Fears for Claire's stores after US owner files for bankruptcy
US-based fashion accessories and jewellery business Claire's has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in a court in Delaware, according to new filings.
It is the second time the group has declared bankruptcy, after first filing for the process in 2018 after it was unable to repay a loan.
The group saw its finances improve after wiping around 1.9 billion dollars (£1.4 billion) off its balance sheet in a refinancing but has come under pressure from recent weak consumer demand and supply chain uncertainty.
Claire's runs 2,750 stores across 17 countries. It has around 280 stores in the UK.
The new bankruptcy filings showed that the business reported liabilities and assets of between 1 billion dollars and 10 billion dollars. It also showed that the company owed more than 25,000 creditors.
The group is owned by a group of firms, including investment giant Elliott Management, who were creditors when the retail firm first faced insolvency seven years ago.
Last month, Sky News reported that Claire's is working with advisers from Interpath to seek a potential sale or restructuring of its UK business.
The report indicated that a sale deal could result in store closures across the UK.
It also reported that Lakeland owner Hilco is among suitors considering a takeover deal for Claire's' UK operations.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
11 minutes ago
- Times
Rachel Reeves plans to tax high-value homes to plug fiscal black hole
Rachel Reeves is drawing up plans to hit the owners of high-value properties with capital gains tax when they sell their homes as she attempts to fill a £40 billion hole in the public finances. The chancellor is considering using the autumn budget to end the current exemption from capital gains tax that people enjoy when they sell their 'primary' residence under plans that will be seen as a 'mansion tax'. Higher-rate taxpayers would have to pay 24 per cent of the value of any 'gain' they make from the increase in the value of their property while basic rate taxpayers would have to pay 18 per cent. Under the plans the current exemption from capital gains tax, known as private residence relief, would come to an end for properties above a certain threshold. While the threshold is the subject of live discussion in the Treasury, officials believe it could raise significant sums of money. A threshold of £1.5 million would hit around 120,000 homeowners who are higher-rate taxpayers with capital gains tax bills of £199,973. However, property experts warned that the owners of more expensive properties could choose to simply stay put instead of selling up and this could stymie the housing market and limit revenues for the government. There are also concerns that it could hit pensioners who want to downsize particularly hard. Aneisha Beveridge, head of research at the estate agent Hamptons, said: 'It's a big change that would hit long-term owners hardest and create a cliff-edge at £1.5 million, distorting behaviour around that point. 'While the headline gains look substantial, they're often the result of decades of ownership and, in some cases, house prices haven't even kept pace with inflation. 'For households who don't need to move, this could act as a strong disincentive to sell, dampening transactions and potentially weighing on house price growth and Treasury revenues alike.' The Treasury is also looking at the idea of imposing an entirely new tax on the sale of more expensive homes, as first reported by The Guardian. However, government sources rejected suggestions that the threshold for a potential annual levy would be £500,000, suggesting it would have to be far higher to avoid slowing the market. No decisions have been taken given the budget is months out. Reeves is said to be concerned that Britain's property taxes are outdated and in need of reform and she also has limited room for manoeuvre given Labour's manifesto commitments. The chancellor will put the principle of 'fairness' at the heart of her budget. She is looking at property taxes after ruling out increasing income tax, national insurance or VAT in Labour's manifesto. The manifesto also included an explicit pledge by the government not to raise taxes on working people. There are concerns that the current council tax system is deeply unfair because it is based on property values from 1991. Critics say that this has led to a 'regressive' system under which a house valued at £1 million pays only twice as much council tax as a house worth £80,000. The Treasury has considered adding additional bands in the past but any changes are likely to be highly complex and would carry significant political risk. Removing the capital gains tax exemption for higher-value properties is viewed as a more realistic revenue-raiser. • Most millionaires think they'd be better off outside the UK Isaac Delestre, senior research economist at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said: 'Short of reinventing council tax entirely, the current system could be made more proportional by increasing council tax multipliers for properties in the highest bands or even adding additional bands. Another option would be for central government to levy a new, separate tax on high-value properties, in addition to council tax.' Tom Bill, from the estate agency Knight Frank, said that if only gains over the past few years were factored in, any tax could raise little money. He said: 'I'd be surprised if there are any gains to tax at the top end of the property market, given that prices in prime central London are down 20 per cent over the last decade. If there was anything that reduced demand further, then the prospect of gains in