Brand one step closer to opening first Glasgow shop
The London-based fashion company, founded by Nick Wheeler, has applied for permission to put up its logos.
Proposed shopfront (Image: Sourced) (Image: Sourced)
READ NEXT: Global retailer speaks out after closure of Glasgow store
Earlier this year, the retailer was given the green light to take over the property and make changes to it and an additional pending bid is being considered by the council for external works.
Michael Kors suddenly closed its shop at the end of April and later said it is "exploring new opportunities to better serve customers".
Charles Tyrwhitt has stores in Edinburgh, the US, France and England.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
11 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Chelsea manor listed for £250million becomes one of London's most valuable after owner quits London because 'Britain has gone to hell'
A valuable Chelsea manor is set to be listed for an eye-watering £250million after its billionaire owner quit London, declaring that 'Britain has gone to hell'. John Fredriksen, the UK's ninth richest billionare, moved his business out of the UK capital last month after it had emerged he had closed the Sloane Square headquarters of one of his private businesses - Seatankers Management. Now, his luxury 300-year-old Georgian manor is said to be hitting the market. Nestled on Chelsea's oldest street in west London, the Old Rectory comes fit with a private ballroom and a near two acre garden, one of central London's largest. Mr Fredriksen, 81, is understood to be packing up his multi-million pound home, boasting up to 10 bedrooms across 30,000 square feet, the Times has reported. Local residents have alleged that more than a dozen domestic staff have been let go, while discreet viewings of the grand mansion are also set to be arranged. Experts believe that a listing of the prestigious home is unlikely to appear on popular property listing sites but instead will be sold in an 'off-market' private deal delivered by specialist agents. A spokesman for Fredriksen declined to comment on whether The Old Rectory was on sale, alongside whether any domestic staff had been let go, according to The Times. The Norweigan-born shipping tycoon, who has an estimated wealth of around £13.7billion, has been publicly critical of Britain's poor economic prospects, particularly following Labour's controversial non-dom tax raid. Local residents have alleged that more than a dozen domestic staff have been let go, while discreet viewings of the grand mansion are also set to be arranged. Experts believe that a listing of the prestigious home is unlikely to appear on popular property listing sites He is said to be spending most of his time running his successful business empire from the United Arab Emirates, rather than the UK. At a shipping event in June, Mr Fredriksen told Norweigan title E24 that Britain was 'starting to remind me more and more of Norway', adding: 'Britain has gone to hell, like Norway'. He continued: 'The entire Western world is on its way down. 'People should get up and work even more, and go to the office instead of having a home office.' Mr Fredriksen purchased the Grade II-listed riverside mansion from Greek businessman Theodore Angelopoulos in 2001 for £37million. In 2004, he reportedly turned down former Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich's £100million offer for the house. Having first gotten into oil trading in the 1960s and then buying his first tankers in the 1970s, Mr Fredriksen left Norway in 1978. The oil tanker magnate went on to make his fortune during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s. The oil tanger magnate (pictured) moved his business out of the UK capital last month after it had emerged he had closed the Sloane Square headquarters of one of his private businesses - Seatankers Management. In an interview with E24 in June, he said that 'Britain has gone to hell' John Waters, director of independent buying agency Robert Bailey Property, told The Times that 'many' of the UK's wealthiest home owners that have left the country in recent years have chosen to rent overseas, rather than sell their properties. They do so, he said, 'in the hope that the UK tax system will in the future become less unfavourable'. Mr Waters added: 'They feel they have little choice due to the end of non-dom status and the prospect of all their global assets being subject to UK inheritance tax.' In April, The Labour Government abolished the non-dom tax status in April, which is where UK residents whose permanent home or domicile for tax purposes is outside the country. Then, just a month later, it was revealed that the UK has suffered the biggest fall in billionaires on record. The number dropped to 156 this year from 165 in 2024, representing the sharpest decline in the Sunday Times Rich List's 37-year-history. 'Our billionaire count is down and the combined wealth of those who feature in our research is falling,' Robert Watts, compiler of the Rich List, said when it was published last month. 'We are also finding fewer of the world's super rich are coming to live in the UK.' Research by New World Wealth has also suggested that the UK has lost 18 dollar billionaires over the last two years - more than any other country in the world. However, putting an exact figure on the number of billionaires leaving the country is complicated by the difficulty of calculating an individuals' wealth and working out their tax residency if they do not make this information public. The drop in Britain's billionares also came after the Autumn Budget last year that included several controversial tax changes. Since April, employers have had to start paying higher National Insurance contributions for their staff.
