Gordon Dadds Share Discussion Threads

[trumpet] 31/3/2003 09:58

From The Business I believe.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

THE ENTREPRENEURS ARE CLEARING THEIR DESKS AND LEAVING UK PLC
By Matthew Lynn

THE greatest improvement in British life during the 1980s and 1990s was the rediscovery of a culture that celebrated entre-preneurs, risk-takers and new businesses. A country that slumbered through most of the post-war period appeared to have connected back to the spirit that created the first industrial revolution,. And now? Six years of Labour's mismanagement of the economy has suffocated business creativity in Britain. If you didn't know otherwise, you might imagine the business' community had gone on strike.
The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) drew attention to one strand of the story last week when it published a sobering analysis of the collapse 'of business' investment. It calculated that UK business investment fell by 12.7% in the past two years, the biggest drop of any G7 country. At 12% of GDP, British business investment' remains stubbornly below most of its major' industrial competitors. "Falling business investment is a looming threat that will do irreversible damage to the economy," argued Digby Jones, the CBI's director-gen-eral. "'this has been a long-term endemic problem for the UK but the trend in recent years has been particularly disturbing."
That is bad enough news in itself - economies that don't invest don't grow - but the portrait of the UK economy slowly emerging is much more disturbing. Not just business investment, but also just about every measure of new business creation is in fast decline. The entrepreneurs are all clearing their desks and going home. There are four main ways of measuring how fast new enterprises are being created: overall businesses investment; the scale of inward investment by foreign companies; the rate
at which new companies are opening and closing; and the numbers of self-employed. None of them looks good.
Total investment in the UK is already dropping at the fastest pace since the government started keeping track in 1986. It is not just manufacturing - for decades a poorly-performing sector of the UK economy - that is being hit. Retailing and financial services, two of the UK's main economic engines, have declining investment and the CBI survey of intentions suggests managers in those industries have no plans to step up investment.
Edward George, governor of the Bank of England, pins the blame for the collapse on the Iraq war. No doubt that is part of the problem. But figures from elsewhere in the economy suggest something more trou-bling - an overall collapse in the desire to create new businesses.
Foreign investment in Britain collapsed by 78% last year, according to figures pub-lished by the United Nations. Britain is now getting only 5.1% of foreign investment in the European Union (EU), compared with 16.7% in 2001 and an average of 28.9% , for the 1980s and 1990s. Those percentages translate into big money. Foreign investment in the UK is now running at about $12bn (£7.56bn, €11.28bn) a year, compared with $45bn for France and $43bn for Germany - neither of which could be characterised as among the world's most dynamic economies.
The decline in inward investment has been jumped upon by pro-euro campaigners as evidence that Britain's failure to join the euro is driving away foreign companies. There may be an element of truth in that, particularly far the Japanese. But it's just as likely that they are staying away because Britain is fast turning into high-cost, high- tax, high-regulation place to do business. They are building factories instead in Poland and Hungary - but worryingly they are also building them in France and Germany. And who can blame them? Britain now has German- and French levels of tax and regulation but they have far higher productivity, better infrastructure and better education.
Britain has abandoned its main competitive advantage - low taxes, light regulation - but not replaced it with anything else. So existing companies are not investing anymore; and foreign companies are looking elsewhere. But at least there are still lots of entrepreneurs out their, creating new companies, and laying the foundation for the economy of the future.
Er... I'm afraid not.
Company insolvencies are rocketing in an economy that is supposedly still growing. The latest government figures show 4,323 companies went bust in the last quarter of 2002, an 11% increase on the earlier an quarter and a 14% rise year on year.
How does that compare with the number of new business being created? Figuresfor that are hard to calculate precisely but the signs are not encouraging. The number of new Vat registrations dropped by 4% between 2000, and 2001, in the latest figures available. In fairness, the number of de-registrations has also dropped. But those numbers would suggest fewer and fewer people are creating new businesses.
Life is getting tougher for new small companies. The Association of Business Recovery Professionals, representing insolvency specialists, found in its latest survey that the failure rate for companies in the first three years of their life had risen: more than all 40% now go under. Small companies - those with sales of less than a £lm - are now 85% of all insolvencies compared with 63% five years ago. Those were the micro-businesses that should have been big busi-nesses of the future.
How about the self-employed? We heard a lot in the last decade about how they were the advanced guard of a flexible, net-worked, modem economy. Well, there are fewer of those around as well. I 1997, 3.8m people were self-employed and heading back to the safety of big compa-nies and the public sector. Even in the City, it is not the creators of new businesses that are exciting the markets anymore.
The big new names are men such as retailer Philip Green or corporate raider Hugh Osmond, who launched a £6bn attack on Six Continents. They are only entrepreneurs in the sense that they work for themselves. They trade companies, not create new ones. They are like Lord Han-son and Tiny Rowland who rose to promi-nence during an earlier period of economic stagnation - skilled dealers in old assets, rather than builders of new ones.
There is no great mystery about Britain's crisis of entrepreneurship. Rising taxes, an ocean of red tape, a minimum wage that accelerates at three times the rate of inflation and intrusive employment legislation all tip the scales against new companies. At the margin, some will decide not to bother. Others will find it all too expensive and go bust. It takes time for the impact of that to be felt. There are plenty of big companies that are still growing. There are small businesses established in the last decade that are still expanding.
But the economy is restless. The stock of new businesses needs to be constantly replenished. Old businesses fade away and if there is nothing to replace them, the UK's economy will fade with them. Public spend-ing and consumer borrowing can only keep an economy moving for a limited period. When the impact of the decline of entrepreneurship is finally felt, it will be deadly. In our globalised, hyper-competitive econ-omy, only flexible, innovative economies prosper. Britain is no longer among them.

