UK cuts stock market red tape in bid to aid Chancellor's growth plans
The financial watchdog confirmed it will cut red tape in the UK's capital markets amid the Chancellor's push to drive growth in the sector through stripping back restrictions.
It comes ahead of Rachel Reeves' Mansion House speech to financial bosses, where she is expected to launch a series 'Leeds Reforms' aimed at the financial sector, focusing on a strategy of less onerous rules for firms rather than reduced risk.
Over the past year, Ms Reeves has called on regulators to slash red tape in order to help drive the Government's growth agenda, with hopes that accelerated growth can help support its spending plans.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has confirmed it will introduce a suite of measures to lower costs for UK businesses looking to secure investment.
Companies that are already listed on London's stock markets will not need to publish lengthy prospectuses in order to issue more shares and raise funds in most cases, the FCA said.
New rules will also halve the time it takes between initial documents being published and an IPO (initial public offering) to list on the London Stock Exchange.
It comes amid a dearth of new listings on the stock exchange, while a raft of firms have also opted to switch from London to rival international stock markets.
Finance firm Wise said last month that it plans to shift its primary stock listing to the US due to stronger investment opportunities across the Atlantic.
The FCA said companies will also now be able to issue corporate bonds to retail investors more easily, while a new public offer platform will help smaller growth companies raise cash.
Simon Walls, executive director of markets at the FCA, said: 'These bold shifts promote innovation, lower costs and enable a broader investor base for growing businesses. They are the latest in a programme of reforms shifting the balance from pre-emptive checks to market disclosures.
'Our capital markets are world-leading.
'They're our economic engine, and we want to keep them roaring in support of sustained growth and prosperity for the whole country.'
On Tuesday, the Chancellor will also reduce restrictions on lenders to allow some banks and building societies to offer more high loan-to-income mortgages to help more people buy a first home.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Western Telegraph
28 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Look at increasing Scottish Government borrowing limits, MPs tell UK Government
Currently, the Government is limited to borrowing £600 million for day-to-day spending and £450 million for capital projects. But in a report from the Scottish Affairs Committee at Westminster on the fiscal arrangements north of the border, MPs pushed for the limits to be increased. The report said: 'At present, the Scottish Government's limited borrowing powers constrain its ability to manage fiscal shocks, as it is only able to borrow for resource purposes to cover forecast errors. We encourage the UK Government to consider reforming the Scottish Government's capital borrowing powers Scottish Affairs Committee report 'Capital borrowing limits are currently linked to, and grow in line with, inflation, which may not necessarily be the highest metric of growth.' It added: 'We agree with the Secretary of State that borrowing limits should be linked to the measure which offers the Scottish Government the highest level of flexibility but, crucially, we note that which metric delivers this remains undetermined. 'The UK Government should therefore publish a transparent analysis of what borrowing limits would look like based on the different metrics advised in the evidence for this inquiry. 'At the next fiscal framework review, we encourage the UK Government to consider reforming the Scottish Government's capital borrowing powers, by automatically coupling borrowing to the metric which offers the highest limit.' The report comes at the end of an inquiry by the committee which sought to gauge the effectiveness of the Barnett Formula – the measure which dictates the level of funding the UK Government sends to Scotland every year. The MPs found the measure was 'fit for purpose', although it is 'imperfect'. Scotland's Finance Secretary reiterated her Government's support for 'full fiscal autonomy' in a written submission to the committee (Jane Barlow/PA) The committee also rejected calls for the formula to shift and provide funding to Scotland based on need. Scotland, the report said, already receives more funding per head than any other country in the UK and a change in the framework could see funding cut. In written evidence to the committee, Scottish Finance Secretary Shona Robison reiterated the Scottish Government's support for full fiscal autonomy – an arrangement which would see powers over tax and spending devolved. But the committee dismissed such a move as not being a 'realistic prospect'. 'Fundamental questions remain about how full fiscal autonomy would work in practice, and whether it would be operable within the constraints of the UK's current devolution settlement,' the report said. 'Practicality aside, we do not believe that a compelling case has been made that such a change would automatically result in Scotland receiving a higher level of funding.' Ms Robison declined an invitation to appear before the committee, leading the MPs to say 'do not see how we can consider this a serious proposition, and we remain to be convinced that this proposal is desirable in principle, let alone workable in practice'. Responding to the report, Ms Robison said: 'This report rightly recognises that Scotland's finances remain largely dictated by the UK Government's spending decisions, irrespective of the impact on Scottish public services. 'That has meant Scotland has been left with a shortfall of £400 million to pay for the Chancellor's national insurance increase, and saw Scotland short-changed by more than a billion pounds over the next three years at the recent spending review. 'The decisions we have taken to ask higher earners to pay a little bit more – while most income tax payers pay less than in the rest of the UK – mean that we can support vital public services and provide free tuition, prescriptions and the Scottish child payment to help tackle child poverty.' Scottish Secretary Ian Murray said: 'The spending review provided the Scottish Government with an extra £9.1 billion, giving them a record settlement. 'People will expect that to deliver better outcomes for Scots – lower NHS waiting lists and better attainment in our schools. 'Spending per head in Scotland is around 20% higher than the rest of the UK thanks to the Barnett formula. This report confirms that it appears to be the position of the Scottish Government to scrap that formula that delivers higher funding – they should explain why they want less money for public services in Scotland. 'Their plans for full fiscal autonomy would mean a £12 billion cut in public spending for Scotland.'
