Azure Global

Wednesday, 27 November 2013

Law firm Clifford Chance analyses Royal Mail's property portfolio

Evaluation comes amid criticism that property portfolio may have been undervalued and Royal Mail sold off on the cheap

Clifford Chance, the "Magic Circle" City law firm with links to some of the leading investors in Royal Mail, has been privately analysing the newly floated company's portfolio of 2,000 UK properties.

News of the evaluation comes a week after MPs on the Department for Business, Innovation & Skills select committee probed bankers on the value of the newly privatised company's property portfolio, amid criticisms that it may have been undervalued and that Royal Mail sold off on the cheap. Vince Cable and Michael Fallon, the ministers who led the controversial flotation, are set to appear in front of the committee on Wednesday.

It is not clear which client has engaged the law firm, but Clifford Chance has previously represented organisations including the Children's Investment Fund and GIC, Singapore's sovereign wealth fund, who are two of Royal Mail's largest shareholders.

The Guardian understands that Clifford Chance has received a report containing details of around 800 properties held by the Royal Mail subsidiary Royal Mail Estates which are registered with the Land Registry in England and Wales.

The portfolio includes a string of sorting offices and plots of land – such as the Mount Pleasant and Nine Elms sites in central London which are part of three property redevelopment plans already predicted to make Royal Mail around £300m. Around 95% of the portfolio is freehold property.

As a large proportion of the portfolio consists of sorting offices, investors are unlikely to be able to dispose of them for a quick profit as the business needs the sites to operate. However, analysts have estimated that there could be around £100m of Royal Mail properties that are surplus to requirements, while the fact that the group owns so many freeholds was always likely to attract certain sections of the property industry, at a time when businesses selling their properties for cash and then leasing them back appears to be coming back into fashion.

A spokesman for Royal Mail said the company had "pursued" sale and leaseback in the past, but it was not currently "a key part of our strategy".

However, the UK supermarket group Morrisons announced in September that it would review its £9bn property portfolio with a view to doing such a deal.

The Morrisons announcement came only five years after Sir Ken Morrison, the chairman who led the company for 50 years, said that sale and leaseback was anathema to the grocer.

Aside from the 800 properties registered to Royal Mail Estates, there are further sites in Scotland and Northern Ireland, while the remainder that take the total to 2,000 are largely made up of leasehold sites that Royal Mail has occupied for less than 10 years.

Royal Mail floated last month at an initial value of £3.3bn, but the shares quickly soared prompting criticisms that the taxpayer may have been shortchanged. When the stock exchange closed on Tuesday evening, the company was worth £5.3bn.

Ofgem not a 'toothless tiger' in fight against rising energy prices, insists boss

Andrew Wright tells MPs he agrees with consumers who think the retail energy market is not working well

Ofgem boss Andrew Wright says he understands public anger at rising energy prices but has denied his organisation is guilty of "feeble regulation".

Wright acknowledged "deep distrust" of the big six energy companies – British Gas, npower, SSE, Scottish Power, E.ON and EDF – as some customers face price rises of more than 10% as winter kicks in.

Addressing MPs on the Commons energy and climate change committee, Wright said rising prices, years of aggressive doorstep selling, confusing tariffs and complexity when consumers wanted to switch providers had all created negative perceptions of the industry.

"I completely understand why people feel frustrated and angry about rising energy bills. Prices have more than doubled over the last 10 years at a time when incomes have been squeezed, and consumers are not convinced that price increases that they see are either fair or justified," he said.

"Consumers have a perception that the market is not working well and that's something that we agree with. We think the retail market is not working as well as it should do."

When asked whether Ofgem was a "toothless tiger", failing to address rising prices and accusations of unfair profit taking among companies, he said it was acting within its statutory regulatory framework and rejected the idea he was supportive of the rises.

"I never said it was OK. I have not said this level of profit is right or acceptable. If companies imply we think 5% is right, we've never said that."

He said that politicians were right to debate the issue of rising energy price rises but when questioned about Labour leader Ed Miliband's promise to freeze prices he did not appear to be enthusiastic.

"The sort of things we would consider are, does it have an adverse impact on consumers and on the investment that's needed?

