first Japanese securities company to develop its business internationally with the opening in 1927 of a representative office in New York. In Japan, we broadened the scope of our business when we began trading in equity securities in 1938 and when we organized the first investment trust in Japan in 1941.
Since the end of World War II, we have played a leading role in most major developments in the Japanese securities market. These developments include the resumption of the investment trust business in the 1950s, the introduction of public stock offerings by Japanese companies in the 1960s, the development of the over-the-counter bond market in the 1970s, the introduction of new types of investment trusts such as the medium-term Japanese government bond investment trust in the 1980s, and the growth of the corporate bond and initial public offering markets in the 1990s.
Our expansion overseas accelerated in 1967, when Nomura acquired a controlling interest in Nomura International (Hong Kong) Limited for the purpose of conducting broker-dealer activities in the Hong Kong capital markets. Subsequently, we established a number of other overseas subsidiaries, including Nomura
Securities International, Inc. in the United States in 1969 as a broker dealer and Nomura International Limited, now Nomura International plc, in the United Kingdom in 1981, which acts as an underwriter and a broker, as well as other overseas affiliates, branches and representative offices.
On October 1, 2001, we adopted a holding company structure. In connection with this reorganization, Nomura changed its name from The Nomura Securities Co., Ltd. to Nomura Holdings, Inc. Nomura continues to be listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange and other stock exchanges on which it was previously listed. A wholly-owned subsidiary of Nomura assumed Nomuras securities businesses and was named Nomura Securities Co., Ltd.
In December 2001, we listed our shares (in the form of American Depositary Shares evidenced by American Depositary Receipts) on the New York Stock Exchange.
We have also enhanced our asset management business through the acquisition of a majority interest in Nomura Asset Management Co., Ltd. in March 2000. Nomura Asset Management became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Nomura in December 2001.
In June 2003, we adopted a committee-based corporate governance system under which we established a Nomination Committee, an Audit Committee and a Compensation Committee. See Item 6.C of this annual report.
In February 2007, we acquired Instinet Incorporated, a global agency broker and major provider of electronic trading services for institutional investors, to develop an electronic platform in global equities.
In a series of steps beginning in September 2008, we acquired certain operations, including personnel, of former Lehman Brothers in Asia, Europe and the Middle East.
The address of Nomuras registered office is 9-1, Nihonbashi 1-chome, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 103-8645, Japan, telephone number: 81-3-5255-1000.
B. Business Overview.
We are one of the leading financial services groups in Japan and have worldwide operations. As of March 31, 2010, we operated offices in over 30 countries and regions including Japan, the United States, the United Kingdom, Singapore and Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (Hong Kong SAR) through our subsidiaries.
Our clients include individuals, corporations, financial institutions, governments and governmental agencies.
Our business consists of the following three divisions:
In April 2010, we established the Wholesale Division, encompassing the operations previously conducted by our Global Markets Division, the Investment Banking Division and the Merchant Banking Division. A discussion of our historical operating results through March 31, 2010 by category of activity and geographic market is provided in accordance with the Divisions in existence as of that date. See Item 5.A of this annual report.
Our Business Strategy
Our Corporate Goals and Principles
Our management vision is to establish ourselves as a globally competitive financial services group. We have also set a management target of maintaining an average consolidated return on equity (ROE) of 10% to 15% over the medium to long term, subject to change depending on capital regulation developments.
In pursuing this vision, we put our clients first and contribute to the creation of an affluent society based on investment by listening closely to the needs of our clients and delivering world class products and services and high value-added solutions via financial and capital markets. We aim to go beyond the boundaries of the traditional securities business and take the lead in expanding into new business areas, thereby constructing new growth models. In addition, we will promote compliance with applicable laws and regulations as well as engage in ethical corporate behavior.
Management Challenges and Strategies
The global economic downturn, triggered by the turmoil in financial markets, subsided in the Spring of 2009 through inventory adjustment and the execution of economic stimulus plans in many countries. Emerging markets are helping the global economy move gradually toward normality, but significant economic uncertainty and market volatility remain.
In this environment, we plan to address the needs of our global client base by taking advantage of our strengthened business platform and to strategically allocate management resources to grow our client base and improve our market share. In addition, we will continue to proceed with our plans to reduce costs by reengineering our business to fit the market environment and by increasing operational efficiency.
To achieve our strategic goals, we will implement the following initiatives:
We will continue to enhance our products and service offerings, which are provided through direct contacts, online or via call centers to accommodate increasingly sophisticated and diverse client needs. Other measures include development of new revenue streams through enhanced online businesses, continuous investment in our brand recognition designed to further our market penetration, and creation of new markets via new client segments. Through these efforts, we aim to continue being a trusted partner to our clients by providing world-class quality products and services that meet their individual needs.
Global Markets will continue to be the product supply hub for the Nomura group which will further enhance our product development expertise. In addition, we will leverage our global trading infrastructure and business franchise to deliver high value-added products and solutions to our clients. In Fixed Income, we will strengthen our global marketing structure and cater to increasing client needs by focusing on flow business in foreign exchange, interest rates, credit and commodities as a core, and structured business to attract solutions-oriented clients. We will continue to leverage our increased human capital pool in Asia, Europe and the Americas. In Equities, we aim to establish ourselves as a world-class liquidity provider.
In Investment Banking, we will expand our revenues by fully leveraging our significantly expanded client coverage and product platform in Europe, the Middle East and Africa, as well as in the Asia-Pacific and by strengthening collaboration with our Retail and Global Markets distribution capabilities, and aim to become a vital earnings driver for the entire Nomura group. In addition to revenue from traditional businesses such as M&A advisory and underwriting, we will pursue solutions businesses in order to diversify and expand our revenue sources. We will also continue to strengthen our coverage platform in the U.S. for selected industries to support clients global activities and increase our business opportunities. In our merchant banking business, we remain focused on increasing the enterprise value of the companies in which we invest, and on achieving optimal or immediate returns on investments by continually weighing exit strategy options. With the continued instability in the global investment environment, we are taking a more cautious approach to new investments and are continually reevaluating our investment and exit strategies.
We aim to increase our world-class competitive advantage in Japan and the rest of Asia by expanding our investment management and product delivery capabilities globally. We intend to increase assets under management from both individual and institutional investors and expand our client base by providing clients in Japan with a diverse range of global investment opportunities and by meeting international investor demand for investment opportunities in Japan and Asia.
In implementing the initiatives outlined above, we will enhance collaboration between divisions. We aim to bring together the collective strengths of our domestic and international operations to realize our management objectives and to maximize shareholder value by enhancing profitability across our businesses, while helping to strengthen the global financial and capital markets.
In addition, we are working to further enhance our management system to support continued growth.
In the wake of the financial crisis, the market and regulatory environments surrounding global financial institutions have changed significantly. We strengthened our capital base through a public offering in October 2009 to allow for these environmental changes as well as to achieve sustainable growth. Going forward, we will continue to maintain our strong financial base and leverage it to grow our client-focused business platform.
We understand that it is necessary to further strengthen our global risk management system. By adopting a proactive risk management approach, senior management has directly engaged in risk management-related decision making. We will continue to strengthen this system.
As our business becomes increasingly international, we recognize the growing importance of compliance. In addition to complying with laws and regulations, we view compliance in a wider context. We will further enhance Nomura groups overall compliance system.
We view talented personnel as key assets. In line with our basic client-oriented business approach, we have established globally-uniform personnel policies firmly rooted in the belief that employees should be rewarded for their overall performance. We will continue to build a professional organization capable of delivering a comprehensive range of services that satisfy our clients.
In Retail, we conduct business activities mainly for individuals and corporations in Japan through a network of nationwide branches. The number of branches was 172 as of the end of March 2010. We offer investment consultation services to meet the medium to long term needs of our customers. The aggregate market value of our retail client assets increased to ¥73.5 trillion as of the end of March 2010 from ¥59.3 trillion a year ago. We discuss retail client assets in Retail Client Assets under Item 5.A of this annual report.
In order to execute our business strategy described above in Our Business Strategy, we employ various methods to deliver our services to clients. These include face-to-face meetings with our staff, either in our branch offices through client visits, communications through Nomura Home Trade, an internet-based trading service, or through our call centers.
We capitalize on the linkages between the Retail, Wholesale and Asset Management Divisions to offer various financial instruments such as stocks, debt securities, investment trusts and variable annuity insurance products, for the short, medium, and long term, with different risk levels. We seek to provide proprietary Nomura expertise to clients through various media such as our investor reports and Nomura Home Trade.
Our Wholesale Division consists of Global Markets, Investment Banking and certain other non-Retail operations. We formed this new division in April 2010 to promote seamless coordination between the underlying businesses and to provide our clients with timely, high value-added services tailored to their needs.
Global Markets consists of three businesses: Fixed Income, Equities and Asset Finance.
We have full-service offerings in Fixed Income and Equities, with a proven track record of selling and trading debt securities, stocks, and foreign exchange, as well as derivatives based on these financial instruments, mainly to institutional investors. In response to the increasingly diverse and complex needs of our clients, Global Markets is enhancing its trading and product origination capabilities to be the product supply hub for the Nomura group, offering superior products not only to institutional investors but also to Retail and Asset Management clients. In addition, we offer execution services based on cutting-edge technologies such as algorithmic trading and transaction cost analysis. We seek to maximize the synergies and cross-selling opportunities across our recently expanded global operations.
In Asset Finance, we leverage our broad client base to maximum advantage and offer high value-added services including financial advisory, the structuring of privately placed funds and commercial mortgage-backed securities, equity and mezzanine financing and other services through a one-stop approach. We are also branching out into real estate management operations, as well as enhancing our expertise to supply financial products that meet investors real estate-related needs.
We have established extensive ties with institutional investors in Japan and international markets; wealthy and affluent investors, public-sector agencies, and regional financial institutions in Japan; and government agencies, financial institutions, and corporations around the world. These strong relationships enable us to understand specific client requirements and to develop and deliver solutions that meet those needs across a broad product lineup.
We offer a broad range of investment banking services to a diverse range of corporations, financial institutions, sovereigns, investment funds and others. We aim to develop and fortify solid relationships with these clients on a long term basis by providing them with our extensive resources for each bespoke solution.
Underwriting. We underwrite offerings of a wide range of securities and other financial instruments, which include various types of stocks, convertible and exchangeable securities, investment grade debt, sovereign and emerging market debt, high yield debt, structured securities and other securities in Asia, Europe and other major financial markets. We also arrange private placements and engage in other capital raising activities. We are one of the leading equity and fixed income securities underwriters in Japan.
Financial Advisory & Solutions Services. We provide financial advisory services on business transactions including mergers and acquisitions, divestitures, spin-offs, capital structuring, corporate defense activities, leveraged buyouts and risk solutions. Our involvement in initial public offerings (IPOs), reorganizations and other corporate restructurings related to industry consolidation enhance our opportunities to offer clients other advisory and investment banking services. We are one of the leading financial advisors in Asia.
Merchant Banking. In Japan, we operate through wholly owned subsidiaries, including Nomura Principal Finance Co., Ltd. and Nomura Financial Partners Co., Ltd. Our main focus has been targeting investment opportunities that will offer attractive returns to us and which will also help contribute to the structural reform of the Japanese economy. In Europe, our private equity investments are mainly managed by Terra Firma, which is operated by former Nomura employees. We also make alternative investments in Europe and investments in venture companies in Japan, Europe and the United States. In Asia, we set up Asia Merchant Banking in 2007 to seek investment opportunities brought about by the expansion of the regional economy. For a further description of our private equity business, see Item 5.A Private Equity Business.
We conduct our asset management business, which consists of the development and management of investment trusts and investment advisory services, primarily through Nomura Asset Management Co., Ltd. (NAMCO). NAMCO is the largest asset management company in Japan in terms of assets under management in investment trusts as of March 31, 2010. In Japan, our challenge is to shift individual financial assets from saving products into investment products to create business opportunities. In order to make these opportunities available, NAMCO manages various investment trusts, ranging from low risk/low return products to high risk/high return products, and develops new products to respond to various investor needs. Investment trusts are distributed to investors through Nomura Securities Co., Ltd. as well as through financial institutions such as securities companies (including those outside our group), banks and Japan Post Bank. Investment trusts are also offered in defined contribution pension plans. We also provide investment advisory services to public pensions, private pensions, governments and their agencies, central banks and institutional investors.
Our Research Activities
We have been successfully building a leading global research platform. Research coverage worldwide in March of this year reached 1,760 companies and the total number of researchers globally is 640. In this years Nikkei analyst ranking survey, our Japan team was ranked first. Our European team achieved their best results ever in the recent Institutional Investor survey, ranking second out of 23 teams which improved from our previous ranking of eighth place in 2009. We recently announced key hires to our US equity research team to further strengthen our global research capabilities.
Our Information Technology
We believe that information technology is one of the key success factors for our overall business and intend to develop and maintain a solid technology platform to ensure that the firm is able to fulfill the various needs of our clients. Accordingly, we will continue to build a technology platform suitable for each business segment.
For example, for our retail clients, we have introduced Nomura Home Trade, at www.nomura.co.jp/hometrade, which provides on-line trading capabilities and current status reports on asset portfolios, investments
and transactions and investment information, including our research reports through the internet or mobile phones. Our subsidiaries, Nomura Securities merged with JOINVEST Securities Co., Ltd. in 2009 to provide expanded internet-based services to its clients.
