Author Archives: GK Strategy

Silouhette of soldier

Artificial Intelligence: ‘The Future of Defence Capability’

Will Labour follow through on its commitment to reform carried interest?

It is no secret that Labour remains in a hugely advantageous position in the build-up to the next General Election, expected in Autumn 2024. YouGov’s latest polling has the voting intention figure at 47% compared to the Conservative’s 24%, and the Party looks likely to form the next government.

While Labour Leader Keir Starmer has broadly aligned himself with the Conservative Government’s economic agenda to date, one area where Labour has sought to create some distinction is with its proposals for private equity tax reform. While this is unlikely to gain a significant amount of national media attention, it will have huge implications for private equity firms operating in the UK and the UK’s attractiveness as a destination for this type of investment.

The proposals centre on the tax arrangements utilised by private equity firms, in particular carried interest. Carried interest refers to a share of profits earned by general partners of private equity firms. General partners typically receive 20% of a fund’s returns (usually above a pre-defined minimum return known as the hurdle rate) as a performance fee for managing the fund.

While this appears relatively uncontroversial, what has attracted particular attention is the tax treatment carried interest receives. Rather than being taxed as income, which would incur a tax rate of up to a 45%, carried interest qualifies for capital gains tax and is taxed at a rate up to 28%.

The private equity industry argues its payments are not bonuses but investment returns, as investors are required to invest their own money in deals to be entitled to them. Opponents of the current approach believe that the everyday reality of most private equity firms means they should be considered trading, not investment, businesses.

Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves has placed private equity tax arrangements firmly in her sights ahead of the upcoming General Election. Reeves has described the existing arrangements as “absurd” and said a Labour government would close the “carried interest loophole”. The Party estimates the change would raise £440 million a year for the Exchequer.

Reeves’ argument is also gaining some traction in the legal profession. In March 2023, a leading tax lawyer argued that most private equity funds should be treated as “trading” for tax purposes. Changing the classification would mean payouts would be levied as income with a top rate of 45%, rather than at a capital gains tax rate of 28%. The same author suggests that to facilitate the change, the Government would need to introduce legislation to avoid an uncomfortable judicial review of HMRC.

This stems from a statement agreed in 1987 between the British Venture Capital Association (BVCA) and Inland Revenue, which recent analysis suggests could be unlawful, saying that typical private equity funds were not “trading” for tax purposes, with the consequences being that carried interest was taxed as capital. Since then, the Inland Revenue and HMRC has followed the BVCA statement, and private equity funds rely on it as a matter of course.

If legislation to change the existing system were to be introduced, it is currently unclear the extent to which it would be prioritised by an incoming Labour administration. Other long-touted reforms, namely amending VAT arrangements on private school fees, for example, will form part of the Party’s first year in government Shadow Ministers have confirmed. With Labour positioning economic growth as a central plank of its election pitch, the wisdom of alienating potential investors will also likely be called into question. At the recent Party Conference in Liverpool, Labour confirmed it would seek to unlock private sector investment across a variety of industries including infrastructure for digital connectivity, laboratories and energy.

While Labour has previously made bold commitments in relation to the private equity industry, wider pledges and the prioritisation of other reforms could push changes to carried interest tax arrangements down the pecking order. However, given that Labour has clearly presented its views on ending what it refers to as a “loophole”, the viability of dropping the proposals altogether is unlikely.

A possible route forward would be to reform the current capital gains tax treatment utilised by the private equity industry so that returns on investments in sectors outside Labour’s industrial strategy are taxed as income, while investments in those sectors continue to benefit from the reduced rate. While Labour has confirmed it has no plans to introduce a wealth tax, increase capital gains tax or put up the top rate of income tax, this does leave the door open to a two-tiered approach. This would allow Labour to present itself as going after private equity bosses, an argument popular with its traditional voter base, while also encouraging investment in areas tied to its economic agenda.

GK Strategy is an expert advisory firm that supports investors with political and regulatory due diligence, and political advice and insight, across a range of different sectors including energy efficiency, adult social care and education. Please do get in touch with our insights team at insights@gkstrategy.com if you would like to discuss Labour’s approach to private equity tax reform or any other potential investment areas.

gk - How is the policy and regulatory environment for rail changing_

Party conference 2023

As the annual conference season draws to a close, possibly the last before a general election next year, the main political parties will be reflecting on the success or otherwise of the Manchester and Liverpool gatherings. Both conferences were attended by our political advisers, who reflect on Conservative and Labour conference below.