"It is obviously necessary to allow companies to recover the revenues that they need to be able to run their businesses effectively. They should have no guarantee of profits but an efficient business serving customers should be able to recover the costs that they incur. So any arrangement that doesn't allow them to do that potentially puts at risk investment in the industry."

His comments came a day after Ofgem published a report which found that profits per customer rose by 77% last year, from £30 to £53, driven by higher prices and increased demand for heating during last year's cold weather.

The average profit margin for supplying energy to households in 2012 was 4.3%, up from 2.8% in 2011, with total profits from supplying energy to households and businesses rising from £1.25bn to £1.6bn last year.

Article Source : http://www.guardian.co.uk
Azure Global’s vision is to be widely recognized as a reputed firm of financial business advisors, achieving real growth for ambitious companies and to become the first choice for F&A outsourcing for accountancy practices and businesses alike and if u want to Setup ur business in United Kingdom then its not difficult in this modern age for more info visit our site Azure Global and join us also On Facebook

Local government cuts unfair to north-east, say councils

The average council in the north-east will lose £665 per person against £305 in the south-east by 2017-18

Councils in the north-east of England will lose more than twice as much funding per person as those in the south-east over the next five years, according to a local government lobby group which says government cuts are widening England's economic divide.

A group of mainly urban councils says its calculations, based on cuts already pushed through and changes in local funding to come, suggest the average council in the north-east will lose £665 per person, compared with £305 in the south-east, by 2017-18.

Sigoma, the Special Interest Group of Municipal Authorities, representing large towns and cities in the northern, Midlands and south coast regions of England, accused the government of pushing some councils to breaking point and warned: "Any economic recovery may bypass parts of the UK."

But the government rejected the calculations and pointed to other figures suggesting some northern councils have considerably more spending power than the national average.

Sigoma, which is part of the Local Government Association, said its report took into account new funding structures and welfare changes. It argued that the changes meant councils suffering the largest cuts were often those facing the highest costs.

Its report, timed to coincide with an opposition day debate on the cost of living, said: "The government has failed to consider the cumulative impact of their reforms on councils, only assessing one change at a time. The large number of changes means that the same councils are being hit again and again with cuts in funding. Following years of disproportionate funding cuts councils have had to find significant savings so far; with opportunities for further savings now harder to find and given the rising cost of adult social care, some services are now at breaking point."

The councils are calling on the chancellor, George Osborne, to heed their warning that services will suffer as he prepares to present his autumn statement next week, when he will outline government tax and spending plans.

Steve Houghton, Sigoma chair and leader of Barnsley council, said his group's assessment "shows the government's complete disregard for the mounting pressure faced by certain councils and the pain it is causing their residents".

He added: "The government must make fair funding a key priority to allow councils to provide essential services without the growing distraction of a service failure."

However, local government minister Brandon Lewis rejected the report. "This crude lobbying exercise is based on made-up extrapolations designed to scaremonger rather than inform public debate. Council funding is fair to north, south, rural and urban areas. It is distributed to ensure the smallest reductions for the councils most reliant on government support," he said.

He referred to documents from the House of Commons library that showed that north of England councils have more spending power per household than their southern counterparts. "This year Newcastle has a spending power per household which is £300 more than the national average and £700 more than Wokingham, for example," Lewis added.

Labour says it will use its opposition day – when opposition parties can choose a topic for debate – to highlight a "growing cost of living crisis" across Britain caused by prices rising faster than wages. The party says London, Yorkshire and the Humber, the North West, Wales and the East of England have seen the biggest falls in real wages since 2010.

A separate report warns of a growing north-south divide in the jobs market as a southern construction boom fuels demand for workers in the south.

The focus on homebuilding and infrastructure projects like Crossrail in the South has seen almost half of the 55,663 construction vacancies advertised in October fall in London and the South East, according to a monthly labour market report from jobs search website Adzuna. Only 6% of advertised vacancies were in the North West and 3% were in the North East.

Across all sectors of the economy nine of the top ten cities to find a job are in the South, where there are twice as many vacancies as jobseekers, Adzuna said. Nine of the worst ten cities to find a job are in the North, with more than 20 jobseekers for each vacancy in Salford, the Wirral, Sunderland, and Hull

Tesco's grim trading update will prompt questions about chief's strategy

Tesco is expected to unveil another grim trading update next week which is likely to prompt new questions about whether the turnaround strategy of chief executive Phil Clarke is working.