On the wholesale side, we enhanced our technology platform for higher trading capabilities such as Direct Market Access and Algorithmic Trade, and for better risk management capability. We are planning to further leverage our service entities in India to facilitate the operations of the wholesale business.
As a leading financial services industry player, we are active in markets which remain intensely competitive and we expect them to remain so. We compete globally with other securities firms, banks and integrated financial institutions. We also face competition on regional, product and niche bases from local and specialist firms. A number of factors determine our competitive position against other firms, including:
Our competitive position is also affected by the overall condition of the global financial markets, which are influenced by factors such as:
In Japan, we compete with other Japanese and non-Japanese securities companies and other financial institutions. Competition has become more intense due to deregulation in the Japanese financial industry since the late 1990s and the increased presence of global securities companies and other financial institutions. In particular, major global firms have increased their presence in securities underwriting, corporate advisory services (particularly M&A advisory) and secondary securities sales and trading.
There has also been substantial consolidation and convergence among financial institutions in recent years, both within Japan and globally. This trend accelerated further over the course of the past years as several leading market players consolidated, were forced to merge, received governmental assistance, or received regulatory approval to transition to bank holding companies in the credit crisis. The growing presence and scale of financial groups which encompass commercial banking, securities brokerage, investment banking and other financial services has led to increased competition. Through their broadened offerings, these firms are able to create good client relationships and leverage their existing client base in the brokerage and investment banking business as well.
In addition to the breadth of their products and services, these firms have the ability to pursue greater market share in investment banking and securities products by reducing margins and relying on their commercial banking, asset management, insurance and other financial services activities. This has resulted in pricing pressure in our investment banking and trading businesses and could result in pricing pressure in other areas of our businesses. Moreover, the trend toward consolidation and convergence has significantly increased the capital base and geographic reach of some of our competitors, hastening the globalization of the securities and financial
services markets. To accommodate this trend, we will have to compete successfully with financial institutions that are large and well-capitalized, and that may have a stronger local presence and longer operating history outside Japan.
We have also competed, and expect to compete, with other financial institutions which commit capital to businesses or transactions for market share in investment banking activities. In particular, corporate clients may seek such commitments (such as agreements to participate in their commercial paper backstop or other loan facilities) in connection with investment banking mandates and other assignments.
The FIEA, which came into effect on September 30, 2007 to amend and replace the former Securities and Exchange Law, widely regulates financial products and services in Japan under the defined terms financial instruments and financial instruments trading business. The FIEA combines previously existing financial and securities related laws to comprehensively regulate financial products. It expands the scope of securities subject to regulation, extending, among others, to a previously unregulated category of products identified under the defined term collective investment schemes. The FIEA also widely regulates financial instruments trading business, which includes not only the securities business but also the investment advisory business, the investment trust management business and the financial futures trading business.
In addition, to enhance fairness and transparency in the financial markets and to protect investors, the FIEA provides for, among other things, stiffer penalties for misrepresentations in disclosure documents and unfair trading, stricter regulation of tender offer bids, stricter reporting obligations for large shareholders and improved corporate information disclosure systems, including quarterly report systems, submission of confirmation certificates concerning the descriptions in securities reports and internal controls over financial reporting.
Regulation of the Securities Industry. The FIEA regulates most aspects of securities transactions and the securities industry in Japan, including public offerings, private placements and secondary trading of securities, on-going disclosure by securities issuers, tender offers for securities, organization and operation of securities exchanges and self-regulatory associations, and registration of securities companies. The Prime Minister has the authority to regulate the securities industry and securities companies. This authority is delegated to the Commissioner of the FSA under the FIEA. The Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission, an external agency of the FSA which is independent from the Agencys other bureaus, is vested with authority to conduct day-to-day monitoring of the securities markets and to investigate irregular activities that hinder the fair trading of securities, including inspection of securities companies. Furthermore, the Commissioner of the FSA delegates certain authority to the Director General of Local Finance Bureau to inspect local securities companies and branches. A violation of applicable laws and regulations may result in various administrative sanctions, including the revocation of registration or authorization, the suspension of business or an order to discharge any director or executive officer who has failed to comply with applicable laws and regulations. Securities companies are also subject to the rules and regulations of the Japanese stock exchanges and the Japan Securities Dealers Association, a self-regulatory association of the securities industry.
To enhance investor protection, each Japanese securities company is required to segregate client assets and to hold membership in an Investor Protection Fund approved by the government under the FIEA. The Investor Protection Fund is funded through assessments on its securities company members. In the event of failure of a securities company that is a member of the fund, the Investor Protection Fund provides protection of up to ¥10 million per client. The Investor Protection Fund covers claims related to securities deposited by clients with the failed securities company and certain other client claims.
Regulation of Financial Instruments Firms. On December 25, 2009, the FSA issued for public comment a proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Guidelines for Supervision of the Financial Instruments Business Operators, etc., which became effective on March 4, 2010. This amendment requires corporate groups of
financial instruments firms (i.e., firms engaging in the securities business, investment advisory business or certain other financial services) that engage in international operations, including Nomura, to strengthen their management and compliance systems in view of the increasingly significant growth, complication and development of their international operations. These new requirements include strengthening the groups business management system, compliance system and risk management system, as well as public disclosure of detailed information regarding their capital adequacy ratios, in accordance with the Basel II framework.
In addition, the amendment includes restrictions on their compensation system, which are designed to reduce excessive risk taking by their executives and employees.
Regulation of Other Financial Services. Securities companies are not permitted to conduct banking or other financial services directly, except for those which are registered as money lenders and engaged in money lending business under the Money Lending Business Act or which hold permission to act as bank agents and conduct banking agency activities under the Banking Law. Securities companies are allowed, however, to hold majority ownership in banks and other financial services institutions. Securities company subsidiaries conducting banking and financial services are also regulated by relevant laws and regulations. The Nomura Trust & Banking Co., Ltd. is such a subsidiary and engages in banking and certain financial services.
Regulatory Amendments. A bill to amend the FIEA was passed by the Diet on June 6, 2008 and came into full effect on June 1, 2009, to strengthen the competitiveness of Japans financial and capital markets.
A part of the amendment, which became effective on December 12, 2008, requires a review by the Japanese government of the existing system of administrative monetary penalties, in order to create fair, transparent and reliable markets. This amendment has increased the administrative monetary penalties that may be imposed in the event of certain types of misconduct, such as insider trading, market manipulation and filing of false disclosure documents, and has expanded the scope of misconduct to which administrative monetary penalties may apply to include additional items, such as illegal market stabilization and failure to file disclosure documents.
Another part of the amendment, which became effective on June 1, 2009, revamped the firewall regulations among securities companies, banks and insurance companies and abolished the ban on concurrent holding by certain employees, including executives, of posts in such companies. To manage conflicts of interest between or among securities companies, banks and insurance companies, these financial institutions are required to implement proper information management and to develop appropriate internal control frameworks to prevent client interests from being unfairly harmed due to trading by the financial institution itself or by other financial institutions within its group.
To improve the stability and transparency of Japans financial system and to ensure the protection of investors, another bill to amend the FIEA was passed by the Diet on May 12, 2010. A part of the amendment, which is scheduled to become effective within one year, is intended to strengthen group-wide regulation and supervision through the introduction of consolidated regulations on and the supervision of securities companies the size of which exceeds specified parameters. The amendment introduces, among others, obligations on parent companies of large securities companies to submit business reports and to meet capital adequacy requirements on a consolidated basis related to the whole group.
Another part of the amendment, which is scheduled to become effective within two and a half years, is intended to improve the stability and transparency of the settlement of over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives transactions by requiring the use of central counterparties for clearing certain OTC derivative transactions and by establishing a system for data storage and reporting of trade information for financial instruments business operators and clearing organizations.
Our overseas offices and subsidiaries are also subject to various laws and governmental rules and regulations applicable in the countries where they carry on their operations, including those promulgated and enforced by the Securities and Exchange Commission, the New York Stock Exchange and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (a non-governmental regulator for all securities companies which was established in July 2007 through the consolidation of the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. and the member regulation, enforcement and arbitration functions of the New York Stock Exchange) in the United States, and by the Financial Services Authority and the London Stock Exchange plc in the United Kingdom. Failure to comply with such laws, rules or regulations could result in fines, suspension or expulsion, which could have a material adverse effect upon us.
Regulatory Capital Rules
The FIEA requires that all Financial Instruments Firms (Category I) (Financial Instruments Firms I), a category that includes Nomura Securities, ensure that their capital adequacy ratios do not fall below 120% on a non-consolidated basis. The FIEA also requires Financial Instruments Firms I to file month-end reports regarding their capital adequacy ratios with the Commissioner of the FSA or the Director-General of the appropriate Local Finance Bureau, and also to disclose their capital adequacy ratios to the public on a quarterly basis. In addition, if the capital adequacy ratio of a Financial Instruments Firm I falls below 140%, it must file a daily report with the authorities. The FIEA provides for actions which the Prime Minister, through the Commissioner of the FSA or the Director-General of the appropriate Local Finance Bureau, may take if any Financial Instruments Firm I fails to meet the capital adequacy requirement. More specifically, if the capital adequacy ratio of any Financial Instruments Firms I falls below 120%, the Commissioner of the FSA or the Director-General of the appropriate Local Finance Bureau may order the Financial Instruments Firm I to change its business conduct, to deposit its property in trust, or may issue any other supervisory order that such authorities deem necessary and appropriate to protect the interests of the general public or investors. If the capital adequacy ratio of a Financial Instruments Firm I falls below 100%, the authorities may take further action, including the issuance of orders to temporarily suspend its business and the revocation of its registration as a Financial Instruments Firm I under the FIEA.
Under the FIEA and regulations thereunder, the capital adequacy ratio means the ratio of adjusted capital to a quantified total of business risks. Adjusted capital is defined as net worth less illiquid assets. Net worth mainly consists of stated capital, additional paid-in capital, retained earnings, reserves for securities transactions, certain allowances for doubtful current accounts, net unrealized gains/losses in the market value of investment securities, and subordinated debt. Illiquid assets generally include non-current assets, certain deposits and advances and prepaid expenses. The business risks are divided into three categories: (i) market risks (i.e., risks of asset value changes due to decline in market values and other reasons), (ii) counterparty risks (i.e., risks of delinquency of counterparties and other reasons) and (iii) basic risks (i.e., risks in carrying out daily business activities, such as administrative problems with securities transactions and clerical mistakes), each quantified in the manner specified in a rule promulgated under the FIEA.
We closely monitor the capital adequacy ratio of Nomura Securities on a continuous basis. Since the introduction of the capital adequacy requirement in Japan in 1989, we have at all times been in compliance with these requirements. We believe that we will continue to be in compliance with all applicable capital adequacy requirements in the foreseeable future.
Under the Guideline for Financial Conglomerates Supervision, established by the FSA in June 2005, a financial conglomerate is defined as a corporate group, including two or more different types of financial institutions, such as a securities company and a bank. Nomura is classified as a financial conglomerate. Similar to Financial Instruments Firms I, financial conglomerates are required to maintain a certain capital adequacy ratio, which is 100% on a consolidated basis. The Comprehensive Guidelines for Supervision of Financial Instruments
Business Operators, etc, established by the FSA in July 2007, requires corporate groups of financial instruments firms engaging in international operations to report their consolidated capital adequacy ratios to the Commissioner of the FSA semi-annually and additionally if the ratio falls below 120%. Nomura is also classified as such a corporate group of financial instruments firms engaging in international operations and was therefore subject to such reporting requirements prior to March 31, 2009. Beginning from March 31, 2009, however, Nomura became subject to a different capital adequacy and reporting requirements as described below.
The Comprehensive Guidelines for Supervision of Financial Instruments Business Operators, etc allows corporate groups of financial instruments firms engaging in international operations to elect to calculate their capital adequacy ratios in accordance with the Criteria for bank holding companies to judge whether their capital adequacy status is appropriate in light of their own and their subsidiaries asset holdings, etc. under Article 52-25 of the Banking Act (the Bank Holding Companies Notice), instead of calculating these ratios in accordance with the guideline applicable to financial conglomerates. The Bank Holding Companies Notice on capital adequacy for Japanese bank holding companies closely follows the risk-weighted approach introduced by the Basel Committee, commonly referred to as Basel II. The capital adequacy ratio required to be maintained by bank holding companies with international operations under the Bank Holding Companies Notice is 8.0% on a consolidated basis. Corporate groups of financial instruments firms engaging in international operations who elect to calculate their capital adequacy ratios in accordance with the Bank Holding Companies Notice must report their consolidated capital adequacy ratios to the Commissioner of the FSA semi-annually. We elected to calculate our capital adequacy ratio in accordance with the Bank Holding Companies Notice beginning on March 31, 2009, whereupon we became subject to the capital adequacy and reporting requirements described above.
We have been monitoring and acting in compliance with the consolidated capital adequacy requirements applicable to Nomura, and believe that we will continue to be in compliance with all applicable capital adequacy requirements in the foreseeable future.
The Basel Committee has issued a series of announcements regarding a broader program to strengthen the regulatory capital framework in light of weaknesses revealed by the financial crises, as described in Consolidated Regulatory Requirements under Item 5.B of this annual report. The Bank Holding Companies Notice may be amended to follow the new regulatory capital framework after it is officially adopted by the Basel Committee.
