Tag Archives: tax

Push to raise foreign taxes on US assets a risk for foreign investors

By Lizzie Wills, Senior Partner & Head of Private Equity

A bill making its way through the US Congress could present meaningful new taxes on US holdings of investors domiciled in the UK, as well as several EU member countries – another in a series of new risks to emerge from the newly fraught relationship between America and its historic allies. While passage of the bill is not guaranteed, potentially impacted parties should begin to think now about how to react to potential changes.

The effort in the US Congress to impose new taxes on many foreign investments in the US is part of a broader tax and spending package that recently passed the US House of Representatives and is currently being debated in the Senate. The bill would be passed under a legislative vehicle known as reconciliation, which allows a bill to pass under restricted circumstances with simple majorities of both the House and Senate, circumventing the usual requirement to secure 60 Senate votes.

The foreign investment tax package is known as Section 899 for the new section of the US tax code required to implement it. Section 899 would impose incremental taxes above current rates on the value of income or sale proceeds of many US holdings (US Treasury securities would be exempt) held by institutional investors, individuals and governments domiciled in countries that have imposed what the bill characterises as “discriminatory” taxes on the US. The discriminatory threshold would automatically include countries that have levied Digital Service Taxes (DSTs) on US-based technology firms – which includes the UK, France and Spain – as well as taxes imposed under the Undertaxed Profits Rule, a standard developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to attempt to impose minimum tax rates on multinationals.

Since the House version of the reconciliation bill passed on 22 May 22, critics have dubbed Section 899 the “revenge tax”, predicting that if passed the provisions would hurt US asset prices, cause interest rates to rise and the US dollar to tank considering the US$30 trillion in US assets held by foreigners. The Tax Foundation, a US think tank, estimates the new taxes would impact some 80% of the foreign direct investments into the US. Yet US policymakers appear to be largely unmoved thus far by the opposition. The Senate Finance Committee has released draft language pegging the incremental taxes at 15% (5% per year for each of three years) starting in 2027, watering down the House version but keeping it largely intact. The notion of raising taxes on foreign investors is completely consistent with the “America First” mindset of the Trump administration and Republican congressional leaders. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO), a non-partisan body that estimates the fiscal impact of proposed legislation, has forecast that the House version of Section 899 would raise US$116 billion over the 10-year budget forecast window, important considering the CBO’s forecast that the bill would add trillions to the already yawning US budget deficit. The Senate’s version of the bill would raise less, given the 15% maximum (versus 20% in the House bill) but would still be expected to generate meaningful revenue.

The broader reconciliation bill has drawn opposition from multiple factions of the Republican party. However, the bulk of the criticism has focused more on the bill’s proposed cuts to the Medicaid health-insurance programme (for moderates) and the projected further widening of the federal budget deficit (for conservatives). By comparison, criticism of Section 899 has been muted. And even if the current version of the bill is scaled back, the temptation for a party that controls the White House, Senate and House to pass a bill through reconciliation is huge – the vehicle was used to pass the tax-reform bill in Trump’s first term, in 2017, as well as the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) under President Joe Biden in 2021.

Sample countries that have imposed Digital Service Taxes (DSTs) on US Firms

Austria	Denmark	Belgium
Canada	Hungary	Turkey
France	Italy	Peru
India	Poland	Colombia
UK	Spain	Kenya

Source: Tax Foundation

What can non-US investors with US holdings do in response? Both the Senate and House versions of the bill specify that the new taxes will only be imposed on entities with greater than 50% equity ownership outside the US. Jointly held funds with divided US/non US ownership could shift majority control back to the US partner. Other strategies will surely emerge to adapt to the new rules should they come to pass. But investors would do well to start thinking about them sooner rather than later.

If you’re interested in discussing this in more detail please be in touch with Lizzie Wills on lizzie.wills@gkstrategy.com.

Key Takeaways from the Spending Review: A future that is less generous than the past

GK had the pleasure of hosting former Treasury and education minister David Laws and the Financial Times’ Economics Commentator Chris Giles in our latest webinar on Thursday (12^th June) to discuss the winners and losers from the government’s spending review, and what it means for business.

The spending review is a significant moment in the political calendar. The settlements it confirms set departmental day-to-day budgets for the next three years (2026-27, 2027-28 and 2028-29) and capital expenditure for the next four (until 2029-30). It is also the moment when No.10 and the Treasury must publicly commit the funds to support their political objectives – in essence, we get to see where spending is going to be prioritised and where it is not.