[bonsai] 31/3/2003 09:49

FIFTH OF FIRMS PLAN NI JOB CUTS ¯ POLL
One in five firms plans to cut jobs to
help pay for the increase in National
Insurance contributions, a survey says.

Almost 90% of the 1,000 firms polled by
the British Chambers of Commerce said
the increased contributions would have
an adverse affect on their business.

BCC President Isabella Moore said those
that did not plan to cut jobs intended
to cut wages, investment or research.

One in 10 of those polled said they had
considered moving their business abroad


- no chance of a stimulus package now -
it would like a reversal of policy !

[pmeas] 22/3/2003 00:28

spending will be consumed by inflation and most companys results are for previous years not present day.

[trumpet] 21/3/2003 11:47

Total tax receipts up 0.7 percent, spending up 7.4%. Quite staggering.

Record employment income tax revenues down 0.2% - what does that say about the quality of jobs being created, or more importantly the ones that have disappeared?


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Blow to Brown as tax receipts plunge
By Philip Thornton, Economics Correspondent
21 March 2003


Tax receipts have plunged at the fastest rate for a decade, according to Treasury figures yesterday that fuelled fears Gordon Brown will have to increase taxes in the Budget to fill a hole in the public finances.

Government borrowing plunged deeper into the red last month as personal and business tax revenues fell by 2.3 per cent or £3.1bn in the first 11 months of the financial year.

The Office for National Statistics confirmed this was the steepest drop since the 1992-93 financial year when the UK was emerging from recession.

Corporation tax receipts slumped almost 9 per cent compared with last year while income tax revenues were down 0.2 per cent.

The falls reflect the impact of the sharp economic downturn as corporate profits tumbled and bonuses for workers in the City of London were cut sharply.

Total receipts, including VAT and stamp duty that benefited from the boom on the high street and the housing market, rose 0.7 per cent – compared with the Chancellor's 2.6 per cent forecast.

Meanwhile spending has grown by 7.4 per cent a year, well above the Government's budget for a 6 per cent increase.

The mix of falling revenues and surging spending pushed the public finances £600m into the red last month, taking the deficit so far this year to £18.1bn.

Analysts said a shortfall in March – which tends to see high spending and low revenues – would mean the deficit will overshoot the Government's £20bn forecast.