In the United States, Nomura Securities International, Inc. (NSI) is a registered broker-dealer and registered futures commission merchant. As such, NSI is subject to the minimum net capital requirements of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. NSI is regulated by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and the Chicago Board of Trade as its designated self-regulatory organization. These requirements specify minimum levels of capital that U.S. broker-dealers are required to maintain and limit the amount of leverage that such broker-dealers may use in their businesses. As a primary dealer of U.S. government securities, NSI is also subject to the capital adequacy requirements under the Government Securities Act of 1986.
In Europe, the Nomura Europe Holdings plc (NEHS) group is regulated under consolidated supervision by the Financial Services Authority in the United Kingdom. Various banking and broker/dealer subsidiaries of the group are regulated on a stand alone basis by their appropriate local regulator.
In addition, certain of our other subsidiaries are subject to various securities and banking regulations, and the capital adequacy requirements established by the regulatory and exchange authorities of the countries in which those subsidiaries operate. We believe that each such subsidiary is, and will in the foreseeable future be, in compliance with these requirements in all material respects.
C. Organizational Structure.
The following table lists Nomura and its significant subsidiaries and their respective countries of incorporation. Indentation indicates the principal parent of each subsidiary. Proportions of ownership interest include indirect ownership.
D. Property, Plants and Equipment.
As of March 31, 2010, our principal head office is located in Tokyo, Japan and occupies 1,031,022 square feet of office space. Our other major offices in Japan are our Osaka branch office, which occupies 122,208 square feet, our Nagoya branch office, which occupies 82,918 square feet, and the head office of Nomura Asset Management Co., Ltd. in Tokyo, which occupies 166,765 square feet. We lease certain other office space in Japan. Nomura Land and Building Co., Ltd., which is accounted for under the equity method of accounting in our consolidated financial statements, is the lessor of certain office space in Japan, including part of our Tokyo headquarters.
As of March 31, 2010, our major offices outside Japan are the offices of Nomura International plc (NIP) located in London, which occupy 736,746 square feet, the New York head office of Nomura Securities International, Inc., which occupies 150,574 square feet, and offices of Nomura International (Hong Kong) Limited located in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, which occupy 212,695 square feet. We own the land and building for the London head office of NIP. We lease most of our other overseas office space.
As of March 31, 2010, the major office of Nomura Services India Private Limited, our specialized service company in India, occupies 436,082 square feet.
As of March 31, 2010, the aggregate book value of the land and buildings we owned was, including capital lease, ¥144 billion, and the aggregate book value of equipment we owned, including communications and data processing facilities, was ¥40 billion.
In August 2009, a Nomura consolidated subsidiary, Nomura Properties plc entered into a 20 year lease as tenant of Watermark Place, a 525,000 square foot development at 1 Angel Lane in London. The building will be predominantly used for the European headquarters of Nomura International plc. The office fit out commenced in August 2009 and the expected completion date is December 2010.
Item 4A. Unresolved Staff Comments
We are a large accelerated filer as defined in Rule 12b-2 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. There are no written comments which have been provided by the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission regarding our periodic reports under that Act not less than 180 days before the end of the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010 and which remain unresolved as of the date of the filing of this annual report with the Commission.
A. Operating Results.
You should read the following discussion of our operating and financial review and prospects together with Item 3.A Selected Financial Data of this annual report and our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report.
This discussion and analysis contains forward-looking statements that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of factors, including, but not limited to, those under Item 3.D Risk Factors and elsewhere in this annual report.
The Japanese economy contracted severely in the fiscal year ended March 2009 as it was seriously affected by rapid deterioration in the global economy amid a credit squeeze triggered by the September 2008 collapse of a U.S. investment bank. Fallout lingered into the year ended March 2010, when real GDP contracted a substantial 1.9%, after having fallen 3.7% in the year ended March 2009. Quarter-on-quarter growth during the year, however, showed an improving trend that reflected export recovery supported by economic stimulus measures in various countries, as well as improved domestic demand being underpinned by measures taken by the Japanese government. This economic recovery has also started to translate into improvements in the employment environment.
Corporate earnings fell sharply in the year ended March 2009 in reaction to economic downturns in Japan and overseas as well as financial market turmoil. In the year ended March 2010, sales remained on a downtrend, but profits turned up, supported by widespread cost-cutting efforts and a second-half upswing in manufacturing industry sales. We estimate that recurring profits rose in the year ended March 2010 at around 90% of major companies (NOMURA 400 companies), with large contributions to overall earnings improvement from companies in the financial sector and in such processing industries as automobile electrical machinery and precision equipment.
The stock market had been on a downtrend until March 2009, but it turned up with stock prices rising over the year ended March 2010. Global stock markets turned up from March 2009 as concerns of economic contraction sparked by the global credit squeeze were gradually alleviated by monetary easing and economic stimulus measures taken by policymakers around the world. The TOPIX reached a post-bubble low in March 2009, rallied through to August, then temporarily slipped back through to November before rising again to reach a high for the fiscal year in March 2010. The TOPIX fell from 1,212.96 as of March 2008 to 773.66 at the end of March 2009, a decline of 36.2%, the steepest decline over a fiscal year since the indexs inception, but it then recovered to 978.81 at the end of March 2010, a rise of 26.5%. The Nikkei Stock Average also rallied sharply by 36.8%, rising from 8,109.53 at the end of March 2009 to 11,089.94 at the end of March 2010.
Yields on newly issued 10-year Japanese government bonds were at 1.3% at the end of March 2009 as global financial market turmoil showed signs of easing, but rose to over 1.5% in June in tandem with the stock market rally. Thereafter, long-term rates declined as the view gained ground that an end to monetary easing policies in the US would be postponed, and then rose amid concerns of growth in Japans fiscal deficit. As a result, rates held broadly between 1.2% and 1.5% during 2009, finishing little changed at the 1.3% level at the end of March 2010.
On the foreign exchange markets, the yen was influenced by an easing in global financial market turbulence. At the end of March 2009, the yen was trading at the ¥99 level against the U.S. dollar and the ¥130 level against the euro. As a result of continued monetary easing in the U.S. to tackle the financial crisis, the U.S. dollar weakened against major currencies through to November 2009, with the yen appreciating to a peak of ¥84 against the dollar. Thereafter, the yen depreciated against the dollar in response to additional monetary easing by the Bank of Japan and other developments, reaching ¥93 at the end of March 2010. Against the euro, the yen moved between ¥124 and ¥139 from April through December 2009, but from the start of 2010 the euro depreciated as Greek government debt problems deepened and concerns surfaced over the euro monetary system and European economies. The yen appreciated to a peak of ¥119 against the euro at one point in February 2010, before correcting to ¥125 at the end of March 2010.
The economies of the leading industrialized nations have been recovering as a result of economic stimulus measures taken in response to the global financial crisis from September 2008. International commodity prices fell sharply heading toward the end of 2008 due to the global credit crunch and concerns about the recession, but
then rallied. Aggressive interest rate cuts in the U.S. and Europe, the recapitalization of banks using public funds, and fiscal measures helped the global economy emerge from recession, but not sufficiently to allow the withdrawal of stimulatory policies and a return to normality. Furthermore, in China, the curbing rises in real estate prices has become an issue in the wake of aggressive fiscal policy measures.
U.S. real GDP growth slow down to 0.4% year-on-year in 2008, followed by a 2.4% contraction in 2009. On a quarterly basis, however, three consecutive quarters of growth starting from July-September 2009 showed the economy entering a recovery phase. Benefits from monetary easing in response to the financial crisis, and from efforts to boost domestic demand through tax cuts and public works spending, helped revive business sentiment and stimulate corporate activity as corporate earnings improved. With the corporate and household sectors continuing to reduce debt, the pick-up has been modest, but recovery has spread to capital investment and employment.
The Federal Reserve Board (FRB), sought to shift gradually to a neutral policy stance while continuing to promote financial market stability and supporting the economy. The FRB held the federal funds rate target at 00.25%, effectively maintaining a zero interest rate policy, and indicated its awareness of the markets in acknowledging that it would take time before policy interest rates were raised. However, it phased out quantitative easing measures designed to supply funds to the financial markets through such means as purchasing mortgage backed securities.
The U.S. stock market turned up as the global credit squeeze eased and benefits from monetary easing spread, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average rallying to 10,856.63 at the end of March 2010, from 7,608.92 at the end of March 2009. The yield on 10-year U.S. Treasuries was at the 2.6% level in March 2009 but then held at the 3% level from April 2009 onward as upward pressure from rising share prices and concerns about growth in the fiscal deficit was counteracted by downward pressure from the FRB continuing monetary easing.
European economies also entered a period of recovery in 2009. The Eurozone saw real GDP contract 4.2% year-on-year in 2009, after growth of 0.6% in 2008. On a quarterly basis, however, growth was positive for three straight quarters, starting in the July-September 2009 quarter. The European Central Bank, in order to stabilize financial markets and support the economy, lowered its policy rate and supplied ample liquidity to the financial markets, in addition to which fiscal stimulus measures taken in different countries contributed to gradual economic recovery.
Subsequently, concerns have started to grow about the size of government debt as a side effect of fiscal stimulus measures. European share prices rallied in tandem with stabilization in markets around the world, with the benchmark German stock index (DAX) rising approximately 50% during the year ended March 2010.
Asia ex-Japan economies also made a strong recovery. Real GDP growth in China in 2009 was 8.7%, versus 9.0% in 2008, with the much stronger recovery compared with the leading industrial nations supported by the Chinese governments large-scale stimulus package, worth some 13% of nominal GDP. This recovery drove economic recovery across Asia as a whole, though also spawning the need to curb rising real estate prices as a policy issue.
The global economy reeled from the intensified financial market turmoil in the second half of the fiscal year ended March 2009, but in the spring of 2009 inventory adjustments and economic stimulus measures implemented throughout the world reversed the economic downturn. Emerging countries and resource-rich countries experienced fast-paced economic recoveries. In Japan, fiscal policies brought an end to the economic downturn in the first half of the fiscal year ended March 2010, followed by the start of a recovery in the second half of the fiscal year ended March 2010, led by an increase of exports, particularly to emerging countries. Although the employment situation has been slow to improve and household sector spending has yet to recover,
the situation in the corporate sector has improved. After a significant decline in the year ended March 2009, recurring profits of major listed companies were once again positive in the year ended March 2010 due to cost-cutting measures in response to a steep drop in sales. On the other hand, trading value on the Tokyo Stock Exchange totaled approximately ¥379 trillion in the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010, the lowest level in five years. In the bond market, the yield on newly issued 10-year Japanese government bonds rose to the 1.5% range in June 2009 in conjunction with the stock market rebound, but then fell to the 1.1% range at the end of 2009 as investors prepared for a prolonged period of low interest rates in industrialized countries. The yield subsequently rose to the 1.3% range in March 2010. In the capital markets, reduced risk aversion on a global basis brought about a more favorable environment for companies to raise capital through the equity and debt capital markets both in Japan and overseas. The amount of equity and equity-related financing was much larger than the previous fiscal year, particularly in Asia. In Japan, equity and equity-related financing increased to ¥7.7 trillion, approximately 5.5 times greater than the previous fiscal year, marking the highest level in a decade. Amid this environment, we focused our efforts on client businesses in equity and fixed income. In Japan, we leveraged our strong base to earn stable profits, while overseas we generated profits from our new business platform. We were profitable on a pre-tax basis in all previous five business segments. As a result, net revenue increased 268% year-on-year to ¥1,150.8 billion, non-interest expenses decreased 4% year-on-year to ¥1,045.6 billion, income before income taxes was ¥105.2 billion, and net income attributable to Nomura Holdings, Inc. was ¥67.8 billion. Consequently, ROE for the full year was 3.7%.
In Retail, net revenue for the year ended March 31, 2010 was ¥388.3 billion, up 33% from the previous year, and income before income taxes was ¥113.4 billion, up 522% from the previous year. During the fiscal year, we focused on businesses that meet client needs, with a particular emphasis on consulting services. We saw an increase in sales of investment trusts, particularly for multi-currency investment trusts, as well as an increase in equity offerings associated with capital raising by companies. We also steadily expanded our Retail client base during the period. Retail client assets increased to ¥73.5 trillion as of March 31, 2010, compared to ¥59.3 trillion as of March 31, 2009.
In Global Markets, net revenue for the year ended March 31, 2010 was ¥658.4 billion and income before income taxes was ¥172.0 billion. Over the past year we have seen positive results from our expanded business platform following the acquisition of certain Lehman Brothers operations in October 2008. In addition to growth in client equity and fixed income trading in Japan, we also saw an increase in such businesses in both Europe and Asia. In the equity business, we expanded our client franchise by enhancing services related to European and Asian equities in addition to our existing Japanese equity-related business and by serving clients with our advanced technologies. In the fixed income business, we became a Primary Dealer in the United States as we continued our platform build out aimed at delivering world-class products and services. In Global Markets, we are working to build a regionally-balanced earnings structure with a focus on client trades.