Daily Mail
39 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
ALEX BRUMMER: A reckless plan risks a return to boom and bust
Chancellor Rachel Reeves was working at Halifax Bank of Scotland (HBOS), a major mortgage lender, during the great financial crisis of 2008. But she appears to have forgotten the key lessons of that searing experience. HBOS collapsed after embarking on a mad dash to become Britain's largest consumer and mortgage bank. It had abandoned the prudence which should be at the core of safe lending. As a result, HBOS was forced into a rescue merger with Lloyds-TSB, while Gordon Brown's Labour government propped up the enlarged institution with £20.3billion of taxpayer money. Yet under new proposals unveiled by Ms Reeves last night amid the grandeur of the Mansion House in the City of London, tough rules designed to keep the financial system safe will be swept away. Helping young people gain a foothold on the housing ladder is a laudable goal and ending the 'red tape' sounds like a great idea – particularly if it supports the dream of a home-owning democracy first advocated by Margaret Thatcher more than four decades ago. But those of us old enough to remember the collapse of the housing market in the 1990s – when interest rates soared under John Major's government – and the subsequent catastrophic collapse of Northern Rock in 2007 cannot but be horrified. Ms Reeves's plan is a slap in the face for prudence. In the 1990s 'negative equity' – when the cost of mortgages exceeded the value of the homes purchased – saw thousands of buyers abandon their properties and drop the keys back through the doors of mortgage lenders. Northern Rock collapsed after it junked historic affordability rules and granted buyers 100 per cent-plus mortgages –destroying confidence in its prospects of remaining solvent. The subsequent run on the bank, not to mention the long queues of customers seeking to withdraw their money, are etched on the national memory. The then head of the employers' group the CBI, Richard Lambert, argued that it sent a terrible image around the world and made the UK 'look like a banana republic'. It was hard to disagree. Yet under the Chancellor's proposed arrangements, borrowers will be able to obtain home loans at up to six times their salaries, a huge leap from the current four-and-a-half times limit. Prospective home owners could, in future, apply for mortgages with an income of just £30,000, down from £35,000, and with joint incomes of only £50,000. The Treasury says that these new 'Helping Hand' mortgages – to be administered by Nationwide – are aimed at people with low incomes. True, they might genuinely help aspirational homeowners in some regions of the country. But they will do little to address the plight of young people in London and other areas of fast economic growth such as Cambridge, where house prices are driven ever higher by the availability of well-paid starter jobs. Moreover, together with the weaker income and spending checks that Ms Reeves plans to usher in, easy-to-get mortgages are bound to increase the prospect of defaults. And that, in turn, could damage future lending capacity. Since taking office, Ms Reeves has been seeking new tools to drive growth. She believes that prosperity has been held back by rules imposed by the Financial Conduct Authority (the City regulator) and the Bank of England. Yet there is no escaping the real reason for Britain's vanishing growth and the accompanying assault on jobs: the culprit is the Chancellor and her £40billion tax-raising budget with its crippling rise in employers' National Insurance contributions. Now Ms Reeves is seeking a backdoor solution to a flatlining economy by reinvigorating the housing market and encouraging consumer credit. Yet she also risks returning to Britain's appalling record of financial boom and bust.