the short-term would pretty much vanish.' Simon Brown, the chief executive of the property data company Landmark Information Group, said: 'Any tax that rises with property value risks slowing the housing market even further. If downsizing becomes less attractive, larger family homes stay off the market and transaction volumes fall. This reduces overall movement in the market upwards and downwards, and not only reduces choice for families and first-time buyers, but also hits the Treasury by shrinking the tax base.' Kirstie Allsopp, the property expert and TV presenter, warned that discussions about potential mansion taxes risked 'destabalising the property market'. By Stephen Swinford, Political Editor The concept of a 'mansion tax' is far from new. Over the past 12 years both the Liberal Democrats under Nick Clegg and then Labour under Ed Miliband have toyed with the idea, only for it to fail to survive. However, the dire fiscal circumstances facing Reeves now mean it is very much back on the table. The chancellor is said to be looking at two broad options: the first is a capital gains tax raid on the sale of high-value property; the second an annual levy. Both will be contentious, as recent political history suggests. Vince Cable first proposed the idea on behalf of the Liberal Democrats in 2009. He suggested the new tax would hit anyone owning a home worth more than £1 million. He then proposed a £2 million threshold after the Liberal Democrats entered a coalition with the Tories. The plans were dropped in favour of a 7 per cent stamp duty charge on houses worth more than £2 million after negotiations with George Osborne, then the chancellor. The Liberal Democrats tried to revive the idea but were met with outright opposition from their coalition partners. In 2013 Ed Miliband, then the Labour leader, revived the proposals. In the run-up to the 2015 election he claimed that the policy would raise £1.2 billion a year which could be used to fund the NHS. Osborne once again used his budget in 2014 to announce increases in stamp duty, which he suggested were an alternative to a mansion tax. Reeves, however, has little room for manoeuvre given Labour's pledge not to increase the main rates of income tax, VAT or national insurance. With a black hole in the public finances of as much as £41 billion the mansion tax could be about to make a return.
Telegraph
11 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Alexander Isak attacks Newcastle over ‘broken promises' in effort to force Liverpool transfer
Alexander Isak has finally gone public on his desire to leave Newcastle United, claiming promises have been 'broken' and 'trust is lost' as he urged the club to allow him to leave. It is the final, desperate move left for a player who is seeing his chances of forcing a move to Liverpool fade as Newcastle cannot sign the two strikers they need to sanction his departure. Having been named in the Professional Footballers' Association team of the year for last season, Isak, who did not attend the ceremony on Tuesday night, used the recognition to insist relationships were broken and it was for the best of everyone concerned if he was allowed to leave. He said on his Instagram account: 'I'm proud to be recognised by my fellow professionals with a place in the PFA Premier League team of the season for 2024-25. 'First and foremost I want to thank my team-mates and everyone at Newcastle United who has supported me along the way. 'I'm not at the ceremony tonight. With everything going on, it didn't feel right to be there. I've kept quiet for a long time while others have spoken. The silence has allowed people to push their own version of events, even though they know it doesn't reflect what was really said and agreed behind closed doors. 'The reality is that promises were made and the club has known my position for a long time. To now act as if these issues are only emerging is misleading. When promises are broken and trust is lost, the relationships can't continue. That's where things are for me right now – and why change is in the best interests of everyone, not just myself.' Newcastle have rejected one bid of around £110m from Liverpool, which was made almost three weeks ago and continue to insist the 25-year-old is not for sale. They have strenuously denied that any promises have been broken and claimed there was no agreement from the club to let him leave this summer. Newcastle have always valued the Sweden international at £150m and Liverpool are not willing to pay that much. Isak's explosive and confrontational statement appears to have been designed to put even more pressure on Newcastle to open the door to a second bid. Telegraph Sport
The Independent
30 minutes ago
- The Independent
County councils say rural taxpayers to face unfair burden under funding reforms
Council taxpayers in rural areas will contribute unfair levels of funding for services in urban communities under proposed Government reforms, county councils have warned. Large rural authorities have also highlighted that maximum council tax increases will be needed to deliver necessary core budget increases for essential services over the next three years. In its submission to the Government's consultation on planned reforms, known as the 'fair funding review 2.0', the County Councils Network (CCN) said the proposals were 'better than feared'. The network welcomed some elements that determine funding levels, such as an indicator for remoteness and a new formula for social care and school transport allocations, which it said 'better recognise the needs' of the 38 county areas. But CCN called on the Government to reconsider its broader approach, insisting the proposals 'place a disproportionate burden on