In Investment Banking, net revenue for the year ended March 31, 2010 was ¥118.9 billion, up 87% from the previous year, and income before income taxes was ¥1.7 billion, due primarily to increased transaction volume in equity finance by major Japanese financial institutions and corporations. In Japan, we maintained our dominant position in equity underwriting, bond underwriting and M&A advisory. We also won mandates on many large deals overseas, including cross-border M&A deals and the underwriting of debt issued by foreign governments. In addition to such traditional investment banking activity, the solutions business, which helps clients manage their balance sheet and portfolios, began contributing to earnings during the fiscal year.
In Merchant Banking, net revenue for the year ended March 31, 2010 was ¥12.2 billion due primarily to realized and unrealized gains on equity securities of certain investee companies. As a result, income before income taxes was ¥1.4 billion. We succeeded in posting a profit as we strengthened our efforts to increase the enterprise value of existing investments and sought optimal exit strategies.
In Asset Management, net revenue for the year ended March 31, 2010 was ¥70.4 billion, up 18% from the previous year, and income before income taxes was ¥18.6 billion, up 152% from the previous year. Assets under
management increased by ¥3.2 trillion from the end of March 2009 to ¥23.4 trillion as of March 2010. We maintained our leading position in Japans publicly offered investment trust market, and responded to client needs by launching high-yield bond investment trusts and new emerging country-related investment trusts. We also won a large number of investment advisory mandates from overseas institutional investors.
Results of Operations
The following table provides selected consolidated statements of operations information for the years indicated.
Net revenue increased by 268% from ¥312,627 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 to ¥1,150,822 million for the year ended March 31, 2010. Commissions increased by 29%, due primarily to an increase in commissions for the distribution of investment trusts, reflecting the recovery from the overall market slump triggered by the turmoil in the global financial markets. Fees from investment banking increased by 121%, due primarily to an increase in transaction volume in equity finance for Japanese companies. Net gain on trading was ¥417,424 million for the year ended March 31, 2010, due primarily to the recovery from the turmoil in the global financial markets. Gain on private equity investments was ¥11,906 million for the year ended March 31, 2010 due primarily to realized and unrealized gains on equity securities of certain investee companies.
Net revenue decreased by 60% from ¥787,257 million for the year ended March 31, 2008 to ¥312,627 million for the year ended March 31, 2009. Commissions decreased by 24%, due primarily to a decline in commissions for the distribution of investment trusts, reflecting the overall market slump triggered by the turmoil in the global financial markets. Asset management and portfolio service fees also decreased by 26%, due primarily to a decrease in assets under management driven by the plunge in the stock market and the appreciation of the yen. While net gain on trading was ¥61,720 million for the year ended March 31, 2008, we suffered a net loss of ¥128,339 million on trading for the year ended March 31, 2009, due primarily to the turmoil in the global
financial markets. While we gained ¥76,505 million on private equity investments for the year ended March 31, 2008, we lost ¥54,791 million on such investments for the year ended March 31, 2009 due primarily to unrealized losses of certain investee companies.
Net interest revenue was negative ¥9,925 million for the year ended March 31, 2008, negative ¥20,528 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 and ¥29,381 million for the year ended March 31, 2010. Net interest revenue is a function of the level and mix of total assets and liabilities, which includes trading assets and financing and lending transactions, and the level, term structure and volatility of interest rates. Net interest revenue is an integral component of trading activity. In assessing the profitability of our overall business and of our Global Markets business in particular, we view net interest revenue and non-interest revenues in aggregate. For the year ended March 31, 2010, interest revenue and interest expense decreased 29% and 41%, respectively, due primarily to decline of short-term interest rates of repurchase and reverse repurchase transactions. As a result, net interest revenue for the year ended March 31, 2010 increased by ¥49,909 million from the year ended March 31, 2009. Net interest revenue for the year ended March 31, 2009 declined by ¥10,603 million from the year ended March 31, 2008. Short-term interest rates declined during the year in major currencies including U.S. dollar and Japanese yen by March 2009, but until the third quarter short-term interest rates in Japanese yen stayed at a relatively high level in comparison to the U.S. dollar, which decreased significantly. Together with the continuous decline in demand for structured notes from investors, this has pushed up our financial costs, failing to offset the decline in the gross interest revenue which is due to the general decline in the interest rate level across the globe. However, the rate at which net interest revenue deteriorated in the last three quarters has been moderated, in response to decreased turmoil in the short-term interest rate market.
In our consolidated statements of operations, we include gains and losses on investments in equity securities within revenue. We recorded gains and losses on such investments in the amount of negative ¥48,695 million for the year ended March 31, 2008, negative ¥25,500 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 and ¥6,042 million for the year ended March 31, 2010. This line item includes both realized and unrealized gains and losses on investments in equity securities held for operating purposes. These investments refer to our investments in unaffiliated companies, which we hold on a long-term basis in order to promote existing and potential business relationships. In our consolidated financial statements, these investments are recorded at fair value, with unrealized gains and losses on these investments recognized in the consolidated statements of operations.
Non-interest expenses decreased by 4% from ¥1,092,892 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 to ¥1,045,575 million for the year ended March 31, 2010. The decrease in non-interest expenses was caused by the decrease in other expenses by 46% from ¥262,558 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 to ¥142,494 million for the year ended March 31, 2010, primarily because impairment losses against affiliated companies were lower for the year ended March 31, 2010. The decrease in non-interest expenses was offset by the full-year recognition of compensation and benefits, information processing and communications, and occupancy and depreciation related to the acquisition of Lehman on a half year in October 2008 for the year ended March 31, 2010, while such expenses were recognized in principle for a half year in the year ended March 31, 2009.
Non-interest expenses increased by 28% from ¥852,167 million for the year ended March 31, 2008 to ¥1,092,892 million for the year ended March 31, 2009. The increase in non-interest expenses consisted mainly of other expenses and compensation and benefits. Other expenses increased by 67% from ¥157,190 million for the year ended March 31, 2008 to ¥262,558 million for the year ended March 31, 2009, mainly due to significant impairment losses being recognized against affiliated companies. Compensation and benefits increased by 34% from ¥366,805 million for the year ended March 31, 2008 to ¥491,555 million for the year ended March 31, 2009, due primarily to an increase in the number of employees as a result of the Lehman acquisition.
Income (loss) before income taxes was negative ¥64,910 million for the year ended March 31, 2008, and negative ¥780,265 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 and ¥105,247 million for the year ended March 31, 2010.
We are subject to a number of different taxes in Japan and have adopted the consolidation tax system permitted under Japanese tax law. The consolidation tax system only imposes a national tax. Since April 1, 2004, our domestic statutory tax rate has been approximately 41%. Our foreign subsidiaries are subject to the income tax rates of the countries in which they operate, which are generally lower than those in Japan. Our effective tax rate in any one year is therefore dependent on our geographic mix of profits and losses and also on the specific tax treatment applicable in each location.
Income tax expense for the year ended March 31, 2010 was ¥37,161 million, representing an effective tax rate of 35.3%. The significant factor causing the difference between the effective tax rate of 35.3% and the statutory tax rate of 41% was due to different tax rates applicable for foreign subsidiaries which decreased the effective tax rate by 26.9%. Other significant factors causing the difference were taxable items to be added on financial profit and non-deductible expenses which increased the effective tax rate by 10.8% and 10.5%, respectively for the year ended March 31, 2010.
Income tax expense for the year ended March 31, 2009 was negative ¥70,854 million, representing an effective tax rate of 9.1% which was significantly below the statutory tax rate of 41%. The most significant factor causing the difference was an increase in the valuation allowance, mainly relating to non-recoverability of losses in certain U.S. and U.K. subsidiaries and also future realizable losses in Japan as a result of the review of the future realizable value of the deferred tax assets. Although the increase in the valuation allowance generally has the effect of increasing the effective tax rate, this had the effect of decreasing the rate by approximately 27.6% due to losses from continuing operations. Other significant factors included tax benefits recognized on the devaluation of investments in foreign subsidiaries which increased the effective tax rate by approximately 7.5% and also the different tax rates applicable for foreign subsidiaries which decreased the effective tax rate by 9.9% for the year ended March 31, 2009.
Income tax expense for the year ended March 31, 2008 was ¥3,259 million, representing an effective tax rate of negative 5.0%. The effective tax rate was significantly below the statutory tax rate of 41%. The most significant factor causing the difference was an increase in the valuation allowance, mainly relating to the non-recoverability of losses in certain U.S. subsidiaries and future realizable losses in Japan as a result of the review of the future realizable value of deferred tax assets. Although the increase in the valuation allowance generally has the effect of increasing the effective tax rate, it resulted in a decreasing effective tax rate for the year ended March 31, 2008 by approximately 165.5% due to losses from continuing operations. Another significant factor causing the difference was tax benefits recognized on the devaluation of investments in foreign subsidiaries. This had the effect of increasing the effective tax rate for the year ended March 31, 2008 by approximately 120.9%.
Net income (loss) attributable to NHI was negative ¥67,847 million for the year ended March 31, 2008, and negative ¥708,192 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 and ¥67,798 million for the year ended March 31, 2010. Our return on equity was negative 3.3% for the year ended March 31, 2008, negative 40.2% for the year ended March 31, 2009, and 3.7% for the year ended March 31, 2010.
Results by Business Segment
As discussed in Overview under Item 4.B of this annual report, we provide operation results for the year ended March 31, 2010 in accordance with previous five business segments: Retail, Global Markets, Investment Banking, Merchant Banking and Asset Management. Gain (loss) on investments in equity securities, our share of equity in the earnings (losses) of affiliates, impairment losses on long-lived assets, corporate items and other financial adjustments are included as Other operating results outside of business segments in our segment information. Unrealized gain (loss) on investments in equity securities held for operating purposes is classified as reconciling items outside of our segment information. The following segment information should be read in conjunction with Item 4.B Business Overview of this annual report and Note 21 Segment and geographic
information to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. The reconciliation of our segment results of operations and consolidated financial statements is set forth in Note 21 Segment and geographic information.
In April 2010, Nomura established the Wholesale Division, encompassing the operations previously conducted by the Global Markets, the Investment Banking, and the Merchant Banking divisions. Also Nomura realigned its reportable segments to reflect how it operates and manage its business. This realignment consisted of merging the Global Markets, Investment Banking and Merchant Banking segments and realigning its businesses into the Retail, Wholesale, and Asset Management segments. Nomura will disclose business segment information in accordance with this structure for the year ending March 31, 2011.
In Retail, we receive commissions and fees from investment consultation services which we provide mainly to individual customers in Japan. Additionally, we receive operational fees from asset management companies in connection with the administration services of investment trust certificates that we distribute. We also receive agent commissions from insurance companies for the insurance products we sell as an agent.
Operating Results of Retail
Net revenue for the year ended March 31, 2010 was ¥388,272 million, increasing 33% from ¥291,857 million for the year ended March 31, 2009, due primarily to increasing commissions for distribution of investment trusts.
Net revenue for the year ended March 31, 2009 was ¥291,857 million, decreasing 27% from ¥402,018 million for the year ended March 31, 2008. The overall market slump triggered by the turmoil in the global financial markets led to a decline in brokerage commissions and commissions for distribution of investment trusts. Sales of structured bonds declined as a result of the rapid strengthening of the yen, leading to lower sales credit.
Non-interest expenses for the year ended March 31, 2010 were ¥274,915 million, almost at the same level as ¥273,620 million for the year ended March 31, 2009.
Non-interest expenses for the year ended March 31, 2009 were ¥273,620 million, decreasing 2% from ¥279,702 million for the year ended March 31, 2008, due primarily to a decrease in compensation and benefits.
Income before income taxes was ¥122,316 million for the year ended March 31, 2008, ¥18,237 million for the year ended March 31, 2009, and ¥113,357 million for the year ended March 31, 2010.
The graph below shows the revenue composition by instrument in terms of Retail non-interest revenues for the years ended March 31, 2008, 2009, and 2010.
As described above, revenue composition of investment trusts and asset management increased from 47% for the year ended March 31, 2009 to 58% for the year ended March 31, 2010, due primarily to an increase in commissions for the distribution of investment trusts. Revenue composition of equities remained unchanged from the previous year. Revenue composition of bonds decreased from 24% for the year ended March 31, 2009 to 15% for the year ended March 31, 2010, due primarily to a decrease in revenue reflecting the decrease in the sales of bonds. Revenue composition of variable annuity insurance decreased from 3% for the year ended March 31, 2009 to 1% for the year ended March 31, 2010.
Retail Client Assets
The following graph shows amounts and details regarding the composition of retail client assets at March 31, 2008, 2009, and 2010. Retail client assets consist of customers assets held in our custody, and assets relating to variable annuity insurance products.
Retail Client Assets
Retail client assets increased by ¥14.2 trillion from ¥59.3 trillion as of March 31, 2009 to ¥73.5 trillion as of March 31, 2010, due primarily to market appreciation of equity securities. The balance of our clients investment trusts increased 25% from ¥10.4 trillion as of March 31, 2009 to ¥12.9 trillion as of March 31, 2010, reflecting net cash inflows by clients of ¥0.8 trillion and market appreciation of ¥1.7 trillion.
Retail client assets decreased by ¥12.9 trillion from ¥72.2 trillion as of March 31, 2008 to ¥59.3 trillion as of March 31, 2009, due primarily to a decrease in the balance of equity securities as a result of the stock market decline. The balance of our clients investment trusts decreased 22% from ¥13.4 trillion as of March 31, 2008 to ¥10.4 trillion as of March 31, 2009, reflecting net cash inflows by clients of ¥0.1 trillion and market depreciation of ¥3.1 trillion.