Daily Mirror
41 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
HMRC 'doesn't know how many billionaires actually pay tax in the UK', MPs reveal
MPs have criticised the taxman for its lack of detailed information on the super-rich and what they pay, potentially making it harder to impose a wealth tax HMRC doesn't know how many billionaires pay tax in the UK - or what they cough-up, MPs have revealed. This worrying lack of know-how is despite there being relatively few billionaires to keep tabs on, and the huge amounts of money involved, they say. Critics claimed it showed HMRC had 'one set of rules for the wealthiest, and another for everyone else.' The Commons Public Accounts Committee, in a report, also flagged a wider problem that could hamper efforts to impose a wealth tax. Former Labour leader Lord Kinnock recently suggested imposing a 2% tax on assets valued above £10million would bring in up to £11billion a year. Downing Street and senior ministers have refused to rule out the idea as Chancellor Rachel Reeves faces a battle to plug a massive hole in the public finances. Yet efforts could be complicated by the crucially important information HMRC gathers. According to the report: 'HMRC has no overview of an individual's total wealth and faces challenges in getting all the data it needs to risk assess and target wealthy people.' The committee says the taxman has had some success in cracking down on the rich, including those trying to dodge tax. Through better enforcement of the rules, it collected £5.2billion from the wealthy in the 2023/24 financial year, more than double the £2.2billion in 2019/20. They are defined as individuals with incomes of £200,000 or more, or assets equal to or above £2million, in any of the past three years. HMRC - whose work collecting tax is vital for funding public services - has around 1,000 in a team dedicated to getting tax from the rich, and has secured funding to take on another 400. But the report says the authority 'can and must' do more. It found HMRC 'does not know how many billionaires pay tax in the UK or how much they contribute overall.' Yet the Sunday Times Rich List includes figures in its annual update, recently finding there were 155 billionaires in the UK. The Public Accounts Committee suggests HMRC 'immediately start work' comparing available data on known billionaires, including the Rich List, with its own records. It notes they do something similar already in the US, where the Inland Revenue Service worked with researchers to link its data to the Forbes 400 list of the super-rich. There were also just 25 criminal prosecutions of wealthy people for their tax affairs in 2023/24. Meanwhile, the number of penalties slumped from 1,747 to 456 penalties. Another area of concerns was the so-called tax gap - the difference between what HMRC thinks the wealthy may owe and what it collected. The report questioned whether the estimate of £1.9billion is "over optimistic". It points to estimates of £300million due from offshore sources, when UK residents held £849billion in offshore accounts in 2019. The committee recommends HMRC use artificial intelligence to speed up the data gathering process. Lloyd Hatton, a Labour MP member of the committee, said it was crucial for taxpayers to have trust in the system and for the rich to be paying their fair share. "This report is not concerned with political debate around the redistribution of wealth," he said. "Our committee's role is to help HMRC do its job properly ensuring wealthy people pay the correct tax. While HMRC does deserve some great credit for securing billions more in the tax take from the wealthiest in recent years, there is still a very long way to go before we can reach a true accounting of what is owed.' Fariya Mohiuddin, interim deputy director at the group Tax Justice UK, said: 'If HMRC isn't able to tax the super-rich fairly, how can anyone have faith in a system that seemingly has one set of rules for the wealthiest, and another for everyone else. At the heart of this story is the urgent need for HMRC to have the resources and political backing for it to be an effective and efficient tax authority that can administer a tax system that is fair and fit for the 21st century. 'With millions waiting for healthcare treatment to essentials being unaffordable for many, HMRC needs to be able to collect the right tax from the super-rich. Failing to do so lets money be squirrelled away into tax havens like some of the British Overseas Territories which deprives our communities, hospitals and schools of the cash they need. he government must give HMRC backing by investing in it for the long-term, to make the system fair, and ensure British tax havens implement transparency measures to prevent offshore hoarding of wealth.' An HMRC spokesperson said: "The government is determined to make sure everyone pays the tax they owe. Extra resources were announced in the recent spending review which allows us to significantly step up our work on closing the tax gap amongst the wealthiest. This includes recruiting an extra 400 officials specialising in the wealthy and offshore tax gap, and increasing prosecutions of those who evade tax." They added that large amounts of data was already used to collect the tax that is legally due, relying on multiple sources, including our own records, information that is already in the public domain and detail shared by other countries.
