By Lucy Craymer
WELLINGTON, March 21 (Reuters) – There is limited competition for personal banking services among New Zealand’s four major banks, the country’s competition watchdog said on Thursday, due to price-matching strategies and a lack of disruptive forces to drive change.
A draft report released by the Commerce Commission said the four major banks’ focus on maintaining profit margins had resulted in ongoing under-investment in their core technology platforms and low levels of innovation.
The report was commissioned by the previous New Zealand government in 2023 due to concerns about a lack of competition for personal banking services and questions over what could be done to improve the sector.
New Zealand’s banking system is dominated by four large Australian-owned banks: Westpac Banking Corp WBC.AX, ASB Bank, Bank of New Zealand and Australia and New Zealand Banking Group AN3PG.AX.
The banks did not respond immediately to requests for comment.
John Small, Chair of the Commerce Commission, said a well-functioning banking market would typically have strong competition driving innovation and choice for customers rather than the price-matching strategies seen in New Zealand, which has resulted in very stable market share for the banks.
The report recommended improving the capital position of government-owned Kiwibank, New Zealand’s fifth-largest bank, ensuring the regulatory environment better supports competition and setting a 2026 deadline to have open banking fully operational.
Opening banking involves banks making customer data available to third parties on request, so customers can better shop around for deals.
Minister for Commerce and Consumer Affairs Andrew Bayly said in a statement he would await the release of the final report in August, but the government wanted to deliver better banking outcomes.
The draft will be subject to consultation before a final report is published in August.
(Reporting by Lucy Craymer in Wellington; Editing by Nia Williams)
((Lucy.Craymer@thomsonreuters.com;))
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.