We have a proven track record in sales and trading of bonds, stocks, and foreign exchange, as well as derivatives based on these financial instruments, mainly to institutional investors. In response to the increasingly diverse and complex needs of our customers, we are building up our trading and product origination capabilities to offer superior products not only to institutional investors but also to Retail and Asset Management. This cross-divisional approach also extends to Investment Banking, where close collaboration leads to high value-added solutions for our customers. In Asset Finance, we use our broad customer base to maximum advantage and offer sophisticated financial solutions for raising capital through real estate and other asset securitization schemes.
We have forged extensive ties with institutional investors in Japan and international markets; wealthy and affluent investors, public-sector agencies, and regional financial institutions in Japan; and government agencies, financial institutions, and corporations around the world. These ties enable us to identify the types of products of interest to investors and then to develop and deliver products that meet their needs.
Operating Results of Global Markets
Net revenue increased from negative ¥157,254 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 to ¥658,441 million for the year ended March 31, 2010. In Fixed Income, net revenue increased from negative ¥217.2 billion for the year ended March 31, 2009 to ¥308.0 billion for the year ended March 31, 2010. In Equities, net revenue increased from ¥98.9 billion for the year ended March 31, 2009 to ¥352.8 billion for the year ended March 31, 2010. Over the past year we have seen positive results from our expanded business platform following the acquisition of certain Lehman Brothers operations in October 2008. In addition to growth in client equity and fixed income trading in Japan, we also saw an increase in such businesses in both Europe and Asia. In Equities, we expanded our client franchise by enhancing services related to European and Asian equities in addition to our existing Japanese equity-related business and by serving clients with our advanced technologies. In Fixed Income, we became a Primary Dealer in the United States as we continued our platform build out aimed at delivering world-class products and services. In Global Markets, we are working to build a regionally-balanced earnings structure with a focus on client trades.
Net revenue decreased from ¥95,597 million for the year ended March 31, 2008 to negative ¥157,254 million for the year ended March 31, 2009. In Fixed Income, net revenue was negative ¥217.2 billion due to trading losses in conjunction with the market drop-off as well as the one-off losses in association with the turmoil in global financial markets. In Equities, the deterioration in the trading environment due to the market turmoil resulted in a 52% year-on-year decline in net revenue to ¥98.9 billion. We also wrote down the value of real estate and other illiquid assets and reduced our exposure to illiquid assets. Following the acquisition of certain operations of Lehman Brothers in October 2008, we restructured our organization and business lines, and generally completed system and other infrastructure integration projects by the end of fiscal year 2009.
Non-interest expenses increased by 17% from ¥417,387 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 to ¥486,433 million for the year ended March 31, 2010, due primarily to increases in commissions, floor brokerage and compensation and benefits.
Non-interest expenses increased by 30% from ¥321,794 million for the year ended March 31, 2008 to ¥417,387 million for the year ended March 31, 2009, due primarily to the acquisition of certain operations of Lehman Brothers.
Loss before income taxes was ¥226,197 million for the year ended March 31, 2008, ¥574,641 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 and income before income taxes was ¥172,008 million for the year ended March 31, 2010.
The table below shows our market share of Japanese Government bond auctions and secondary bond trading, in terms of the principal amounts of bonds purchased, for the years indicated. Secondary bond trading refers to the trading of bonds originally issued in Japan in the over-the-counter market and on exchanges in Japan, but excludes gensaki and inter-dealer transactions.
The following table sets forth the closing level of the TOPIX and the Nikkei 225, which are both stock market indices in Japan, as of the dates indicated, and the percentage changes from the closing level at the date one year before:
The TOPIX reached a post-bubble low in March 2009, rallied through to August, then temporarily slipped back through to November before rising again to reach a high for the fiscal year in March 2010. The TOPIX fell from 1,212.96 at the end of March 2008 to 773.66 at the end of March 2009, a decline of 36.2%, the steepest decline over a fiscal year since the indexs inception, but it then recovered to 978.81 at the end of March 2010, a rise of 26.5%. The Nikkei Stock Average also rallied sharply, by 36.8%, rising from 8,109.53 at the end of March 2009 to 11,089.94 at the end of March 2010. The following table shows our market share of Japanese equity trading for the years indicated.
We provide a broad range of investment banking services, such as underwriting and advisory activities to a diverse range of corporations, financial institutions, sovereigns, investment funds and others. We underwrite offerings of debt, equity and other financial instruments in Asia, Europe and other major financial markets. We have been enhancing our M&A and financial advisory expertise to secure more high profile deals both across and within regions. We develop and forge solid relationships with these clients on a long-term basis by providing extensive resources in a seamless fashion to facilitate bespoke solutions.
Operating Results of Investment Banking
Net revenue increased by 87% from ¥63,499 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 to ¥118,922 million for the year ended March 31, 2010, due primarily to increased transaction volume in equity finance by major Japanese financial institutions and corporations.
Net revenue decreased by 24% from ¥83,109 million for the year ended March 31, 2008 to ¥63,499 million for the year ended March 31, 2009, due primarily to the decline in transaction volume in equity finance reflecting instability across global stock markets.
Non-interest expenses decreased by 3% from ¥120,910 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 to ¥117,178 million for the year ended March 31, 2010.
Non-interest expenses increased by 100% from ¥60,336 million for the year ended March 31, 2008 to ¥120,910 million for the year ended March 31, 2009, due primarily to the acquisition of certain operations of Lehman Brothers.
Income before income taxes was ¥22,773 million for the year ended March 31, 2008, loss before income taxes was ¥57,411 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 and income before income taxes was ¥1,744 million for the year ended March 31, 2010.
The following table shows changes in our market share (value base) in the underwriting market for bonds and equities in Japan.
In Japan, Nomura Principal Finance Co., Ltd. has been active in the field of buy-outs and corporate revitalization, targeting investment opportunities that offer scope for capital appreciation and attractive returns on our investment. Our Japanese private equity business has also been developed through investments in funds managed by the Nomura Research & Advisory Co., Ltd. Our principal finance investments in Europe have been primarily managed by Terra Firma, as explained in Private equity business below.
Operating Results of Merchant Banking
Net revenue was ¥12,168 million for the year ended March 31, 2010, compared to net revenue of negative ¥69,875 million for the year ended March 31, 2009, due primarily to realized and unrealized gains on equity securities of certain investee companies.
In the year ended March 31, 2010, unrealized gains from investments in Japan were ¥4.8 billion. Realized gains from the Terra Firma Investments were ¥0.6 billion and unrealized gains from the Terra Firma Investments were ¥8.4 billion. Realized and unrealized gains arose from improving markets, primarily in residential real estate, renewable energy and utilities sectors.
Net revenue was negative ¥69,875 million for the year ended March 31, 2009, as compared to net revenue of ¥64,793 million for the year ended March 31, 2008, due primarily to unrealized losses of certain investee companies.
In the year ended March 31, 2009, realized gains from investments in Japan were ¥42.0 billion and unrealized losses from investments in Japan were ¥78.0 billion. Realized gains from the Terra Firma Investments were ¥6.7 billion and unrealized losses from the Terra Firma Investments were ¥15.7 billion. Realized gains resulted from the exit of certain retail and service industry investments. Unrealized losses resulted from underperformance of investments in the media, aircraft leasing, waste management and renewable energy sectors.
In the year ended March 31, 2008, realized gains from investments in Japan from which we exited were ¥16.6 billion and unrealized losses from investments in Japan were ¥21.2 billion. Realized gains from the Terra Firma Investments were ¥69.3 billion and unrealized gains from the Terra Firma Investments were ¥14.3 billion. Investments in the residential real estate sector continued to perform well, leading to a significant gain.
Non-interest expenses decreased by 30% from ¥15,398 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 to ¥10,738 million for the year ended March 31, 2010, due primarily to a decrease in professional fees.
Non-interest expenses increased by 34% from ¥11,473 million for the year ended March 31, 2008 to ¥15,398 million for the year ended March 31, 2009, due primarily to an increase in professional fees.
Income before income taxes was ¥53,320 million for the year ended March 31, 2008, loss before income taxes was ¥85,273 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 and income before income taxes was ¥1,430 million for the year ended March 31, 2010.
We earn portfolio management fees through the development and management of investment trusts, which are distributed by Nomura Securities Co., Ltd., other brokers, banks, Japan Post Bank and Japan Post Network Co., Ltd. We also provide investment advisory services for pension funds and other institutional clients. Net revenues basically consist of asset management and portfolio services fees that are attributable to Asset Management.
Operating Results of Asset Management
The defined contribution pension plan business in the Asset Management segment was integrated into the Other Segment in the second quarter of the year ended March 31, 2009. In the above table, certain reclassifications of previously reported amounts have been made to conform to the current presentation.
Net revenue increased by 18% from ¥59,789 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 to ¥70,365 million for the year ended March 31, 2010, due primarily to the increase in assets under management mainly driven by the stock market appreciation.
Net revenue decreased by 33% from ¥88,741 million for the year ended March 31, 2008 to ¥59,789 million for the year ended March 31, 2009, due primarily to the reduction in assets under management mainly driven by the significant decline in the stock market and appreciating yen, and unrealized losses from pilot funds and seed money for new product development.
Non-interest expenses decreased by 1% from ¥52,409 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 to ¥51,771 million for the year ended March 31, 2010.
Non-interest expenses decreased by 4% from ¥54,790 million for the year ended March 31, 2008 to ¥52,409 million for the year ended March 31, 2009, due primarily to a decrease in compensation and benefits.
Income before income taxes was ¥33,951 million for the year ended March 31, 2008, ¥7,380 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 and ¥18,594 million for the year ended March 31, 2010.
The following table sets forth assets under management of each principal Nomura entity within Asset Management as of the dates indicated.
Assets under management were ¥23.4 trillion as of March 31, 2010, a ¥2.3 trillion decrease from March 31, 2008, and a ¥3.2 trillion increase from March 31, 2009. The greatest proportion of these assets was managed by Nomura Asset Management with assets under management of ¥23.3 trillion as of March 31, 2010.
The net assets of stock investment trusts increased as of March 31, 2010 compared to the previous year due to improving market conditions. However, the net assets of bond investment trusts declined. Assets from institutional clients increased as of March 31, 2010 compared to the previous year, reflecting new mandates from overseas pension funds.
Investment trust assets included in assets under management by Nomura Asset Management were ¥14.7 trillion as of March 31, 2010, up ¥1.7 trillion, or 13%, from the previous year, reflecting net cash outflows by clients of ¥0.4 trillion and market appreciation of ¥2.1 trillion. The sales of high-yield bond investment trusts and new emerging country-related investment trusts remain robust. For the year ended March 31, 2009, the balance of investment trusts managed by Nomura Asset Management was ¥13.0 trillion as of March 31, 2009, down ¥4.2 trillion, or 25%, from the previous year, reflecting net cash outflows by clients of ¥0.3 trillion and market depreciation of ¥3.9 trillion.
The following table shows Nomura Asset Managements share, in terms of net asset value, in the Japanese asset management market as of the dates indicated.
Nomura Asset Managements share of the fund market in Japan
Other Operating Results
Other operating results include gain (loss) on investments in equity securities, our share of equity in the earnings (losses) of affiliates, impairment losses on long-lived assets, corporate items and other financial adjustments. Please refer to Note 21 Segment and geographic information to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report.
Loss before income taxes in other operating results was ¥20,904 million for the year ended March 31, 2008, ¥65,420 million for the year ended March 31, 2009 and ¥211,293 million for the year ended March 31, 2010.
Other operating results for the year ended March 31, 2010 include the losses from changes in the fair value of the financial liabilities, for which the fair value option was elected, attributable to the change in our creditworthiness, of ¥64.4 billion ($0.69 billion), the negative impact of our own creditworthiness on derivative liabilities, which resulted in loss of ¥27.9 billion ($0.30 billion) and the gains from changes in counterparty credit spreads of ¥18.3 billion ($0.20 billion).
Summary of Regional Contribution
For a summary of our net revenue, income (loss) before income taxes and long-lived assets by geographic region, see Note 21 Segment and geographic information to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report.
Regulatory Capital Requirements
Many of our business activities are subject to statutory capital requirements, including those of Japan, the United States, the United Kingdom and certain other countries in which we operate.
A significant portion of our business is conducted in currencies other than yenmost significantly, U.S. dollars, British pounds and Euros. We prepare financial statements of each of our consolidated entities in its functional currency, which is the currency of the primary economic environment in which the entity operates. Translation exposure is the risk arising from the effect of fluctuations in exchange rates on the net assets of our foreign subsidiaries. Translation exposure is not recognized in our consolidated statements of operations unless and until we dispose of, or liquidate, the relevant foreign subsidiary, which historically has not occurred, and which we do not expect to occur frequently.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Use of estimates
In presenting the consolidated financial statements, management makes estimates regarding certain financial instrument and investment valuations, the outcome of litigation and tax examinations, the recovery of the carrying value of goodwill, the allowance for doubtful accounts, the realization of deferred tax assets and other matters that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities as well as the disclosures in these consolidated financial statements. Estimates, by their nature, are based on judgment and available information. Therefore, actual results may differ from estimates, which could have a material impact on the consolidated financial statements, and it is possible that such adjustments could occur in the near term.