Carl Emmerson, an economist at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said receipts and borrowing were both on track to miss the Treasury's forecasts.

"Whether further tax increases will be required to pay for the Government's pledged spending increases will depend on whether receipts recover in the medium term, as the Treasury expects, or if the growth is less strong," he said.

The Chancellor will issue fresh forecasts for both economic growth and public spending on 9 April when he delivers his Budget.

On average City economists believe the economy will grow just 1.9 per cent this year, rather than the Treasury's forecast of between 2.5 and 3.0 per cent.

On the public finances they fear the deficit could hit £28bn in the coming financial year and £31.3bn in 2005-06 – compared with Treasury forecasts of £24bn and £19bn respectively.

John Hawksworth, at the accountants PricewaterhouseCoopers, forecasts a deficit of £30bn in the coming year, but admits £40bn is possible.

"This reflects a less strong rebound in tax receipts than expected by the Treasury, partly due to lower economic growth and partly due to lower equity prices and weak corporate profits," he said.

There was fresh evidence of the economic slowdown with manufacturing on course for its third recession in five years and retail sales growth falling to a four-year low.

High street spending fell for the second month in a row last month thanks to a drop in sales from food shops, department stores, mail order catalogues and websites.

The annual growth rate tumbled to 3.2 from 4.6 per cent making it the worst month since July 1999, official figures showed.

Ross Walker, the UK economist at Royal Bank of Scotland, said in normal times that would be a sustainable growth rate. "But the extent of the slowdown ahead of the 'triple whammy' of tax increases – national insurance hikes, frozen personal allowances and council tax rises – leaves us feeling less sanguine," he said.

Meanwhile, the Confederation of British Industry said manufacturers' expectations about future output hit their lowest levels in more than a year.

The CBI used the survey to urge the Chancellor not to use the Budget to raise money through extra taxes on business.

Ciaran Barr, the chief UK economist at Deutsche Bank, said manufacturing, where output has fallen in three of the past five months, was on course for recession.

"With most evidence pointing to a weak outcome for first-quarter GDP, we continue to look for the Bank [of England] to cut rates again within the next two months," he said.

[ashtongray] 19/3/2003 16:30

The MPC seems quite relaxed about inflation - temporary peak after the new council tax kicks in, but otherwise not looking too bad thereafter?

[pmeas] 19/3/2003 15:07

We also have us some inflation Jl202.

[pmeas] 19/3/2003 10:40

Record employment holds gains JL202

Maxk you should try a ssas pension loads of tax benifits and you choose what its invested in except gold.

[ashtongray] 06/3/2003 21:20

scrip

Indeed. But you will notice that neither Tony Blair's pension, nor that of his friend and mentor Lord Irvine, will be subject to the pension fund cap.

I sometimes wonder what it would be like to revisit all the current members of HMG in say 10 years time, and find out just how many of them are (socialist) millionaires, complete with Titles and country estates. remember Jim Callaghan in the 70's?

[maxk] 06/3/2003 16:17

Isnt this government wonderfull?

They have secured the pensions of 40% of the working population.

[trumpet] 06/3/2003 10:33

JonC,

Quite.

[jonc] 06/3/2003 10:26

"because their pensions come with a government guarantee. "

Shouldn't that actually say:

"because their pensions are guaranteed by the very taxpayers who ARE suffering cuts in transfer values...

[trumpet] 06/3/2003 10:06

Cheers Pmeas,



Ministers to escape rules on pension transfers
By Christine Seib


MEMBERS of Parliament and public sector workers will escape new rules designed to allow pension fund trustees to reduce the retirement benefits of workers who leave company schemes early.

MPs, who were last year criticised for voting through improvements to their own pensions as the savings crisis in the UK deepened, will evade controversial changes to pension law, due in June.

Under the rules, cash-strapped company pension schemes will be allowed to cut transfer values by 50 per cent or more. But public sector workers, including teachers and nurses, are set to escape the new rules, because their pensions come with a government guarantee.

