In the City: London May Be Coming for Wall Street
London is closing the gap with New York for the title of world's top financial center, according to the latest Global Financial Centres Index. Is it a signal that the the UK's efforts to rejuvenate its banking and investment sectors post-Brexit are starting to pay off? On this week's In The City, host David Merritt sits down with Chris Hayward, Policy Chairman of the City of London Corp., who makes the argument it is.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
High energy costs threaten UK manufacturing's future, industry warns
By Andy Bruce MANCHESTER, England (Reuters) -Britain needs to cut industrial energy bills that are the highest among major advanced economies if its aspirations for a healthy manufacturing sector are to succeed, industry body Make UK said on Monday. Prime Minister Keir Starmer's government is working on an industrial strategy to put British manufacturing - hit hard by Brexit, soaring energy costs and global trade wars - on a solid footing for the years ahead. Manufacturing association Make UK said it should cancel climate levies imposed on industrial energy costs and adopt a fixed industrial energy price. Britain had the highest industrial energy prices out of any International Energy Agency member country in 2023, reflecting its dependence on gas and its role in setting electricity prices. "If we do not address the issue of high industrial energy costs in the UK as a priority, we risk the security of our country," Make UK chief executive officer Stephen Phipson said. "We will fail to attract investment in the manufacturing sector and will rapidly enter a phase of renewed de-industrialisation." Britain has de-industrialised - defined as the share of manufacturing in overall economic output - faster than in any other major European country over the last 30 years, according to a Reuters analysis of national accounts data. Manufacturing hit a record low 9% of economic output last year, crowded out by the dominant services sector which now drives the majority of the country's exports - a first among Group of Seven advanced economies. Alan Johnson, a senior executive for manufacturing, supply chain and purchasing at Nissan Motor, said its Sunderland plant in the north east of England had the highest energy costs out of any of its facilities in the world. "The proposals being put forward by Make UK ... would send a strong message to investors that the UK remains committed to creating a more competitive environment for electric vehicle manufacturing," Johnson said. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
One of the most attractive — and sometimes secretive — ways the wealthy donate money could soon get even more popular
A provision in Trump's tax bill could make donor-advised funds an even more popular form of giving. DAFs are especially attractive to the ultrawealthy because of big tax advantages. Some experts told BI they're seeing DAF donations among the wealthy change in the post-Trump era. As President Donald Trump's "big beautiful bill" moves through Congress, a provision hiking taxes on private foundations could make another form of philanthropy even more attractive: donor-advised funds. Donor-advised funds, or DAFs, are accounts where donors can contribute funds, immediately get a tax deduction, and "advise" on where to donate — and they are becoming increasingly popular. As Daniel Heist, a professor at Brigham Young University and a lead researcher on the 2025 National Survey of DAF Donors, put it, "they're growing like crazy." Donors can contribute non-cash assets, like appreciated securities or crypto, to DAFs, and the funds grow over time. BI spoke with academics, DAF sponsors, and nonprofits about why major donors use DAFs, how the tax bill and Trump are changing the calculus, and the risks of the "opaque" form of philanthropy. Sponsoring organizations, which are themselves public charities, operate DAFs. Some of the largest are connected to investment firms like Fidelity, Vanguard, and Schwab, though others include community foundations or religious organizations. Technically, donors don't control the funds in their DAF, but practically speaking, they can direct the money to any accredited charity. "As long as you're following the rules of the DAF provider, you should always have those recommendations honored," Mitch Stein, the head of strategy at Chariot, a technology company focused on DAFs, said. Private foundations have to distribute at least 5% of their assets annually for charitable purposes, but DAFs don't have payout requirements. Donors also don't report their gifts to individual organizations on their taxes, and instead report that they gave to the DAF. If Trump's fiscal agenda passes in the Senate (it has already passed in the House of Representatives), it would raise the current 1.39% tax on private foundations' investment incomes. The rate would rise to 10% on foundations worth $5 billion or more, to 5% for those worth between $250 and $5 billion, and to 2.8% for those worth between $50 million and $250 million. It wouldn't change for foundations worth less than $50 million. "There already was a substantial amount of momentum toward donor-advised funds, and a bill like this would only magnify that," Brian Mittendorf, a professor at Ohio State University who has studied DAFs, told BI. Though people across net worths use DAFs — Heist called them a common "mid-range philanthropic tool" — they're particularly attractive to the rich. The 2025 survey of DAF donors found that of 2,100 respondents, who were surveyed between July to September 2024, 96% had a net worth of more than $1 million. "I definitely see a trend away from private foundations," Heist said. Rebecca Moffett, the president of Vanguard Charitable, a prominent DAF provider, said she's seeing the same pattern. The main draw has to do with taxes, according to data and the experts. In the 2025 survey, 62% of donors said tax advantages were a strong motivation for opening a DAF account. Jeffrey Correa, Senior Director of US philanthropy at the International Rescue Committee, told BI that there's been an "explosion" of major donors giving through DAFs. The ability to contribute non-cash assets