Fair value for financial instruments
A significant amount of our financial assets and financial liabilities are carried at fair value, with changes in fair value recognized through the consolidated statements of operations on a recurring basis. Use of fair value is either specifically required under U.S. GAAP or we make an election to use fair value for certain eligible items under the fair value option.
Other financial assets and financial liabilities are carried at fair value on a nonrecurring basis, where the primary measurement basis is not fair value. Fair value is only used in specific circumstances such as to measure impairment.
In accordance with ASC 820 Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, all financial instruments measured at fair value have been categorized into a three-level hierarchy based on the transparency of inputs used to establish fair value.
Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities accessible by us at the measurement date.
Quoted prices in inactive markets or containing other inputs which are observable, either directly or indirectly. Valuation techniques using observable inputs reflect assumptions used by market participants in pricing financial instruments and are based on data obtained from independent market sources at the measurement date.
Unobservable inputs that are significant to the fair value measurement of the financial instrument. Valuation techniques using unobservable inputs reflect managements assumptions about the estimates used by other market participants in valuing similar financial instruments. These valuation techniques are developed based on the best available information at the measurement date.
Financial instruments are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement of the instruments. A derivative valued using a combination of Level 1, 2 and 3 inputs would be classified as Level 3, where the Level 3 inputs are significant in its measurement.
The valuation of Level 3 financial assets and liabilities are dependent on certain parameters which cannot be observed or corroborated in the market. This can be the case if, for example, the specific financial instrument is traded in an inactive market. Common characteristics of an inactive market include a low number of transactions of the financial instrument; stale or non-current price quotations; price quotations that vary substantially either over time or among market makers; or little publicly released information. Unobservable parameters include volatility risk and correlation risk for derivative instruments; refinancing periods and recovery rates for credit-related products and loans; and macroeconomic factors affecting the value of collateral for asset-backed securitization products.
If corroborative evidence is not available to value Level 3 financial instruments, fair value may be established using other equivalent products in the market. The level of correlation between the specific Level 3 financial instrument and the available benchmark instrument is considered an unobservable parameter. Other techniques for determining an appropriate value for unobservable parameters may take into account information such as consensus pricing data among certain market participants, historical trends, extrapolation from observable market data and other information we would expect market participants to use in valuing similar instruments.
Level 3 financial assets excluding derivatives as a proportion of total financial assets excluding derivatives, carried at fair value on a recurring basis was 6% as of March 31, 2010 as listed below:
Please see Note 3, Fair value of financial instruments for further information.
Private equity business
As of April 1, 2007 we adopted ASC 946 Financial ServicesInvestment Companies (ASC 946), as a result, all private equity investments made by investment company subsidiaries pursuant to the provisions of ASC 946 are now accounted for at fair value, with changes in fair value recognized through the consolidated statement of operation. Prior to adoption of ASC 946, private equity investments were accounted for at fair value, by the equity method of accounting or as consolidated subsidiaries depending on the attributes of each investment.
The valuation of unlisted private equity investments at fair value requires significant management judgment because these investments, by their nature, have little or no price transparency. Private equity investments are initially carried at cost as an approximation of fair value. Adjustments to carrying value are made if there is third-party evidence of a change in value. Adjustments are also made, in the absence of third-party transactions, if it is determined that the expected realizable value of the investment is different from the carrying value. In reaching that determination, we primarily use either our own internal valuation models based on projected future cash flows to be generated from the underlying investment, discounted at a weighted average cost of capital or comparable market valuations such as EV/EBITDA (Enterprise Value/EBITDA), PE Ratio (Price/Earnings Ratio), Price/Embedded Value Ratio and other multiples based on relationships between numbers reported in the financial statements and the price of comparable companies. Where possible these valuations are compared with the operating cash flows and financial performance of the companies or properties relative to budgets or projections, price/earnings data for similar quoted companies, trends within sectors and/or regions and any specific rights or terms associated with the investment, such as conversion features and liquidation preferences.
Any changes to valuations are then stress tested to assess the impact of particular risk factors in order to establish the final estimated valuation. For more information on our private equity activities, see Private Equity Business below.
We use a variety of derivative financial instruments including futures, forwards, swaps and options, for trading and non-trading purposes. All derivatives are carried at fair value, with changes in fair value recognized through the consolidated statements of operations.
Fair value amounts recognized for derivative instruments entered into under a legally enforceable master netting agreement are offset in the consolidated balance sheets and fair value amounts recognized for the right to reclaim cash collateral (a receivable) and the obligation to return cash collateral (a payable) are also offset against net derivative liabilities and net derivative assets, respectively.
Derivative contracts consist of listed derivatives and OTC derivatives. The fair value of listed derivatives are generally determined from quoted market prices. OTC derivatives are valued using valuation models. Listed derivative and OTC derivative assets and liabilities are shown below:
The fair value of OTC derivative assets and liabilities as of March 31, 2009 and 2010 by remaining contractual maturity are shown below:
The fair value of derivative contracts includes adjustments for credit risk, both with regards to counterparty credit risk on positions held and our own creditworthiness on positions issued.
We realize gains or losses relating to changes in credit risk on our derivative contracts together with the movements of trading positions, which include derivatives, that are expected to mitigate the above mentioned impact of changes in credit risk. We have various derivative contracts with exposure to credit risk including those with monoline insurers (financial guarantors). See Monoline insurers (financial guarantors) below for further information.
The impact of changes in our own creditworthiness on derivative liabilities was a loss of ¥28 billion ($0.30 billion) for the year ended March 31, 2010.
Assets and Liabilities Associated with Investment and Financial Services Business
Exposure to Certain Financial Instruments and Counterparties
Challenging market conditions continue to impact numerous products including securitization and leveraged finance products to which we have certain exposure. We also have exposures to monoline insurers (financial guarantors) in the normal course of business.
Our exposure to securitization products mainly consists of commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS), residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS), and commercial real estate-backed securities. We hold these securitization products in connection with securitization, financing, trading and other activities. The following table provides a summary of our exposure to securitization products by geographic location of the underlying collateral as of March 31, 2010.
The following table sets forth our exposure to CMBS by geographical region and the external credit ratings of the underlying collateral as of March 31, 2010.
Monoline Insurers (financial guarantors)
The following table sets forth our notional amounts, gross exposure, counter party risk reserves and other adjustments, net exposure, and CDS protection to monoline insurers (financial guarantors) by credit rating in structured credit trading business of Global Markets in Europe. The table does not include fully reserved or hedged exposures.
In addition to the above derivatives exposure, we also have $190 million of debt securities, such as utility bonds, as of March 31, 2010, guaranteed by monoline insurers. The estimated fair value of the guarantee included in the carrying value of these debt securities is not significant.
We provide loans to clients in connection with leveraged buy-outs and leveraged buy-ins. As this type of financing is usually initially provided through a commitment, we have both funded and unfunded exposures on these transactions.
The following table sets forth our exposure to leveraged finance by geographic location of the target company as of March 31, 2010.
See Note 1, Summary of accounting policies: New accounting pronouncements recently adopted, in our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report.
Private Equity Business
We make private equity investments primarily in Japan and Europe.
As of April 1, 2007 we adopted ASC 946. As a result, private equity investments made by certain entities which we consolidate under either a voting interest or variable interest model which are investment companies pursuant to the provisions of ASC 946 (investment company subsidiaries) are now accounted for at fair value, with changes in fair value recognized through the consolidated statements of operations. Investment company accounting applied by each of these investment company subsidiaries is retained in these consolidated financial statements.
These entities make private equity investments solely for capital appreciation, current income or both rather than to generate strategic operating benefits to us. In accordance with our investment policies, non-investment companies within the group may not make investments in entities engaged in non-core businesses if such investments would result in consolidation or application of the equity method of accounting. Such investments may generally only be made by investment company subsidiaries. Non-core businesses are defined as those engaged in activities other than our business segments.
We also have a subsidiary which is not an investment company but which makes investments in entities engaged in our core businesses. These investments are made for capital appreciation or current income purposes or both and are also carried at fair value, either because fair value is carried by election of the fair value option or other U.S. GAAP requirements.
Private equity business in Japan
We have an established private equity business in Japan, which is operated primarily through a wholly-owned subsidiary, Nomura Principal Finance Co., Ltd (NPF).
Since its inception in 2000, NPF has made investments in 21 entities and exited from 16 of these investments (including partial sales). The fair value of its investment portfolio is ¥98,998 million and ¥104,962 million ($1,124 million) as of March 31, 2009 and 2010, respectively.
NPF is an investment company subsidiary pursuant to the provisions of ASC 946 and therefore carries all of its investments at fair value, with changes in fair value recognized through the consolidated statements of operations from the adoption date of ASC 946 on April 1, 2007.
We also make private equity investments through another wholly-owned subsidiary, Nomura Financial Partners Co., Ltd. (NFP). NFP is not an investment company subsidiary as it invests in the entities engaged in our core business. We elected the fair value option to account for its 45.5% investment in the common stock of Ashikaga Holdings.
Private equity business in Europe
In Europe, our private equity investments primarily comprise legacy investments made by its former Principal Finance Group (PFG) now managed by Terra Firma (collectively referred to as the Terra Firma Investments), investments in other funds managed by Terra Firma (Other Terra Firma Funds) and through other investment company subsidiaries (Other Investments).
Terra Firma Investments
Following a review to determine the optimum structure for our European private equity business, on March 27, 2002, we restructured our PFG and, as a result, contributed our investments in certain of our remaining investee companies to Terra Firma Capital Partners I (TFCP I), a limited partnership which is engaged in the private equity business, in exchange for a limited partnership interest. Terra Firma Investments (GP) Limited, the general partner of TFCP I, which is independent of us, assumed the management and control of these investments, together with one other PFG investment, Annington Holdings plc, which due to contractual restrictions was not transferred to the partnership.
With effect from March 27, 2002, we ceased consolidating the Terra Firma Investments and accounted for those investments at fair value in accordance with ASC 946.
The Terra Firma Investments are held by entities which are investment company subsidiaries and therefore we continue to account for these investments at fair value, with changes in fair value recognized through the consolidated statements of operations.
The fair value of the Terra Firma Investments was ¥89,762 million and ¥98,683 million ($1,057 million) as of March 31, 2009 and 2010, respectively.
Other Terra Firma Funds
In addition to the Terra Firma Investments, we are in a 10% investor in a ¥242 billion ($2.59 billion) private equity fund (TFCP II) and a 2% investor in a ¥646 billion ($6.91 billion) private equity fund (TFCP III), also raised and managed by Terra Firma Capital Partners Limited.
Our total commitment for TFCP II was originally ¥24,227 million ($259 million) and reduced to ¥5,033 million ($54 million) as a result of adjustments for recyclable distributions. As of March 31, 2010, ¥4,505 million ($48 million) had been drawn down for investments.
For TFCP III, our total commitment is ¥12,492 million ($134 million) and ¥7,413 million ($79 million) had been drawn down for investments as of March 31, 2010.
The investments in TFCP II and TFCP III are carried at fair value, with changes in fair value recognized through the consolidated statements of operations.
We also make private equity investments in Europe through wholly-owned subsidiaries and other consolidated entities which have third party pooling of funds. Certain of these entities are investment company subsidiaries and therefore all of their investments are carried at fair value, with changes in fair value recognized through the consolidated statements of operations.
B. Liquidity and Capital Resources.
We define liquidity risk as the potential inability to meet financial obligations as they become due. This risk could arise from an inability to access the secured or unsecured debt markets, a deterioration in our credit ratings, a failure to manage unplanned changes in funding requirements, a failure to liquidate assets quickly and with minimal loss in value, or changes in regulatory capital restrictions which may prevent the free flow of funds between different group entities. Liquidity risk could be due both to Nomura-specific and market wide events. Our primary liquidity objective is to ensure continuous liquidity across market cycles and periods of stress, and to ensure that all funding requirements and unsecured debt obligations that fall due within one year can be met without additional unsecured funding or forced liquidation of trading assets.
We have in place a number of liquidity policies to achieve our primary liquidity objective. These include (1) ensuring sufficient long term debt to meet our cash capital needs; (2) maintenance of liquidity portfolios comprising cash and highly liquid unencumbered securities that can be converted into cash to meet our
immediate liquidity requirements; (3) diversification of funding sources by currency, products, investor base and maturity in order to minimize reliance on any one source; (4) contingency funding plans and committed, unsecured credit facilities.
The Executive Management Board has the authority to make decisions concerning the group liquidity management. The Chief Financial Officer (CFO) has the operational authority and responsibility over our liquidity management based on decisions made by the Executive Management Board. CFO and Global Treasury are responsible for monitoring and managing our liquidity in accordance with policies determined by the Executive Management Board or other decision making bodies.
1. Ensure appropriate funding mix. We seek to maintain a surplus of long term debt and equity above the cash capital requirements of our assets. This allows us to be able to fund our operations for at least one year in a stress event, without needing to raise additional unsecured funding or forcing the liquidation of trading assets. The amount of liquidity required is based on an internal model which incorporates the following requirements.
Our internal model is calculated at the subsidiary level in order to take into account legal, regulatory and tax restrictions that may impact the transfer of liquidity among us.