council taxpayers in county areas to fund local services and redistribute funding to urban areas'. Modelling showed that under the proposals £1.6 billion in council tax income generated in county areas will be redistributed across the country. This is due to a decision by ministers to include 100% of local council tax receipts when allocating funds in a bid to 'equalise' revenue across the sector, in a departure from the previous approach which took in 85%. CCN said this means 32 of the 38 county and rural authorities will lose an additional £400 million in a process that would represent an 'overwhelming' benefit for urban metropolitan boroughs. The analysis showed 22 authorities will receive increases in direct Government funding totalling £845 million under the plans. But on average these councils will receive 70% of their overall increase in core spending power, the official measure of funding available for services, from council tax rises specifically. In addition, 16 other councils, including some located in the North and the Midlands, will experience funding cuts totalling £470 million. With no increase in direct Government funding, the entire increase in core spending power for these authorities will come from council tax rises, CCN said. 'One third of council tax income raised in these areas over the three-year period is needed to offset cuts to funding and prevent them falling below a proposed 0% funding floor,' the network added. Across all 38 county and rural unitary councils, direct grant funding will increase by £374 million, with 90% of the total uplift in core spending power coming via maximum 5% annual council tax rises. The modelling suggests this scenario is in stark contrast to the impact on councils in urban areas, with nearly 50% of metropolitan authorities' extra resources coming from additional grant funding of £1.2 billion over three years. Overall, in the absence of maximum annual council tax rises over the period, the analysis showed 33 of the 38 county and rural unitary authorities would experience a real-terms reduction in funding, CCN said. The new Government grant would fund just 9% of the estimated £4.4 billion increase in the cost of providing services in county and rural areas over three years, while the boost in Government funding for metropolitan authorities would fund half of the total £2.4 billion increase in estimated costs of services in those areas. CCN said it is 'simply unrealistic' to expect some of England's largest social care councils to 'provide life critical services while receiving deep cuts in Government grant' and called for 'significantly' more funding to prevent 'unsustainable cuts'. Chairman of the CCN Tim Oliver said: 'Some 16 county and rural councils across the length and breadth of the country will see reductions in grant funding, while the Government's proposals place a disproportionate burden on council taxpayers in county areas to fund local services and redistribute funding to urban areas. 'Those facing cuts in Government funding will inevitably have to reduce vital frontline services, while the reliance on council tax rises leaves even those with modest funding increases facing an extremely challenging funding outlook. 'While we recognise the need to take account of how much councils raise in local taxation, the Government's proposals to fully equalise unfairly redistribute hundreds of millions of local council tax to other areas, while weakening the incentive to build homes.' Sir Stephen Houghton, chairman of the Special Interest Group of Municipal Authorities, backed the Government's approach. He said: 'It is absolutely right that any new funding system must fully reflect the wide disparities in councils' ability to raise income through council tax. 'The failure to do so over the past decade has led to disproportionately deep cuts in the most deprived areas, worsening inequality across the country.' The Government's consultation on the reforms closed on Friday. A Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government spokesperson said: 'We do not recognise the (CCN) analysis. The current, outdated way in which local authorities are funded has left communities behind and damaged local services. 'This must change and is why we are taking decisive action as part of our Plan for Change to reform the funding system so we can improve public services, while maintaining the previous government's referendum threshold on council tax rises so taxpayers have the final say and are protected from excessive increases.' Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said: 'Yet again the Labour government are showing utter contempt for people living in rural Britain. 'The family farms tax has been devastating for British farming and scrapping the rural services grant has put rural councils under enormous pressure. Now this latest spiteful change will steal more money out of the hands of county councils and send it straight into Labour-run urban areas. 'Only the Conservatives are serious about standing up for our rural communities' Liberal Democrat local government spokeswoman Vikki Slade said the reforms could be severely detrimental to some areas. Ms Slade said: 'Councils across the country are already teetering on the edge after years of Conservatives' neglect of local funding and services – from bus services cuts in rural areas to the rising costs of social care. These ill-thought-out reforms only risk leaving parts of the country significantly worse off. 'To truly help local authorities, the Government should urgently look at supporting councils who receive the least grant funding and those that face additional pressure on services in rural and coastal areas, to help them with spiralling costs.'