is also a big factor. Donating appreciated assets lets the donor avoid paying capital gains taxes (in the 2025 survey, 51% of respondents said reducing capital gains taxes was a big consideration). Convenience is another benefit, experts said, since DAFs are more streamlined and cheap than private foundations. Then there's the question of privacy, beyond how DAF donations show up on tax filings. Donors can choose varying levels of anonymity when donating to recipient nonprofits. Only 4% of donors in the 2025 survey opted to be totally anonymous to the recipient organizations, most commonly to avoid public recognition or solicitation. Just 24% said they wanted to avoid scrutiny. Generally, the experts BI spoke with said they don't see confidentiality as the primary appeal of DAFs. Moffett and Correa said they haven't seen more major donors opt for anonymity or express concerns about confidentiality. Most of those BI spoke to were enthusiastic about DAFs, but some flagged risks. Mittendorf and Helen Flannery, an associate fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, found through a study that DAFs distribute grants to politically engaged organizations 1.7 times more than other funders. "They can be great conduits for dark money because they're completely opaque," Flannery said, adding that the public doesn't always know where donors' DAF funds go. Risks aside, the wealthy seem as interested as ever in using DAFs — and in turn slowly eroding the private foundations that once defined the philanthropic world. Have a tip or something to share about your giving? Contact this reporter via email at atecotzky@ or Signal at alicetecotzky.05. Use a personal email address and a nonwork device; here's our guide to sharing information securely. Read the original article on Business Insider Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
Musk Throws an Epic Self-Pity Party About Everyone Being Mean to Him
Elon Musk is complaining about the firestorm of criticism that has engulfed his work with the Trump administration. After calling out President Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' for undermining the work of his so-called Department of Government Efficiency—which Trump tasked with culling thousands of workers from the federal government—the Tesla billionaire is also claiming that his task force is being unfairly blamed for the failings of others. 'DOGE is just becoming the whipping boy for everything,' Musk told The Washington Post. 'So, like, something bad would happen anywhere, and we would get blamed for it even if we had nothing to do with it.' Speaking on the day that yet another of his SpaceX Starship launches ended in fiery failure, Musk also groused about how his role with DOGE has led to an intense backlash against his companies. 'People were burning Teslas,' Musk told the Post. 'Why would you do that? That's really uncool.' Musk further expressed dismay that his work with DOGE has proven to be more difficult than he anticipated, having only saved a fraction of the $2 trillion he vowed to cut from the federal budget. 'The federal bureaucracy situation is much worse than I realized,' he said. 'I thought there were problems, but it sure is an uphill battle trying to improve things in D.C., to say the least.' Musk's comments came after he expressed disappointment in Trump's beloved 'Big Beautiful Bill' for sabotaging his work with DOGE. 'I was disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit, not just decreases it, and undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing,' Musk said during an interview with CBS News. 'I think a bill can be big or it could be beautiful, but I don't know if it could be both.' After initially promising to cut $2 trillion in October, Musk later walked back that figure in January by admitting the goal was a 'best-case scenario.' He nevertheless maintained DOGE had a 'good shot' at saving $1 trillion. Since Musk announced his intention in to 'significantly' reduce his time with DOGE as Tesla sales plummet, the cost-cutting task force is still only claiming to have found $170 billion in savings—though questions remain over how much of the savings can be verified. Meanwhile, Trump's bill—which will partly fund tax cuts for the rich through sweeping cuts to Medicaid—will add around $3.8 trillion to the national deficit, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Despite feeling burned by the administration, Musk has said he still plans to allocate some of his time to working with DOGE, although he has since downgraded the department's aspirations from decimating the federal workforce to improving their tech support. 'There's, like, so many situations where the computers are so broken,' even in the intelligence world,' Musk told the Post. His efforts will now be spent 'a bit more like tackling projects with the highest gain for the pain, which still means a lot of good things in terms of reducing waste and fraud.' Polling data has suggested that Musk is among the least popular figures in Trump's administration. Analysts also say that furious anti-Musk protests in the U.S. and overseas have contributed to severe brand damage for some of his companies. In Europe, where Musk has faced intense blowback for supporting far-right politicians, Tesla sales roughly halved in April compared with last year's figures. In addition to his lack of polling popularity, Musk's bona fides as a political operator have also come into question. After his preferred candidate suffered a crushing loss in the Wisconsin state Supreme Court election despite Musk's record $21 million spend on the race, Musk has vowed to cut back on his political donations in the future. 'I think I probably did spend a bit too much time on politics,' Musk told Ars Technica on Tuesday when asked if he thought his activities over the last year had harmed SpaceX. 'It's less than people would think, because the media is going to over-represent any political stuff, because political bones of contention get a lot of traction in the media.' 'It's not like I left the companies,' he added. 'It was just relative time allocation that probably was a little too high on the government side, and I've reduced that significantly in recent weeks.'