We routinely issue long term debt in various maturities and currencies to maintain a long term funding surplus, and to also achieve both cost effective funding and a maturity profile where the average duration of our debt is sufficient to meet our long-term cash capital requirements. We therefore seek to maintain an average maturity for plain vanilla instruments greater than three years. The average maturity (for debt securities and borrowings with maturities longer than one year) was 3.88 years as of March 31, 2010. Approximately 80% of our medium-term notes are structured and linked to interest or equity, indices, currencies or commodities. Conditions for calls by indices are individually set. These maturities are evaluated based on our internal model and monitored by Global Treasury. Maturities for plain vanilla debt securities and borrowings are based on contractual maturities. Where there is a possibility that notes may be called prior to their scheduled maturity date, maturities are based on our internal stress option adjusted model. This model values the embedded optionality under stress market conditions in order to determine when the note is likely to be called.
On this basis, the average maturity of structured notes (notes with maturities longer than one year) was 11.63 years as of March 31, 2010. The average maturity of our entire long term debt portfolio including plain vanilla debt securities and borrowings was 6.67 years as of March 31, 2010. The graph below shows the distribution of maturities of our outstanding long-term debt securities and borrowings.
2. Diversify unsecured funding sources. We seek to reduce refinancing risk through diversification of our funding sources. We diversify funding by product, investor and market in order to reduce our reliance on any one funding source. We benefit by distributing a significant portion of our debt through our retail and institutional sales force to a diversified global investor base. We believe that maintaining relationships with our investors is critical to our liquidity strategy.
We also seek to diversify funding by currency. The proportion of our non-yen denominated long-term debt is 22% of total term debt outstanding as of March 31, 2010.
We diversify funding by issuing various types of debt instrumentsthese include both structured loans and notes. Structured notes are debt obligations with returns linked to other debt or equity securities, indices, currencies or commodities.
3. Unsecured Funding Management. We manage the overall level of unsecured funding and set internal limits on the additional amount of unsecured funding available across the Firm. The limit for unsecured funding is set by the Executive Management Board and monitored closely by Global Treasury.
Issuance of securities by regulated broker-dealers or banking entities may restrict the availability of liquidity across the Nomura group. We actively seek to concentrate issuance of all long-term unsecured, non-deposit funding instruments at either Nomura or unregulated issuing entities. The primary benefits of this strategy include cost minimization, wider investor name recognition and greater flexibility in providing funding to various subsidiaries across the Nomura group.
4. Maintain Liquidity Portfolios. To ensure a readily available source of liquidity, we have structured our liquidity portfolio under the assumption that in certain instances, legal and regulatory requirements can restrict the flow of funds between entities in our consolidated group, and funds or securities may not freely move among us.
We maintain a liquidity portfolio at Nomura Holdings, Inc. and group companies in the form of cash and highly liquid, unencumbered securities that may be sold or pledged to provide liquidity.
The size and structure of our liquidity portfolio takes into account immediate cash requirements arising from
As of March 31, 2010, our liquidity portfolio was ¥5,149.9 billion. Our liquidity portfolio is composed of following highly liquid products.
In addition to the liquidity portfolio, we have ¥1,249.9 billion of other unencumbered assets comprising mainly unpledged trading assets that can be used as an additional source of secured funding. The aggregate value of our liquidity portfolios and other unencumbered assets as of March 31, 2010 was ¥6,399.8 billionthis represented 297.2% of our total unsecured debt maturing within one year.
5. Maintain Committed Bank Facilities. In addition to our Liquidity Portfolio, we maintain undrawn committed facilities with a group of globally recognized banks in order to provide contingent financing sources. Total of unused committed facilities was ¥172.3 billion as of March 31, 2010. We have structured the facilities to ensure that the maturity dates of these facilities are distributed evenly throughout the year in order to prevent excessive maturities of facilities in any given period. While the ability to borrow under these facilities is subject to customary lending conditions and covenants, we do not believe that any of the covenant requirements will impair our ability to draw on them. We may occasionally test the effectiveness of our drawdown procedures.
6. Maintain and test Contingency Funding Plan (CFP). We have developed a detailed contingency funding plan. As a part of the CFP, we have developed an approach for analyzing and specifying the extent of any liquidity crisis. This allows us to estimate the likely impact of both a Nomura-specific and market-wide crises; and specifies the immediate action to be taken to mitigate any risk. The CFP lists details of key internal and external parties to be contacted and the processes by which information is to be disseminated. This has been developed at the legal entity level in order to capture specific cash requirements at the local levelit assumes that the parent company does not have access to cash that may be trapped at the subsidiary level due to regulatory, legal or tax constraints. We periodically test the effectiveness of our funding plans for different Nomura specific and market-wide events. We also have access to operations at central banks such as the Bank of Japan and the European Central Bank, which provide financing against various types of securities. These operations are accessed in the normal course of business and are an important tool in mitigating contingent risk from market disruptions.
Since November 2009, we have revised the CFP to further integrate liquidity risk control into our comprehensive risk management strategy and to enhance the quantitative aspects of our liquidity risk control procedures. Under the revised CFP, we monitor our liquidity based on an internal model which simulates changes in cash outflow under specified stress scenarios. Such stress scenarios are in turn tailored to the liquidity requirements in view of the risk appetite formulated by the Global Integrated Risk Management Committee, our risk management body functioning under the supervision of the Board of Directors and the Executive Management Board. Where the liquidity requirements are not met as a result of the stress test, the CFP specifies an action plan depending on the nature of the contingency.
Cash and cash equivalents as of March 31, 2010 increased by ¥407.1 billion compared to March 31, 2009. For the year ended March 31, 2010, Cash flows from operating activities were outflows of ¥1,500.8 billion due mainly to an increase of Trading assets. Cash flows from investing activities were outflows of ¥269.6 billion due to a net increase in Bank loans, etc., while Cash flows from financing activities were inflows of ¥2,176.5 billion due mainly to an increase in borrowings and a new stock issuances.
Balance Sheet and Financial Leverage
Total assets as of March 31, 2010, were ¥32,230.4 billion, an increase of ¥7,392.6 billion compared to ¥24,837.8 billion as of March 31, 2009, reflecting increases in collateralized agreements, trading assets and private equity investments. Total liabilities as of March 31, 2010, were ¥30,097.4 billion, an increase of ¥6,811.1 billion compared to ¥23,286.3 billion as of March 31, 2009, reflecting increases in securities sold under agreements to repurchase and trading liabilities. NHI shareholders equity as of March 31, 2010, was ¥2,126.9 billion, an increase of ¥587.5 billion compared to ¥1,539.4 billion as of March 31, 2009, due to an increase from a stock issuance.
We seek to maintain sufficient capital at all times to withstand losses due to extreme market movements. The Executive Management Board is responsible for implementing and enforcing capital policies. This includes the determination of our balance sheet size and required capital levels. We continuously review our equity capital base to ensure that it can support the economic risk inherent in our business. There are also regulatory requirements for minimum capital of entities that operate in regulated securities or banking businesses.
NHI shareholders equity was ¥2,126.9 billion as of March 31, 2010, an increase of ¥587.5 billion compared with ¥1,539.4 billion as of March 31, 2009. Our leverage ratio as of March 31, 2010 has dropped to 15.2 times from 16.1 times as of March 31, 2009, largely due to the increase in NHI shareholders equity.
The following table sets forth our shareholders equity, total assets, adjusted assets and leverage ratios:
Capital Management Policy
We seek to enhance shareholder value by capturing business opportunities as they develop. To achieve this goal, we maintain sufficient capital to support our business. We review our sufficiency of capital as appropriate, taking into consideration economic risks inherent in our businesses, regulatory requirements, and the maintenance of a sufficient debt rating for a global financial institution.
Our capital-raising activities during the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010 included the following:
Nomura believes that raising corporate value over the long term and paying dividends is essential to rewarding shareholders. Nomura will strive to pay stable dividends using a consolidated payout ratio of 30 percent as a key indicator.
Dividend payments will be determined taking into account a comprehensive range of factors such as the tightening of Basel regulations and other changes to the regulatory environment as well as the companys consolidated financial performance.
Nomura paid ¥4.0 of dividends for the first half and will pay ¥4.0 for the second half dividend in line with its dividend policy for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010.
As for retained earnings, we intend to invest in business areas where high profitability and growth may reasonably be expected, including the development and expansion of infrastructure, to maximize value for shareholders.
The following table sets forth the amounts of dividends per share paid by us in respect of the periods indicated:
We repurchase shares when we recognize the need to set out flexible financial strategies that allow the Board to respond quickly to changes in the business environment.
When we decide to set up a share buyback program, we will announce the decision soon after it is made and purchase the shares following internal guidelines.
Effective June 25, 2009, we have amended our Articles of Incorporation in order to enable issuance of several classes of preferred stock. A robust capital base is essential to ensuring the expansion and enhancement of our business platform. Although our capital and financial structure currently does not require any immediate issuance of preferred stock, we have made this amendment to expand our fundraising options and our ability to swiftly respond to future changes in the economic and business environment. We do not have plans to issue preferred stocks as of June 29, 2010. The amendment did not result in any change to the authorized number of shares of Nomura.
Consolidated Regulatory Requirements
The FSA established the Guideline for Financial Conglomerate Supervision (hereinafter referred to as the Financial Conglomerate Guideline) in June 2005 and set out the rule on consolidated regulatory capital. We started monitoring the consolidated capital adequacy ratio of Nomura Holdings, Inc. according to the Financial Conglomerate Guideline from April 2005.
Beginning from the end of March, 2009, we elected to calculate the consolidated capital adequacy ratio according to the Criteria for bank holding companies to judge whether their capital adequacy status is appropriate in light of their own and their subsidiaries asset holdings. Under Article 52-25 of the Banking Act (hereinafter referred to as the Bank Holding Companies Notice) as permitted under the provision in the Comprehensive Guidelines for Supervision of Financial Instruments Business Operators, etc. (hereinafter referred to as the Financial Instruments Business Operators Guidelines) instead of the Financial Conglomerate Guideline although we continue to be monitored as a financial conglomerate governed by Financial Conglomerate Guideline. The Bank Holding Companies Notice incorporates the rules set out in International Convergence of Capital Measurement and Capital Standards: A Revised Framework published with the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (Basel II).
Under the Financial Conglomerate Guideline, financial conglomerates, defined as the holding companies of financial institutions and its group companies, must maintain the amount of consolidated capital not less than required capital. As we have started the calculation according to the Bank Holding Companies Notice, we convert each risk by multiplying the amount by 12.5; therefore we examine whether we comply by this requirement by confirming that the capital/risk-weighted asset ratio is higher than 8%.
As of March 31, 2010, we were in compliance with this requirement, with a ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets of 24.3%.
The following table presents the Companys consolidated capital adequacy ratio as of March 31, 2010:
Total qualifying capital is comprised of Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3 capital. Our Tier 1 capital mainly consists of NHI shareholders equity and noncontrolling interests less goodwill, certain intangible fixed assets, and net deferred tax assets in excess of 20% of Tier 1 before deferred tax asset adjustment.
Tier 2 and Tier 3 capital consist of subordinated debt classified to Tier 2 and Tier 3 by original maturity and other conditions set out by the Bank Holding Companies Notice.
Market risk is calculated using the Companys Value-at-Risk model as permitted under the Financial Instruments Business Operators Guidelines. Credit risk assets are calculated using the Standardized Approach which applies a fixed percentage to the fair value of the assets. Operational risk is calculated under the Basic Indicator Approach, where the average net revenues over the previous three years are multiplied by a fixed percentage.
The Basel Committee has issued a series of announcements regarding a broader program designed to strengthen the regulatory capital framework in light of weaknesses revealed by the financial crises. The following is a summary of the proposals which are most relevant to us.
On March 12, 2009, the Basel Committee, recognizing the need to strengthen the level of capital in the banking system, announced that the regulatory minimum level of capital would be reviewed in 2010. On July 13, 2009, the Basel Committee announced its approval of a package of measures designed to strengthen its rules governing trading book capital and to enhance the three pillars of the Basel II framework. This announcement states that the Basel Committees trading book rules, effective at the end of 2011, will introduce higher capital requirements to capture the credit risk of complex trading activities. Such trading rules also include a stressed value-at-risk (VaR) requirement, which the Basel Committee believes will help dampen the cyclicality of the minimum regulatory capital framework. On September 7, 2009, the Group of Central Bank Governors and Heads of Supervision, the oversight body of the Basel Committee, reached agreement on certain key measures designed to strengthen regulation of the banking sector, including an increase in the quality, consistency and transparency of the Tier 1 capital base. In particular, it was agreed that the predominant form of Tier 1 capital should be common stock and retained earnings. Calibration of these new requirements is expected to be completed by the end of 2010.
In December 2009, in an effort to promote a more resilient banking sector, the Basel Committee approved for consultation a package of proposals to strengthen global capital and liquidity regulations. The proposals include raising the quality, consistency and transparency of the capital base (including, in particular, deductions of goodwill and other intangibles and net deferred tax assets from the predominant form of Tier 1 capital, and expanding the limitation on the double counting of capital to cover the wider financial system); strengthening the risk coverage of the capital framework (in addition to the higher capital requirements for trading book exposures announced in July 2009); introducing a leverage ratio requirement as a supplemental measure to the risk-based framework; and introducing a series of measures to address concerns over the procyclicality of the current framework. The proposals also introduce a minimum liquidity standard including a 30-day liquidity coverage ratio as well as a longer-term structural liquidity ratio. Additional capital, liquidity or other supervisory measures to reduce the externalities created by systemically important institutions are also under review. After a comprehensive impact assessment, the Committee will develop the fully calibrated set of standards by the end of 2010 to be phased in as financial conditions improve and the economic recovery is assured, with plans for implementation to commence by the end of 2012.
