Expat money transfers hit SR102bn in 8 months

Updated 05 October 2014

Expat money transfers hit SR102bn in 8 months

Expatriate remittances from the Kingdom rose by 3.4 percent to SR101.8 billion in the first 8 months of 2014 compared to SR98.67 billion during the same period last year, according to a financial report.
Likewise, Saudi personal remittances to foreign countries rose by 7 percent to SR54.33 billion by the end of August 2014 compared to SR50.82 billion in the same period last year, the report, carried by Al-Eqtisadiah said.
Remittances of foreign workers dropped by 8 percent in August for the second consecutive month to reach SR11.6 billion compared to SR12.7 billion in July (2014). Remittances in July fell by 4 percent compared to figures of June which stood at SR 13.2 billion, the report said.
The number of foreigners in the Kingdom stands at 9.72 million, or 32.4 percent of the Kingdom’s population (67.6 percent of total population). Based on the latest data released by the Department of Statistics and Information in 2013, the per capita remittances by foreigners reached SR 1,197 in August, the report said.
On the other hand, personal remittances by Saudi nationals and foreigners dropped by 7 percent to SR17.7 billion in August compared to SR19 billion in July, the report said.
The volume of remittance in general rose by 2 percent (year-on-year) in August 2014 compared to remittances of the same period last year which stood at SR17.4 billion.
However, Saudi remittances fell by 5 percent in August to reach SR6 billion compared to SR6.3 billion in July (2014, the report said.
In general, foreign workers’ remittances captured 66 percent of the total remittances compared to 34 percent for Saudi nationals. Meanwhile, remittances to cover travel expenses abroad in August reached SR 63 million, of which SR 38 million went to Saudis and the remaining SR 25 million to foreigners.
In July, such kind of remittances (travel expenses abroad) stood at SR107 million, with SR51 and SR56 million being allocated to Saudis and non-Saudis, respectively, the report said.


BT warns UK that banning Huawei too fast could cause outages

Updated 13 July 2020

BT warns UK that banning Huawei too fast could cause outages

  • Prime Minister Boris Johnson is due to decide this week whether to impose tougher restrictions on Huawei
  • British PM in January granted Huawei a limited role in the 5G network

LONDON: BT CEO Philip Jansen urged the British government on Monday not to move too fast to ban China’s Huawei from the 5G network, cautioning that there could be outages and even security issues if it did.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson is due to decide this week whether to impose tougher restrictions on Huawei, after intense pressure from the United States to ban the Chinese telecoms behemoth from Western 5G networks.
Johnson in January defied President Donald Trump and granted Huawei a limited role in the 5G network, but the perception that China did not tell the whole truth over the coronavirus crisis and a row over Hong Kong has changed the mood in London.
“If you are to try not to have Huawei at all, ideally we would want seven years and we could probably do it in five,” Jansen told BBC radio.
Asked what the risks would be if telecoms operators were told to do it in less than five years, Jansen said: “We need to make sure that any change of direction does not lead to more risk in the short term.”
“If we get to a situation where things need to go very, very fast, then you are into a situation where potentially service for 24 million BT Group mobile customers is put into question — outages,” he said.
In what some have compared to the Cold War antagonism with the Soviet Union, the United States is worried that 5G dominance is a milestone toward Chinese technological supremacy that could define the geopolitics of the 21st century.
The United States says Huawei is an agent of the Chinese Communist State and cannot be trusted.
Huawei, the world’s biggest producer of telecoms equipment, has said the United States wants to frustrate its growth because no US company could offer the same range of technology at a competitive price.