As with past conferences, the measure of success differs, this was Rishi Sunak’s first as Tory leader, a more stable but still divided party. Just a year ago Liz Truss led a chaotic prelude to her short time in No10 and this year’s collection of Nigel Farage (as journalist) and long awaited HS2 announcement wasn’t the best backdrop as the Prime Minister attempted to cast his leadership as a force for change. Contrast Liverpool and the balance of a Labour party consistently ahead in the polls, with a more united and coherent party than for the past decade – a gathering of Labour activists who were at pains not to be carried too high on the prospect of government.

In a change to the usual order, the Conservative’s met first. The ongoing saga of will they, won’t they with HS2 didn’t help Rishi Sunak’s first conference as party leader. While the Prime Minister’s team struggled to get a hold of the narrative over the three days in Manchester, the former leader and likely leadership hopeful, Liz Truss and Suella Braverman, were quick to try and seize the agenda. Where the party truly seemed united was on the importance of support for climate action, and this was reflected in the sheer number of well-attended fringe events giving serious attention to how the UK can credibly retain its status as a climate leader. The Conservatives, despite recent announcements seemingly backing away from climate policy, understand that this remains a key vote-winner. Cobbling together a sell-able vision for the climate to the electorate could be make-or-break for the party in any upcoming election.

Sunak’s conference speech, his most important as leader saw the Prime Minister attempt to create some separation between his premiership and what he referred to as the previous “30 years of a political system which incentivises the easy decision, not the right one”. This will be a tough balancing act in the months ahead of the upcoming election. The 30-years Sunak references encompasses not only former Labour leaders Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, but no fewer than five Conservative Prime Ministers. The key question going into an election year will be whether Sunak can create that separation and be given the opportunity to push forward with his ambitious reforms to education, or whether he will be rejected by the electorate as more of the same.

Keir Starmer’s speech embodied Labour conference in Liverpool this week. A leader and a party more at home with its values and a confident, clear, coherent, even hopeful message about Britain’s future – a decade of national renewal. The party wanted a clean conference, a solid platform speaking to business leaders and the wider public, the opportunity now to project Keir Starmer’s message for the country which faced down the shame of the Corbyn-era and proudly bound past Labour success with a party of service, building a new country over the next decade and beyond. The test now is for the party to successfully project the same confidence beyond Liverpool, and Westminster, to the country at large.

Labour reshuffle: Keir puts Labour on election footing with ‘battle-ready’ team

GK Associate Director David Mitchell looks at the Labour Party’s reshuffle of its Shadow Cabinet, and what we can understand from Sir Keir Starmer’s new look team. 

The Leader of the Opposition’s Office has invested enormous energy to underpin the value of message discipline into the Labour ranks in the first half of this year. This has centred around the importance of fiscal responsibility, which must trump all else. As Parliament returns today, Keir and his team has convened a team that has experience and consists of media performers to communicate that message to the voters.

The influence of Labour’s most electorally successful leader Tony Blair was evident in today’s reshuffle. From a commitment over the weekend not to raise income tax in the next Parliament (similar to the run up to the 1997 election), to today’s announcement that saw the promotion of Blairites such as Pat McFadden and Liz Kendall. The former was Blair’s Political Secretary and will now take up the role of Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and National Campaign Co-ordinator. In this role Pat will be responsible for ensuring the party is externally aligned across all shadow departments, as well as ensuring a co-ordinated message is presented to the electorate.

This reshuffle was not just about the removal of the remaining remnants of the Corbyn years but was notable for the pivot away from those seen as from the ‘soft left’ of the Labour Party. Lisa Nandy, seen as the face of this wing of the Party, has found herself demoted from the strategically important levelling up brief to Shadow Cabinet Minister for International Development. In this context, today’s reshuffle reflects not just a gradual move in the political direction of the Labour Party, but a substantial positioning of the Party in the centre ground.

The decisiveness of Keir’s reshuffle today is a culmination of changes through the party’s structures including the National Executive Committee, but also a reflection of a healthy and sustained polling lead that the Party has held since the start of 2022. Of course, Keir does not have everything his own way. His relationship with Deputy Leader Angela Rayner, which has been described as ‘tense’ and ‘challenging’ saw Angela emerge as a big winner, adopting the Shadow Deputy Prime Minister and Shadow Secretary of State for Levelling up brief.