The Bank Holding Companies Notice may be amended to follow the new measures described above after they are officially adopted by the Basel Committee.
On December 25, 2009, the FSA issued for public comment a proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Guidelines for Supervision of the Financial Instruments Business Operators, etc., which became effective on March 4, 2010. This amendment requires corporate groups of financial instruments firms engaging in
international operations, including Nomura, to strengthen their management and compliance systems in view of the increasingly significant growth, complication and development of their international operations. These new requirements include strengthening the groups business management system, compliance system and risk management system, as well as public disclosure of detailed information regarding their capital adequacy ratios, in accordance with the Basel II framework. For more information about such amendments, see RegulationsRegulation of Financial Instruments Firms under Item 4.B.
The cost and availability of unsecured funding generally are dependent on credit ratings. Our long-term and short-term debt is rated by several recognized credit rating agencies. We believe that our credit ratings include the credit ratings agencies assessment of the general operating environment, our positions in the markets in which we operate, reputation, earnings structure, trend and volatility of our earnings, risk management framework, liquidity and capital management. An adverse change in any of these factors could result in a downgrade of our credit ratings, and that could, in turn, increase our borrowing costs and limit our access to the capital markets or require us to post additional collateral and permit counterparties to terminate transactions pursuant to certain contractual obligations. In addition, our credit ratings can have a significant impact on certain of our trading revenues, particularly in those businesses where longer term counterparty performance is critical, such as OTC derivative transactions.
As of May 31, 2010, the credit ratings of Nomura Holdings, Inc. and Nomura Securities Co., Ltd. were as follows:
Both Rating and Investment Information, Inc. and Japan Credit Rating Agency, Ltd. are credit rating agencies nationally recognized in Japan. We rely on, or utilize, credit ratings on our long-term and short-term debt provided by these Japanese credit rating agencies, as well as Standard & Poors and Moodys Investors Service, for unsecured funding and other financing purposes and also for our trading and other business activities. Within the rating classification system of Rating and Investment Information, Inc., a-1 is the highest of five categories for short-term debt and indicates a strong degree of certainty regarding the debt repayment; and A is the third highest of nine categories for long-term debt and indicates a high degree of certainty regarding the debt repayment with excellence in specific component factors, with a plus (+) or minus (-) sign added to a rating in that category to indicate its relative standing within that category. Within the rating classification system of Japan Credit Rating Agency, Ltd., AA is the second highest of ten categories for long-term debt and indicates a very high level of capacity to honor the financial commitment on the obligation, with a plus (+) or minus (-) sign added to a rating in that category to indicate its relative standing within that category.
On May 27, 2009, Moodys Investors Service downgraded the ratings for senior debt from A3 to Baa2 and from A2 to Baa1 for Nomura Holdings and Nomura Securities, respectively. The short-term debt rating for Nomura Securities was also downgraded from P-1 to P-2. The outlook for both Nomura Holdings and
Nomura Securities was changed from Negative to Stable. These downgrades were attributed to Moodys expectation that stabilizing earnings will continue to be a challenge for Nomura, given a persistently difficult operating environment. The downgrade also reflects the agencys lingering uncertainty regarding Nomuras ability to expand its wholesale platform within a reasonable timeframe by integrating Lehman Brothers operations.
C. Research and Development, Patents and Licenses, etc.
D. Trend Information.
The information required by this item is set forth in Item 5.A of this annual report.
E. Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements.
Off-balance sheet entities
In the normal course of business, we engage in a variety of off-balance sheet arrangements with off-balance sheet entities which may have an impact on Nomuras future financial position and performance.
Off-balance sheet arrangements with off-balance sheet entities include the following where Nomura has:
Off-balance sheet entities may take the form of a corporation, partnership, fund, trust or other legal vehicle which is designed to fulfill a limited, specific purpose by its sponsor. We both create or sponsor these entities and also enter into arrangements with entities created or sponsored by others. Such entities generally meet the definition of a Variable Interest Entity (VIE) under ASC 810 or meet the definition of a Qualifying Special Purpose Entity (QSPE) under ASC 860.
A VIE, as defined by ASC 810, is an entity with insufficient equity at risk to support its operations without additional subordinated financial support or whose equity investors lack the features of a controlling interest in the entity. In other words, equity investors in these entities lack either the ability to make significant decisions through their voting rights, an obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity or a right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity. A QSPE is generally a passive vehicle whose activities are restricted and predetermined at inception in accordance with criteria under ASC 860. Such vehicles are generally used to securitize financial assets such as loans and debt instruments.
Our only significant arrangements with entities which meet the definition of off-balance sheet entities are through program vehicles which we use primarily for the securitization of commercial and residential mortgages, government and corporate bonds and other financial assets. Significant involvement is assessed based on all of our arrangements with these entities, even if the probability of loss, as assessed at the balance sheet date, is remote.
Our involvement with these entities includes structuring, underwriting, distributing and selling debt instruments and beneficial interests issued by these entities, subject to prevailing market conditions. In the normal course of business, we also act as transferor of financial assets to these entities, as well as, and
underwriter, distributor and seller of asset-repackaged financial instruments issued by these entities, in connection with our securitization and equity derivative activities. We retain, purchase and sell variable interests in Special Purpose Entities (SPEs) in connection with our market-making, investing and structuring activities. Our other types of off-balance sheet arrangements include guarantee agreements and derivative contracts. For further information about transactions with VIEs, see Note 8, Securitization and Variable Interest Entities (VIEs) in our consolidated financial statements.
The following table sets forth our exposures from consolidated VIEs, exposure to unconsolidated significant VIEs and exposure to unconsolidated sponsored VIEs (where we hold a variable interest in a sponsored VIE) as of March 31, 2010, arising from our significant involvement with these entities. We consider maximum exposures to loss to be limited to the amounts presented below, which are reflected in our consolidated balance sheets or the Note 20, Commitments, contingencies and guarantees. Exposures do not reflect our estimate of the actual losses that could result from adverse changes, nor does it reflect the economic hedges we enter into to reduce exposure.
We may be required to consolidate off-balance sheet entities which are currently not consolidated under ASC 810, should we become the primary beneficiary of those vehicles. The primary beneficiary of an entity is determined through an assessment of which entity absorbs the majority of the expected losses or is entitled to the majority of the expected benefits of that entity, or both. Such an assessment takes into account our variable interests in the entity as well the seniority of our interests in relation to those of other variable interest holders.
Repurchase and securities lending transactions accounted for as sales
We enter into certain types of repurchase transactions and securities lending transactions which we account for as sales rather than collateralized financings where the criteria for derecognition of the securities transferred under ASC 860 are met. These consist of Repo-to-maturity transactions, certain Japanese securities lending transactions and to a lesser extent, Japanese Gensaki transactions.
We enter into repo-to-maturity transactions to take advantage of arbitrage opportunities between the cash security and repo markets. These transactions involve the sourcing of specific securities in the market and contemporaneously entering into repurchase agreements with different counterparties where the maturity of the agreement matches the maturity of the security transferred as collateral. We account for these transactions as sales rather than collateralized financings where the criteria for derecognition of the securities transferred under ASC 860 are met. The amounts of securities derecognized from our consolidated balance sheets under open repo-to-maturity transactions as of March 31, 2010 and 2009 were ¥185,047 million and ¥nil, respectively.
We engage in certain Japanese securities lending transactions for funding purposes under which we transfer long securities (such as Japanese listed equities). The agreements supporting these transactions include varying margining requirements, but the amount of cash we borrow from our counterparties is typically significantly less than the fair value of securities we lend. We account for these transactions as sales in our consolidated financial statements where the criteria for derecognition of the transferred financial assets under ASC 860 are met. In particular, we do not maintain effective control over the transferred financial assets as we are not able to be returned the transferred financial assets on substantially agreed terms, even in the event of default by the transferee. The amounts of securities derecognized from our consolidated balance sheets under open securities lending transactions as of March 31, 2010 and 2009 were ¥153,808 million and ¥174,567 million respectively.
We also have historically engaged in traditional Japanese repurchase agreements called Gensaki transactions We account for Gensaki transactions as sales in our consolidated financial statements where the criteria for derecognition of the transferred financial assets under ASC 860 have been met. The transactions are now less commonplace in Japan and have largely been replaced with Gensaki Repo transactions which were introduced in Japan in 2001 and which are similar to other international repurchase agreements used in the United States, United Kingdom and other jurisdictions. These transactions contain margin requirements, rights of security substitution, or certain restrictions on the customers right to sell or repledge the transferred securities. We therefore account for Gensaki repo agreements as collateralized financings in our balance sheet. The amounts of securities derecognized from our consolidated balance sheets under Gensaki Transactions as of March 31, 2010 and 2009 were not significant.
F. Tabular Disclosure of Contractual Obligations.
As part of our business, we enter into a variety of contractual obligations and contingent commitments, which may require future payments. These arrangements include:
Standby letters of credit and other guarantees:
Operating lease commitments:
Capital lease commitments:
Commitments to extend credit:
Commitments to invest in partnerships:
Note 12, Borrowings contains further detail on our short-term and long-term borrowing obligation and Note 20, Commitments, contingencies and guarantees in our consolidated financial statements contains further detail on our other commitments, contingencies and guarantees.
The contractual amounts of commitments to extend credit represent the amounts at risk should the contracts be fully drawn upon, should the counterparties default, and assuming the value of any existing collateral becomes worthless. The total contractual amount of these commitments may not represent future cash requirements since the commitments may expire without being drawn upon. The credit risk associated with these commitments varies depending on the customers creditworthiness and the value of collateral held. We evaluate each customers creditworthiness on a case-by-case basis. The amount of collateral obtained, if deemed necessary by us upon extension of credit, is based on managements credit evaluation of the counterparty.
The following table shows our contractual obligations and contingent commitments as well as their maturities as of March 31, 2010:
Excluded from the above table are obligations that are generally short-term in nature, including short-term borrowings, deposits received at banks and other payables, collateralized agreements and financing transactions (such as resale and repurchase agreements), and trading liabilities.
In addition to amounts presented above, we have commitments under resale and repurchase agreements including amounts in connection with collateralized agreements, collateralized financing and Gensaki transactions. These commitments amount to ¥2,306 billion for resale agreements and ¥1,072 billion for repurchase agreements as of March 31, 2010. These amounts include certain types of repurchase transactions and securities lending transactions which we account for as sales rather than collateralized financings in accordance with ASC 860.
Item 6. Directors, Senior Management and Employees
A. Directors and Senior Management.
The following table provides information about Nomuras Directors as of June 29, 2010. With respect to the information under Brief Personal History below, some of the Directors changed their titles upon our adoption of the holding company structure on October 1, 2001 and the Committee System on June 26, 2003, as described in Item 6.C of this annual report.
Among the above listed Directors, Haruo Tsuji, Hajime Sawabe, Tsuguoki Fujinuma, Hideaki Kubori, Masahiro Sakane, Lord Colin Marshall and Dame Clara Furse satisfy the requirements for an outside director
under the Companies Act. The Companies Act defines an outside director of a company as a non-executive director (i) who has never assumed the position of executive director, executive officer, manager or employee of the company or its subsidiaries and (ii) who does not currently assume the position of executive director, executive officer, manager or employee of the company or its subsidiaries.
The following table provides information about Nomuras Executive Officers as of June 29, 2010. With respect to the information under Brief Personal History below, some of the Executive Officers changed their titles or positions upon our adoption of the holding company structure on October 1, 2001 and the Committee System on June 26, 2003, as described in Item 6.C of this annual report.
The overview of Nomura groups compensation framework is as follows:
(1) Compensation policy
We have developed our compensation policy for both executives and employees of the Nomura group to ensure we attract, retain, motivate and develop talent that enable us to achieve sustainable growth, realize a long-term increase in shareholder value, deliver client excellence, compete in a global market and enhance our reputation. Our compensation policy is based around the following six key themes. It aims to:
(2) Compensation governance
The Compensation Committee of Nomura, which is a statutory committee, is responsible for approving our overall compensation policy and for ensuring that the Nomura groups compensation framework supports our business strategy.
The Company has delegated authority to the Human Resources Committee (HRC) to develop and to implement Nomura groups compensation policy. The HRCs responsibilities include:
The term of the office of each HRC member is unlimited, and changes to its members must be approved by the Chairman. Current members include the CEO (as Chairman of the Committee), COO, President and COO of the Wholesale Division, CFO, Chief Risk Officer, head of Corporate Office and heads of Human Resources.
(3) Regulatory developments and review of our compensation plans
The recent global financial crisis has resulted in enhanced regulatory requirements and oversight in many of our key operating regions. During the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010, we completed a comprehensive review of our compensation programs and practices in light of changes to our business, the regulatory environment and the broader competitive landscape.
We conducted this review with assistance from an independent compensation consulting firm, which contributed in the following areas: