Warwickshire News.co.uk

The FTSE 100 was up 15.61 points, or 0.2 per cent, at 6,738.67 shortly after the open, not far from an intraday peak of 6,754.10 reached in 2007, a resistance level for the index and a near-term target for a number of technical analysts.

Take-up of the bond has raced through its £15million target as investors flocked to the offering, which the UK racecourse owner created to raise money for the redevelopment of its flagship Cheltenham course.

Brianna Keilar explains how "crowdfunding" can help you start a small business without a whole lot of startup cash.

The firms will benefit from the investment in the Government agency for innovation and growth - the Technology Strategy Board.

Funding Circle, co-founded by Andrew Mullinger (pictured) says it's dealing with several cases of firms forced to wait months to receive funding because of hold-ups by high street banks.

Max Temp: 20°C (68°F), Min Temp: 13°C (55°F), Wind Direction: N, Wind Speed: 11mph, Visibility: good, Pressure: 1011mb, Humidity: 77%, UV risk: n/a, Pollution: n/a, Sunrise: 05:01BST, Sunset: 20:54BST

Max Temp: 16°C (61°F), Min Temp: 9°C (48°F), Wind Direction: N, Wind Speed: 11mph, Visibility: good, Pressure: 1015mb, Humidity: 71%, UV risk: n/a, Pollution: n/a, Sunrise: 05:00BST, Sunset: 20:56BST

Max Temp: 15°C (59°F), Min Temp: 7°C (45°F), Wind Direction: NNW, Wind Speed: 9mph, Visibility: very good, Pressure: 1019mb, Humidity: 60%, UV risk: n/a, Pollution: n/a, Sunrise: 04:59BST, Sunset: 20:57BST

Speaking in front of The Duchess of Cornwall, London Mutual Credit Union treasurer Louis McLeod said on Wednesday that the group will deliver quick and easy short-term or 'payday' loans.

Marks and Spencer has become the latest in a string of UK companies to face criticism from tax campaigners over the way it structures its online sales to Europe – with one describing its sales operation as similar to that of the internet retail giant Amazon.

The British retailer has been expanding its online operations to several countries across Europe with a new marksandspencer.eu site, hoping to grow its business in a difficult economic climate, reports The Guardian.

But internal M&S documents seen by the Guardian show the firm’s structure involves shipping goods from one country – the UK – while invoicing the transaction to another – Ireland.

Orders made through the site by customers from France, Germany, Ireland or other countries are shipped from M&S’s UK warehouses – but the transactions are all made with, and charged to, Marks & Spencer (Ireland) Limited, a subsidiary located in the Republic of Ireland, which has the lowest corporation tax rates in Europe.

M&’s UK branch is paid a wholesale price for the goods it ships by M&S Ireland, and this is subject to UK corporation tax, but the rest of the retail markup is subject to Ireland’s much lower corporation tax rate of 12.5%.

This process of using internal billing between countries in order to ship goods from one country when doing business in another is referred to as “transfer pricing”, and while perfectly legal is the practice highlighted by tax campaigners who object to Amazon. However, M&S only uses this structure for sales outside of the UK: all sales in UK stores and online to UK addresses are processed through the UK and are subject to UK corporation tax.

A specification document prepared last year when the site was being designed specified that “[t]he corporate tax structure will be aligned to that of the Irish website”.

The document then detailed how, while the goods would be shipped from the UK, M&S UK would only receive a wholesale – not retail – price: “Goods issue from Hardwick DC [distribution centre] in the UK at cost price … intercompany invoice at cost price in GBP with a variable mark-up % by country (of order) plus UK VAT”.

Earlier this year, after George Osborne announced a further cut to UK corporation tax in his 2013 budget, an M&S employee sent an email to a superior questioning the need for the complex operation of Marks & Spencer’s international site, giving their personal view as to why the structure existed:

“Given that it was developed as a means to avoid UK corporation tax when it stood at 26% it now seems appropriate to reassess this,” it read. “Corporation tax will be 21% by next year. Does this not render many of the advantages of having an Irish company obsolete?

“From a tax management perspective there may have been advantages in avoiding the UK 26% tax rate but the process and IT overhead with the additional VAT complexity may negate these advantages. Needless to say there is also the reputational damage to M&S should it be seen to be avoiding UK tax in the current climate, as seen with recent examples such as Starbucks [and] Amazon.”

The revelations come amid mounting cross-party political focus on corporate tax avoidance, as Ed Miliband pledges to act unilaterally to tackle tax avoidance, just days after the public accounts committee chair, Margaret Hodge described Google’s tax structure as evil.

Tax avoidance has also been made a central component of next month’s meeting of the G8 economic summit by David Cameron and George Osborne.

Marks & Spencer said Ireland was used to host the website as it was the largest international market for M&S, and therefore the logical host for the EU site. It said: “M&S is a major UK taxpayer, contributing over £800m to the UK exchequer in 2011/12.

“We pay UK corporation tax on all profits generated by UK sales and comply with the tax laws of all jurisdictions in which we operate. We conduct our tax affairs in a transparent and legally compliant manner that is consistent with our longstanding values and complies with the tax laws of all jurisdictions in which we operate.

“Our European websites are owned by M&S Ireland. This is made clear to all customers shopping on our European websites. Ireland is our largest international online market, taking over 50% of our online European sales, which is why we structure our other European websites around it. It would not make good business sense for us to set up anew in every market we enter.

“These are not UK sales, these sites do not serve UK customers and there are no sales made in sterling. All tax is legally and fairly paid both in the UK and in Ireland.”

But tax campaigners have been angered by the revelations of how M&S operates its international division, accusing it of trading off its British reputation.

“Given that Marks & Spencer portrays itself as a British institution, it is disgraceful that it is choosing to avoid paying tax in this country,” said Suzy Blackwell of UK Uncut, which has pushed for changes to the law to cut down on legal tax avoidance measures.

“The government must stop letting companies like Marks & Spencer dodge tax which could go towards funding vital public services. It’s an outrage that the government is allowing this behaviour to continue while making devastating cuts across the country.”

Richard Murphy, an accountant who writes for the UK Tax Justice Network, agreed. “There is no doubt that this is Marks & Spencer is ‘doing an Amazon’ by setting up an arrangement in a low tax jurisdiction where little or nothing happens to avoid tax where the trade really takes place.

“As Ernst & Young told the public accounts committee last week, such arrangements are common. But what that means is big business is now used to playing games with tax authorities, who appear to have meekly accepted there is nothing they can do about it. That has to change.”

The post Marks & Spencer under fire over online tax arrangements appeared first on Business Matters.

We focus on which shares are likely to do well this summer and beyond however the wider market performs.

Faced with a barely growing economy, the government has targeted smaller companies as a major source of growth and has introduced reforms to encourage start-ups and make it easier for existing businesses to expand, reports The Telegraph.

“Britain’s businesses cannot grow, export and innovate without proper access to bank credit. But they also need alternatives when looking for finance,” said Mr Cable. “The government wants to see a shift in the market structure towards non-bank lending.”

Bank funding for SMEs has shrivelled in the wake of a global banking crisis, which has made traditional lenders more cautious and, according to a recent UK study, created a cash-flow crisis that is stifling small firms.

Mr Cable’s comments coincided with the launch of a guide to alternative sources of financing, published by business lobby group the Confederation of British Industry (CBI).

The CBI said high-growth, medium-sized businesses could be worth an additional £20bn pounds ($30.4 billion) to the British economy over the next seven years if they can gain access to finance through alternative channels.

The CBI highlighted traditional but underused funding options, such as the retail bond market and private debt placements, but also promoted more innovative approaches such as online “crowd-funding” platforms which enable individuals and businesses to back specific projects.

Mr Cable’s comments came as data showed that the number of small companies complaining about bank loans to Britain’s top financial arbitrator rose sharply last year, supporting persistent claims by companies they are being denied access to finance despite a government push to boost lending.

The Financial Ombudsman received 17pc more complaints in 2012 compared with the previous year, according to figures obtained by UK finance provider Syscap.

Companies were most likely to complain about banks refusing to renew loans or overdrafts or renewing them with punishing interest rates or higher fees, Syscap said.

Firms were also unhappy at being offered the wrong type of finance, such as overdrafts that carry high rates and can be recalled at any time instead of loans.

New regulations brought in after the financial crisis have forced traditional lenders to cut risky financing and left many small businesses short of funds.

The British government has made increasing the flow of credit to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) a central part of its plan to revive the UK’s flagging economy.

The rise in complaints to 612 from 522, along with other recent data, calls into question the effectiveness of its efforts.

“It is clear from the number of complaints that small businesses continue to face major difficulties when it comes to getting the appropriate kind of funding they need from banks,” said Syscap Chief Executive Philip White.

“We hear from small businesses that banks still use the tight credit environment as an excuse to impose high fees on their customers,” he added.