The Guardian
39 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The quiet, matter of fact takeover of women holding senior economist roles
Rachel Reeves is rightly proud of being the first woman chancellor of the exchequer, but she is far from alone: the commanding heights of economic policymaking in the UK are becoming much less male. At a Westminster thinktank event last week about whether Labour is still a 'mission-led government', one of the most striking things was not the panel's answer, which you can probably guess, but the fact that it was made up of three women, and one token man. The Institute for Government's director, Hannah White, was joined by its chief economist, Gemma Tetlow, and the no-nonsense new director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, Helen Miller – as well as the FT's Stephen Bush. Elsewhere, the Resolution Foundation is now run by Ruth Curtice, a former Treasury economist. Rain Newton-Smith, another economist, has the task of repairing the CBI's scandal-rocked reputation as its director general. Two of the four deputy governors of the Bank of England are women, too – as are the leaders of a string of powerful trades unions. This female takeover has been a quiet and matter of fact one – but it marks a significant change, very noticeable upon returning to covering the field, after a few years away. It has not yet been reflected in the gender balance of students picking economics at GCSE, A-level or as a degree, unfortunately. Research commissioned by the Bank of England showed earlier this year that economics classes at all levels remain about 70% male. But if anything, that makes it all the more striking that many of the most authoritative voices we will hear, in the run-up to Reeves's autumn budget, will be female. Aside from straightforward fairness, there are at least three potential benefits of this feminisation of the economic debate. The first, which Reeves herself has talked about directly, is the simple power of example: giving girls and young women the perception they could do jobs such as these. And while it must have been shattering, shedding a few tears at the dispatch box was a powerful part of that: many women of every age will have identified with her. Women just do cry more than men (a YouGov poll in 2015 found that 45% of women had cried at least once a month in the past year; for men, it was 11%). This has zero bearing on their ability to do their job – and if anything, may point to sincerity, rather than insouciance. Whatever you think of their policies, Theresa May's tears as she resigned, surely reflected better on her character than David Cameron's jaunty little hum. A second potential benefit of having women at the top of economic policymaking should be better decision-making. Jill Rutter, a former Treasury official and now senior research fellow at thinktank UK in a Changing Europe, recalls that back in the 1980s, 'there were virtually no women around the table making tax policy decisions, and it was very interesting, because almost all the senior people there had non-working wives'. She recalls being stared at if, as the junior official present, she piped up to ask how a particular policy might go down with women. Four decades later, Boris Johnson's bloke-heavy government was apparently capable of similar myopia. When senior Cabinet Office official Helen MacNamara testified at the Covid Inquiry, she argued that senior women's voices were all but absent from decision-making in the pandemic. 'Decisions were being taken where the impact on women was either lost or ignored,' she said in her written evidence. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion MacNamara pointed to a lack of consideration about the demands that school closures would place on families; the potential impact of lockdown on domestic violence victims; and the rules around pregnancy and birth. By contrast, she said, time was found to discuss the implications for, 'hunting, shooting and fishing'. Across today's economic landscape, there are plenty of pressing issues women may feel particularly moved to pursue – not least the gender pay gap (13%), which Reeves has pledged to narrow, and its less-noticed sister, the gender pensions gap (standing at a shocking 35% for private pension savings), which the work and pensions secretary, Liz Kendall, is expected to highlight in a speech on Monday. The third and more speculative potential upside of having more female economic policymakers, is a shift in the tone of debate. Not all women are moderate, or reasonable, or ground their arguments in the everyday – Liz Truss is certainly a counterexample – but I would gently suggest that on average, they tend to be a bit less prone to bluster, bravado, and what the kids call 'main character syndrome'. That was why it was depressing last week to see Reeves at the Mansion House, describing regulation as the 'boot on the neck' of British enterprise, in danger of 'choking off' innovation. No doubt the violent language was aimed at grabbing headlines (which it did) and communicating a clear message to her City audience. But it was jarring to read such a brute phrase in a public speech by the UK's most powerful woman. There is no shortage of tedious macho language around Keir Starmer – with anonymous briefers proudly telling columnists the prime minister's politics are 'hard Labour', and accusing MPs of 'knobheadery'. Perhaps as her crunch autumn budget approaches, Reeves can help the government to find a different, more relatable vocabulary. Judging by the comments of that mainly-female panel about Labour's first year in power last week, the debate in the coming months will be every bit as robust as ever. But it will be fascinating to see if it can be conducted in a different, calmer way: and perhaps more closely anchored to what MacNamara argued was missing from that shameful Johnson period: people, and families, and how people actually live their lives.
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
Business is an easy target for tax. Ministers should resist
T ucked away in a devolution bill this month was a provision that has unsettled the commercial property industry. The deputy prime minister, Angela Rayner, set out to ban upward-only rent reviews, a mainstay of property valuations for decades, saying the change would 'make it easier for small businesses and community groups to compete'. Even those who supported it pointed out that high-street retailers and leisure operators face far bigger challenges, many imposed by the government. The sectors, which tend to employ low-paid and part-time workers, have shouldered a disproportionate amount of the £25 billion extra national insurance burden announced in October's budget. Analysis of HM Revenue & Customs figures last week found that payrolled employment in the hospitality industry fell by 83,800 jobs in the nine months after the budget, while employment in retail fell by 45,600. April's steep rise in the minimum wage has also had a big impact. Business rates are another factor. Before the election, Rachel Reeves promised to reform the deeply unpopular tax on property occupancy before replacing it altogether. In fact, October brought tinkering that will result in retail and hospitality tenants paying more by 2026. • Business rates hike would drive up food prices, chancellor told There was a dab of jam tomorrow, in that after that point businesses in those sectors will pay less for small properties. But that will be funded through higher charges on occupants of properties valued at more than £500,000. The property agency Gerald Eve has estimated that more than 16,000 buildings will be hit. They will include 1,800 supermarkets, 860 department stores and 483 warehouses but also hospitals, schools and universities. Our deputy political editor, Harry Yorke, reports today that the retail industry is warning this added strain on big shops could force them to push up food and clothing prices, stoking inflation. Helen Dickinson, chief executive of the British Retail Consortium, says retailers 'are doing everything they can to shield customers from … mounting pressures, but there is only so much they can absorb'. The truth is that retail and hospitality are easy to tax because they have big payrolls and are rooted in the UK. That does not make it right. They have already had to grapple with the shift towards online shopping. They have swallowed plenty of tax medicine. These companies employ the 'working people' Labour wants to protect. Squeezing them may be fiscally expedient but it is shortsighted. Labour's failure to get means-testing of winter fuel payments and cuts to welfare past its backbenchers leaves Reeves with a hole to fill this autumn. The temptation will be to come back for more. The chancellor should be mindful of the pain high-employment sectors have suffered before she raises taxes further. She should also get on with reforming business rates.