This is a team that Keir is now confident that he can go to party conference in Liverpool in a few weeks’ time, and present as a government in waiting. LOTO will be aware there will be a buoyant atmosphere and excitement with delegates and activists in attendance, he will now hope his new team will importantly rub off with the voters watching at home.

Oil’s not well for Net Zero: what do the new fossil fuel licenses mean for emissions targets?

GK interns Olivia Warr and Yusaf Hassan take a deep dive into what the new North Sea oil and gas exploration licenses mean for the UK’s net zero targets. 

The Prime Minister’s announcement that the Government would grant 100 new North Sea oil and gas licenses was met with dismay by both climate activists and the Opposition, with Shadow Climate Change Secretary, Ed Miliband, arguing that Sunak’s “weak and confused policy… will do nothing for our energy security and drive a coach and horses through our climate commitments”.

The Prime Minister positioned the move as a refusal to bow down to dictators threatening the UK’s energy security. However, the announcement comes amid a broader shift under Sunak’s watch to less enthusiasm for costly green policies following the Conservative Party’s narrow win in the Uxbridge and South Ruislip by-election – largely attributed to the unpopularity of Labour Mayor Sadiq Khan’s ULEZ expansion. Having already spent months criticising Labour over funding links to activist group Just Stop Oil, No.10 sees the cost of meeting certain green commitments as a clear attack line for the upcoming election season.

The Conservative Party’s messaging will have to be precise, however, to not risk losing control of the narrative. Net zero has huge support among the electorate (a recent YouGov poll had support for the 2050 target at over 70%) and among a large portion of backbench Conservative MPs. If the Prime Minister is seen to be reneging on the Government’s emission-cutting commitments, it could become disastrous for his electoral prospects. What he hopes to exploit, though, is the unease about personal lifestyle or financial implications of certain policy initiatives – as evidenced by the strength of opposition to the ULEZ policy expansion. Sunak hopes to portray himself as the common-sense candidate during a cost-of-living crisis; not taking radical action to hurt people’s bank accounts and showing Keir Starmer to be in the pocket of climate radicals who will hurt the economy for their own agenda.

He will be nervously gauging the reaction of his party. Already, the influential Conservative MP, Chris Skidmore, who recently completed an independent review of the Government’s net zero policies, has slammed the plan, stating it is “on the wrong side of the future economy”. Tory MPs at risk from Liberal Democrat challengers at the next General Election may also be concerned about the opinions of their environmentally conscious constituents. Young people, too, are unlikely to be enamoured by Sunak’s pivot as mainland Europe feels the heat of the climate crisis.

The extent to which Labour can attack the Government’s policy is limited, however, after the Party confirmed they would not revoke any of the licenses issued. This has been seen by some as implicit approval of the plan and perhaps an indication that they quietly also see it as a necessary evil to ensure energy security.

But to what extent will the policy announcement achieve its energy security objectives?

The claim made by the Government is that sourcing oil and gas closer to home would reduce emission production by three to four times whilst lowering import costs. Sunak argues that, given the UK is still forecast to be reliant on fossil fuels for one quarter of its energy needs by 2050, the new licenses would not jeopardise the net zero target. Meanwhile, investing in a Carbon Capture Cluster (CCS) through the Acorn Project in Scotland provides the infrastructure to decarbonise North Sea activity, mitigating those emissions that will result from the new drilling sites, while also generating jobs and investment in Northern Scotland.

However, Sunak’s proposal raises some questions. In terms of tackling the cost-of-living crisis and cementing energy security, there’s no guarantee that the newly extracted oil and gas will be cycled directly into the UK market to provide any benefits. The Climate Change Committee in their 2023 report to Parliament suggested there would be minimal impact on domestic prices from this investment. The North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA) also explained that it would take a minimum of five years before sites could become operational – reducing the short-term benefits of the scheme. Furthermore, while the £1 billion dedicated to the CCS is a mitigatory step in reducing emissions, Sunak has refused to be drawn on whether the development of the infrastructure will be sufficient to match the increased emissions, nor has he committed the extraction licences to be conditional on the emissions’ removal.

It remains to be seen whether the current Government – or indeed any future governments – will be able to make significant progress towards the legally-binding net zero target with the lighter touch, less intrusive approach that Sunak is leaning towards in his bid to keep voters onside, or whether the Prime Minister will be forced to take more dramatic, potentially unpopular, action to ensure the goal is met. The UK’s reputation as a global leader in setting climate change goals is strong, following on from a successful COP summit in Glasgow two years ago, but its ability to deliver on them hangs in the balance.