Only firms with fewer than 10 employees and annual revenues of less than €2m can complain to the Ombudsman, which deals with cases where banks and customers cannot agree a settlement.
Syscap’s White said SMEs’ access to funding could soon improve thanks to the government’s decision to extend and expand its flagship Funding for Lending Scheme (FLS).

Last month, the government said the FLS, which offers banks cheap credit if they increase lending to households and businesses, will last until January 2015.

The post Vince Cable urges British business to explore non-bank funding appeared first on Business Matters.

John Meredith, who has run the Hong Kong-based Hutchison Port Holdings group for the past 42 years, said he was so frustrated at Britain’s decline as a manufacturing and exporting nation that he had decided to intervene personally to help small and medium companies sell their products abroad.

Mr Meredith, 74, has launched Project Bulldog, which aims to channel his expertise from operating 52 ports in 26 countries into concrete advice for budding exporters, reports The Telegraph.

In an advert published on Thursday in The Daily Telegraph, Mr Meredith says: “I would like to offer a personal commitment to assist your company in any way I can.”

His “completely free service” spans everything from helping find contacts in foreign markets to advice on tax, legal, transport and customs issues.

Hutchison Ports is a subsidiary of Hutchison Whampoa, the multinational conglomerate controlled by Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka-shing, 84, whose portfolio includes retailer Superdrug, mobile phone network 3 and gas and water businesses. It owns Britain’s biggest container port Felixstowe, as well as the ports of Harwich and Thamesport.

Mr Meredith said he decided to launch his initiative after being asked a year ago by Government export agency, UK Trade & Investment, to give a presentation on “export opportunities in Asia”.

“I found a pretty strange response,” he said. “Most of the people who came forward afterwards were security people, or lawyers or consultants but not many people who were actually making things.”

He said this was mirrored by what was going on at Felixstowe where the “stuff that’s moving out is mainly empty containers or scrap – but no products. I got irritated by this so I set up Project Bulldog.”

He said Britain needed to focus on manufacturing, including offering tax breaks and cheaper energy for exporters, or risk getting left behind by other more innovative nations, including America.

“You can’t rely on North Sea oil and gas and the City of London. We have to go back to basics and start making stuff,” he said.

Referring to vacuum cleaner entrepreneur Sir James Dyson, Mr Meredith added: “Everyone admires the Dysons of this world. The UK’s got a lot of potential Dysons but they are not getting products to market. We should be teaching innovation in schools so people think laterally.”

He believed his initiative would not get in the way of his day job, from which he has no intention of retiring. “You don’t think of retiring if you work for Mr Li,” he said. “I’m 10 years behind him.”

He said he was not afraid that he would be inundated with requests for help. “I would welcome it,” he said. “I’ve got a particular bug on this issue.”

The post Ports boss offers personal help to UK’s budding exporters appeared first on Business Matters.

Transport company FirstGroup has announced a £615m rights issue in a bid reduce its debt after its full year profit dropped by over a third.

First, let’s look at some facts. The proportion of women in the workplace increased from 29% in 1950 to 47% in 2011 . Women are receiving more education and entering the workforce at a faster pace than ever before. In fact, women out-perform men at most universities. 63.9 % of women graduates obtain a first or upper second degree compared with 59.9 % of men .

But when we look at top management and boards, the picture looks very different. In the UK, women account for only 17% of FTSE board positions . In the US the number is 16% . In politics the picture is not much better. The UK Parliament has 22% women and the US Congress only 17% women .

Why is this even important? Studies have shown that gender balanced teams make better decisions and achieve stronger results. Companies with a high proportion of female leaders have higher increase in shareholder value than those that do not. This awareness has led to many organisations in the UK and elsewhere to start initiatives in the past decade to deal with the talent gap (see figure below) or sometimes known as ‘The Women Problem’.

But despite all these efforts, the Global Gender Gap Index (GGGI) ranks the UK 18th, down from 9th in 2009, and the US 22nd (23rd in 2009), after countries like Cuba, Philippines and Lesotho, on gender equality. And the latest studies from Cranfield School of Management and The Professional Board Forum have found that the number of women appointed to boards in the UK is less than half of what it was a year ago.

So, what is really the problem? At the risk ruffling some feathers, I have compiled a list of what’s holding us back… the common sins both men and women are guilty of:

The 9 Sins of Gender Equality

No.1 Ignorance in High Places
I had the displeasure of listening to Chris Wiscarson, Chief Executive, Equitable Life and Subramanian Ramadorai, Vice Chairman, Tata Consultancy Services, on the topic of Boardroom Diversity: a Man’s Perspective at the Women of the Future (WOF) Summit last week. When asked the basic question: “Why do you want women on boards?” the best they could come up with was: “Because they are at least as good as men.”

Not sure if this was by design or accidental, but WOF certainly managed to illustrate the ignorance that unfortunately exists. Numerous studies have shown that gender diversity produces better results. Studies from MIT published in 2010 showed that with more women the social sensitivity in the group increased, leading to 30-40% better outcomes. Other studies show that female managers perform better than their male counterparts at the upper levels of management.

You’d think Chris or Subramanian might have cited some of this or at least come up with a better answer. Instead the embarrassment continued with simplistic ideas like: “Let’s change the wording in Boardroom Diversity Booklet because women aren’t inspired by words like courage.” Really? What sort of women do you work with? …and finally Subramanian desperate attempt to save face: “I really like working with women. I have women in all my support functions.”

I’m glad you’re happy with your female administrative staff, but with all due respect, Mr. Ramadorai, I think you’re missing the point … unless you plan on appointing your secretary to your board?

No.2 Thinking Structural Change = Culture Change
A Norwegian born and bred, I never considered my opportunities limited by my gender. Growing up there in the 1980’s, the vast majority of us had mothers and fathers who both worked full-time, and numerous strong women role models to look up to like Hanna Kvanmo and Gro H. Bruntland.

I’ve since had the privilege of living and working in the US, Japan and the UK, experiencing those and many other different cultures in the process. While it is easy to place Nordic countries up on a gender equality pedestal (as the GGGI does), I think we should be careful to assume that copying what works there in the UK and US will magically produce the same results.

Culture trumps quotas, guidelines and systems any day. In Norway, we have a long tradition of eating dinner with the family, and thus leaving work at 4pm to go home and see your children is not frowned upon. In Japan, face time is very important and leaving the office before your boss is unheard of. Thus ‘working’ until 10-11pm is not uncommon. In the US, there is an expectation that career comes first and family time is for the weekends. In the UK you either work late or go to the pub, you certainly don’t rush home to pick up the children if you’re serious about your career!

I’m not arguing for or against structural changes or quotas. All I’m saying is that simply enforcing quotas and extending maternity and paternity leave and pay does not turn the UK into Finland (the GGGI’s highest ranking country) or the US into Norway. Nor should that be the aim.

We have to stop thinking that simplistic structural solutions will create culture change. The failure of most organisational change initiatives is an excellent example of how starting with structure to force through change is not only illogical, but usually hugely unsuccessful. People support what they help create. Much like large-scale organisational transformation, the gender issue requires a persistent and systematic grass roots movement supported by the very top, and many, many years of conscious effort by all of us. And each country and organisation needs to find a model that works for its own culture and people.

No.3 We Are Our Own Worst Enemies
For every woman fighting for gender equality, there is another one doing us a disservice.
What male dominated workplaces need is a substantial number of women who are strong, capable and stand up to any sexist behaviour. But that is rarely the case. I’m glad women are no longer expected to look and act like men to be in business. But that doesn’t mean we should use our looks or gender to get what we want either. In many ways, gender equality has gone backwards in this regard. At a recent visit to BI Norwegian Business School the undergrads look more like they’re auditioning for a modelling job than going to class. A director in a London firm I know uses short skirts and coercion to get what she wants. Some women purposely cry to influence their male colleagues. These women are enforcing biases and stereotypes and making the path just that much harder for the many, many competent and professional women out there.

Another example is how women treat other women. Many women act bitchy, catty, jealous and are sometimes outright bullies toward other women. As women today the pressure is on. We have to be beautiful, successful, intelligent, good wives, good mothers … the list goes on. We might have wanted female liberation, but I don’t think we really thought this one through. The pressure has never been more intense (and often self inflicted!) and yet here we are tearing each other down, putting sticks in each other’s wheels. Why? It’s not like there are too many women at the top… and the only thing you end up doing is looking insecure and pathetic.

No.4 Not Speaking Up
We cannot sit around and wait for promotions and salary rises to land in our laps. Nor can we except to be noticed if all we do is sit quietly in meetings and only speak when asked. Want a promotion? Go ask your boss what you need to do to get one. Think you deserve more pay? Go ask for it!

Early on in my career, I used to be very passive in meetings. But as anyone who’s worked with me recently can testify, I’m anything but now. I see so many women, especially junior ones, who take a passive role, afraid to say something stupid, think out loud or come across as aggressive. Participation doesn’t mean you have to be bossy or aggressive, you can contribute and discuss in a collaborative way. The key is that you participate. Otherwise, you won’t get noticed and people will assume you have nothing interesting to say.