The taxpayer pays for the Civil Service Pension, assuring the 659 MPs in the House of Commons a generous index-linked final salary pension.

News that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP)is planning to introduce new legislation aimed at shoring up the battered finances of Britain’s £650 billion pension fund industry prompted union outrage. The move emerged as the Occupational Pensions Regulatory Authority (Opra), the pensions watchdog, issued guidelines that will effectively trap members in distressed schemes until the new rules come into force this year.

A spokesman for the Trades Union Congress said: “These rules will not solve the problem of the huge holes in occupational pension funds.”

Derek Simpson, joint general secretary of Amicus, the UK’s biggest private sector union, said the regulations were an inadequate answer to uncertainty faced by millions over retirement benefits. “We can see why it’s been done but as a stand-alone measure, it’s not enough,” he said.

“We want more protection from schemes being closed or terms altered. We want pensions brought into the employment contract and the Government to bite the bullet on compulsion and make employers contribute to pension funds.”

Mr Simpson said that he would push Ian McCartney, the Pensions Minister, to endorse a minimum pension, based on employer contributions and government bonds, when they meet on March 20.

Frank Field, the former welfare minister, will introduce a Private Member’s Bill tomorrow, designed to boost the rights of workers at companies which walk away from their pension liabilities.

UK pension schemes face massive deficits because of plummeting stock prices and increasing life expectancies. Increasing numbers of final salary schemes are expected to fold, leaving employees facing drastic losses.

Actuaries criticised the Government’s new rules as excessively complex. Mike Hammer, of Towers Perrin, said that the DWP should have done away with its old methodology for calculating valuations. “The existing way of calculating valuations is broken; why not get away from it completely?”

Opra defended the leeway it allowed trustees on deferring valuations. “It only applies to certain funds, it’s only for a few months and it’s on a case- by-case basis,” it said.

Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, was, meanwhile, accused of “grossly misleading” high-earners with a Treasury consultation paper implying that only a handful of people would be affected by a plan for 60 per cent tax on pensions worth more than £1.4 million. Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay, the Liberal Democrat peer, said the proposal could hit a much “wider swath . . . than the government pretends

[pmeas] 05/3/2003 12:38

Catch ya again Trump

[trumpet] 05/3/2003 12:34

Pmeas,

MCA, could be, unless weight of the rest of the market pulls it down through the level. About the only thing apart from a few specs that I'm long on at the moment are commodity stocks, lost the stomach for the rest - regardless of forward earnings / divis etc, no matter how cheap they look.

Busy day for the traders tomorrow. Off to bed now, goodnight.

[pmeas] 05/3/2003 12:26

Trumpet take a look at MCA big double bottom starting tomorrow.

[pmeas] 05/3/2003 12:23

should i say corporate debt

[trumpet] 05/3/2003 12:22

No comment ;-).

[pmeas] 05/3/2003 12:11

yerr but the euro is over valued and the swiss franc is just a safe haven,thats why i stand by browns,thats why our market place is one of the strongest due to browns restranit 5 yrs ago which should delay us whilst the rest of the world die in debt.

[trumpet] 05/3/2003 12:04

Pmeas,

Gut feeling is that $ will fall faster and further than £, but check out the charts of the £ against the Euro and Swiss Franc.

[pmeas] 05/3/2003 12:01

£ its long term trend is still up,and the dollar broke key support on a grand scale two yr ago with plenty to go unless they get that oil.

[trumpet] 05/3/2003 00:55

Pmeas,

Where's the new business?, it's not just dot coms, large parts of manufacturing and other industries have been lost - add shoe manufacturers, textiles, car components, aerospace, IT services and support, call centres, finance.

[trumpet] 05/3/2003 00:51

Inflation from these levels is a completely different ballgame to last time round when inflation was already near the 10% level.

A bout of serious inflation now and increased interest rates will hit those in debt for 6.

[pmeas] 05/3/2003 00:49

what does Commercial construction have to do with "to let " boards its an adjustment of the market place E commerce.lower costs,to let boards are to do with the over capicity of the bubble dot coms.