In the webinar, David and Chris detailed what the spending review means for overall public spending, where the government could come undone, and the possibility of future tax rises. You can read a summary of their key takeaways below:

The spending review is not about making new money available or introducing new taxes. Spending reviews are all about the allocation of a pre-determined spending envelope which, in this instance, the Chancellor set out in the October budget last year. It does not introduce any new taxes or make new money available. Instead, it confirms what areas of public spending the government wants to prioritise, and which departments will have to be squeezed.

The departmental settlements do not represent a return to the austerity years. While the overall spending envelope is tight – especially given growing pressure on public spending across health, pensions and defence – day-to-day spending is still rising by 1.2% per year in real terms (i.e. accounting for inflation) over the spending review period. This means it is broadly in line with the departmental spending settlements put forward by various governments since 2019.

A lot of the spending assumptions depend on public sector productivity improving, which is no guarantee. Public sector productivity has declined since the Covid-19 pandemic and in 2024 it fell by 0.3%. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) has historically assumed quite generous improvements in public sector productivity each year which is a key component of its overall economic growth metric.

If the OBR significantly revises down its assumptions about improvements in productivity, this could seriously impact the funds it is projecting the government will have to work with over the spending review period. This increases the likelihood of the government having to do introduce large tax rises at the autumn budget.

Defence will continue to put pressure on the government’s overall spending envelope. Since the end of the Second World War, successive governments have used cuts to defence as a means of boosting other areas of public spending, most notably health. Persistent global instability and geopolitical uncertainty means that higher levels of defence spending are likely to continue for the foreseeable future. No.10 and the Treasury will have to contend with this new spending pressure as demographic challenges continue to pile up and economic growth remains sluggish.

The NHS is the big winner from the spending review, albeit with a smaller settlement than it has historically received. Health secretary Wes Streeting will undoubtedly be the happiest around the Cabinet table following the confirmation of the Department of Health and Social Care’s settlement, with spending on the NHS set to grow by 3% per year in real terms. However, this is below historic average rises of approximately 4-5%. With a growing elderly population and people living with complex conditions for longer, the funding put forward in the spending review settlement is unlikely to significantly move the dial on the performance of the NHS.

Small tax rises are likely at the autumn budget to meet the Chancellor’s fiscal rules. The government has committed to meet day-to-day expenditure through its own revenues by 2029-30. This means its current budget will have to be in balance or surplus by the end of the decade, and any money the government does borrow will be to invest. If the OBR projects that the government is not on course to meet this fiscal rule (or any of its others), then Chancellor Rachel Reeves will be forced to come back for a second round of tax rises or decide to break a fiscal rule. Either look fairly unpalatable to the government given where they currently are in the opinion polls.

A cabinet reshuffle should be expected in the second half of 2026 as the government begins to ramp up to the next general election. 2026 is projected to a big election year in the UK. Elections are due to take place for the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly, along with a series of newly created unitary authorities. Should the results prove poor for Labour, as current polling indicates they will, then Prime Minister Keir Starmer is likely to reshuffle his cabinet to get his top team in place as the No.10 machine starts to think about the next general election in 2029.

Reflections on the Future of Council Tax

GK Associate Hugo Tuckett assesses the likelihood of council tax reform amid rising concern about local authority financial resilience.

Is council tax reform on the horizon?

Amid rising bankruptcies in recent years, and growing concern about the sustainability of council finances, funding mechanisms for local authorities – and particularly council tax – are attracting growing political scrutiny.

In December 2023, the Local Government Association reported that almost one in five council leaders and chief executives it surveyed think it is very or fairly likely that they will need to issue a Section 114 notice this year or next due to a lack of funding. A Section 114 notice is issued by a council’s finance officer if they believe the council’s expenditure will exceed the resources it has available. Eleven Section 114 notices have been issued since 2018, with only five issued in the 30 years prior.

Given that council tax receipts now make up over half of local authority spending power (56.9% in 2023-24 compared to 49.1% in 2015-16), ensuring the council tax regime is operating effectively is critical to the long-term sustainability of local authority finances.

The Levelling Up Committee recently made a series of recommendations to the Government on council tax reform. In its report, the Committee reiterated its previous conclusions about the “unfairness and outdatedness of the council tax regime”.

The Government has since said it has no plans to conduct a revaluation of council tax bands (the Committee’s key recommendation) as, amongst other factors, “it would particularly risk those on a lower income, including pensioners, who have seen their homes appreciate in value”.

Here is the focal point of political discourse. A Conservative Government, aware that (according to recent YouGov polling) the Party is now the most popular only among the over-70s, will be aggrieved to conduct a revaluation of property bands which would hit the pockets of its core voter base. A Labour government on the other hand, with traditionally greater allegiances to younger, non-home owning voters and those on lower incomes could take a fresh look at this issue. One option likely to be under consideration is the introduction of new, higher bands of council tax.

Given the Shadow Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has ruled out numerous tax rises ahead of the upcoming General Election, council tax reform represents one revenue-raising lever still available to her. While the details of any potential reform are still unknown, it is a near certainty that the council tax regime will only grow in political salience in the years ahead.

GK Point of View – Tory and Labour priorities in 2024

GK Senior Adviser Robert Blackmore and Adviser Noureen Ahmed assess the priorities for the Conservatives and Labour in 2024 as we make our way closer to a general election.

The Tory plan to build back core support

The Conservative Party begins 2024 in dire straits, over 20 points behind Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour in the polls, they are running out of time to avoid a chastening defeat. Party leaders are therefore concentrating their efforts on ensuring they have strong support with the Party itself, while strategists desperately try to home in on the clearest path to victory, reducing illegal immigration via the Rwanda scheme, and providing tax cuts.

Much of the Government’s political capital is being spent on making its plan to send some asylum seekers to Rwanda for processing a reality. The updated Rwanda Bill has now reached the House of Lords, where intense opposition is expected. For party strategists, it provides the Conservatives with an opportunity to weaponise the debate and highlight the immigration and Brexit-related tropes that dominated the political debates in the late 2010s.

However, the political salience of the small boats issue to the wider country, as opposed to the party’s rank-and-file, is not yet clear. That is why the Party is so keen to ensure voters feel economically empowered, as the next election approaches. With the Spring Budget scheduled for 6th March, there are a number of tax cuts that Chancellor Jeremy Hunt has been considering in recent weeks, including further cuts to national insurance, cuts to income tax, and an increase in the child benefit threshold. The Chancellor, however, has been managing expectations about how feasible these may be, with the likelihood that the degree of fiscal headroom in March will be lower than expected. A fourth category, cuts to inheritance tax, is also now deemed less likely, as the Prime Minister fears it could be portrayed as a tax concession to the wealthy.

Yet, such a strategy is dependent on the electorate’s support for the Government after 13 years in power. Will they show gratitude to the Government for providing extra pounds in their pocket and vote accordingly? The tax burden is the highest it has been since the Second World War, and, according to the Resolution Foundation, wage stagnation represents a real-term decline in take home pay for many households since 2008. Given these challenges, it is not guaranteed that the Conservatives’ strategy will cut through.

It’s in the bag for Labour surely?

As the next general election looks increasingly likely for late Autumn, the Labour Party is planning to finalise any manifesto commitments by mid-February (in the unlikely scenario that the PM announces a May election). Although the Labour Party requires a significant electoral swing to claim a majority, it has been buoyed by recent polling indicating that Labour are firm favourites to lead the next government. As a result, many in Labour HQ are optimistically planning the Party’s campaign strategy.

In 2023, Labour Leader Sir Keir Starmer unveiled his 5 national missions that the party will build its manifesto around. Core missions include Labour’s ambition to support the NHS to get back on its feet and break down barriers to opportunities.

Unsurprisingly, education has remained at the forefront of Labour’s core priorities, with the Party recently unveiling its plans for schools, further education, and the early years space. The Party is determined to introduce reforms to support the development of young people and better prepare them for adulthood.

The NHS is regarded as an area of strength for the Party, with the public almost always preferring Labour’s handling of the NHS. Given the widespread awareness of ongoing crises, such as doctors’ strikes, long waiting lists and inaccessible GPs, the Party is letting the national story do the campaigning for them, with scant few serious pledges on health and social care policy. Shadow Health Secretary, Wes Streeting, has promised to work to address the fundamental issues, with promises made by the Party to boost funding investment, cut down waiting lists and improve staff recruitment.

However, further information on reforms have not been made public – many at Labour Party HQ worry that a detailed proposal may just offer the Conservative Party a “free win”, by giving it something to critique. The manifesto will shed light on where their focus may lie on health, but it’s unlikely that Labour will reveal its plans in full before taking power. Nevertheless, Labour has now started talks with the civil service and is finalising policy. We expect Labour to accelerate its campaign plans and attempt to present itself as a calming presence in contrast to the continuing Tory storms.