No.5 Not All Women Want It
This isn’t a problem, but just a fact more people need to be aware of. The truth is not all women want the demands and hard work that come climbing to the higher echelons of business and political life. The same goes for men of course. But perhaps, because of biology and societal expectations, a higher percentage of women feel this way.

Some women these days also feel like they don’t need to prove anything, but rather have the choice of career, motherhood or a combination of both. And that’s what it should be all about. Choice. And even though it can be hard to understand people very different from ourselves, if what they’re doing makes them happy, we need to shut up and respect their choice.

If a higher percentage of women don’t want it, then a merit based 50/50 split at the top of business and politics is unachievable, and we need to accept that. How so? Well, assuming men and women are equally talented, equally educated and entering the workforce in equal numbers, then there is no way we will ever achieve 50/50 at the top while more women are still opting out… unless we want to include less qualified women just to meet a quota! The goal shouldn’t be 50/50. The goal should be that men and women all feel they have the choice and opportunity to do what they desire … and that we compete on equal footing.
This brings me to my next point.

No.6 Men Are Scared of Strong Women
Even considering that some women opt out, I believe 30-40% is achievable in today’s world. But there are plenty of qualified women out there who are not being appointed to management teams and boards due to one specific fact. Many men are scared of strong and intelligent women. There, I said it! I’ve seen this manifest itself in two ways: (1) highly qualified women candidates are not chosen due to some made-up excuse from the selection committee and (2) meek women are appointed to tick the gender box, but with the knowledge that they won’t say much, and thus control is held safely in the hands of men.

Worried this might be happening in your organisation? Things to look out for: (1) the kind of women that are hired and promoted, (2) the kind of women the senior decision makers have chosen to marry…

No.7 Choosing The Wrong Life Partner
Sheryl Sandberg has been talking about this recently. I couldn’t agree more. In fact the only piece of advice I have for ambitious women choosing a life partner is to choose one that loves that fact that you’re driven, strong and intelligent. And I’m not just talking about on the surface, but someone who deep down finds this one of the most attractive parts of who you are.

Easier said than done, but better to be single than having to fight the battle at home as well. As women, we do so much damage tearing ourselves down and putting immense pressure on ourselves to be some mythical superwoman, we shouldn’t make the battle harder by spending our lives with someone who doesn’t bring out the best in us.

No.8 How We Raise Our Daughters… and Sons!
Culture change starts with us. Think about the language we use, the expectations we have of men and women, boys and girls… and how biases are embedded in every fabric of our society.
As parents, educators and role models it is our responsibility to bring out the best in the children around us and help them realise their potential. Yet, mothers’ still treat their daughters as dolls and smother their boys to the point of being incapable of washing their own clothes. Sometimes the problem is so much subtler though. Why is Sally seen as being too aggressive whereas Tom is considered assertive? Why is it a problem if Jane hasn’t got married at 30, but no one worries about John who’s 40 and single.

I truly believe we are only limited by the boundaries of our own thinking… and as adults we help shape those boundaries in the children we spend time with … making them see through a narrow lens (“you should marry a rich guy”) or a wide screen (“you can do anything you set your mind to”).

No.9 Playing a Victim
The best way to deal with sexist colleagues and bosses is to prove them wrong through your work. Some women spend too much energy playing the victim or blaming the system. I think this is nonsense! Yes, the system is unfair. Yes, you’ll probably have to be smarter and work harder to become Chairman, CEO or Prime Minister if you are a woman …or a minority for that matter. That’s life.

Taking everything personally and letting it get to you only hurts you. If you actually experience harassment, speak up, but if someone just gave you a compliment or made you uncomfortable once, let it go. Instead, spend your energy participating, learning and growing as a strong, female leader. The sooner you do that, the sooner other people will start treating you like one.

Last but not least, I’d like to say that the question of diversity goes far beyond gender. To fully take advantage of the potential in our workforce, we need to see past the usual categories like gender, age and race, and focus on creating diversity of thought – embracing and encouraging subtle differences in values, habits, perspectives and assumptions. Only then will we have diverse teams, organisations and with it, a massive increase in potential.
In many ways it amazes me that it’s 2013 and we’re still talking about gender and glass ceilings. It just goes to show how unevolved we truly are.

The post The ‘Problem’ with women appeared first on Business Matters.