A flurry of City analyst research notes out yesterday predicted disappointing sales data when the UK's biggest grocer reveals its third quarter sales update. Barclays, Shore Capital and Deutsche Bank all expect no progress in the grocer's crucial UK market - which still accounts for 70% of group profits - after flat sales at the time of the last update.

Retail analyst James Collins at Deutsche Bank, Tesco's joint house broker, is forecasting a 1.5% decline in the most recent like-for-like UK sales.

He said: "We expect third-quarter like-for-like trends to have deteriorated in most markets versus the second quarter, most notably in the UK, Thailand, Ireland and Korea."

Barclays' James Anstead is predicting a 1.8% drop. He said: "It seems unlikely that Tesco's third quarter trading statement will be the turning point that the market is looking for."

Shore Capital's Clive Black is expecting a sales decline of 1-2%.

Tesco was one of the biggest FTSE-100 fallers. The shares lost more than 2.5% to close at 345p. Two years ago they were changing hands at 405p. JP Morgan yesterday cut its price target from 335p to 315p, Deutsche Bank reduced its target from 405p to 386p.

Tesco's main problems are in the UK, where it is losing business to upmarket rivals like Waitrose and the hard discounters, especially Aldi and Lidl. It is also struggling to catch up with a move away from big weekly shopping trips to out-of-town hypermarkets and a shift to online shopping.

Last week research group Kantar reported that all four of the big UKsupermarkets were losing market share, for the first time in more than a decade.

Clarke is 18 months into a £1bn transformation plan for Tesco's UK stores, which ranges from employing more store staff to revamping tired hypermarkets, improving the food on the shelves and trying to make faster headway in online shopping.

In an interview with the Sunday Times last weekend, Tesco's chairman Sir Richard Broadbent admitted the grocer had become too inward-looking over recent years and "had lost touch with the outside world". He said that a turnaround would not be rapid and that innovation - such as Tesco's new Hudl tablet computer - was key to the retailer's revival.

But at Tesco's last financial results it became clear that the grocer also has substantial problems overseas. Clarke, who led the international business before he took over the top job, reported declining like-for-like sales in every one of its international markets, which spread from Turkey to Thailand. Profits in Europe were down more than 70%.

Tuesday, 26 November 2013

Margaret Hodge attacks 'voluntary' tax policies for rich

Hodge has led the cross-party committee through a wide-ranging investigation into how multinational firms pay UK tax

The chair of parliament's public accounts committee, Margaret Hodge, has delivered her most outspoken attack to date on the coalition's tax policies, describing the tax system for corporations and the super-rich as "increasingly voluntary".

She also criticised the "growing gap between rhetoric and reality" coming from David Cameron on tax reform.

Speaking at an event organised by tax campaigning charities in London, Hodge said: "They [ministers] believe we should engage fully in the global race to the bottom … I now believe David Cameron doesn't mean what he says when he says multinational companies should 'wake up and smell the coffee'."

Despite tough language on combating tax avoidance, the coalition government has been acknowledged among tax professionals as accelerating the pace of tax competition in a drive to lure in foreign investment. Measures such as new rules for overseas finance subsidiaries, tax breaks for groups owning patents in the UK, and the plunging corporation tax rate, have been cited by critics of Cameron's approach to tax reform.

Hodge's attack on Cameron harked back to a speech he gave at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January, shortly after the use of aggressive tax avoidance strategies at Starbucks' UK operations had been exposed by a Reuters investigation. The coffee chain had taken £3bn of sales in the UK over 14 years, but paid only £8.6m in tax.

Cameron told the audience of business leaders in the luxury Swiss resort: "When some businesses aren't seen to pay their taxes, that's corrosive to the public trust … Some forms of avoidance have become so aggressive that I think it is right to say these are ethical issues and it is time to call for more responsibility."

In a blunt jibe at Starbucks, he urged multinationals to "wake up and smell the coffee".

Hodge has spent the last two years leading the cross-party committee of MPs through a wide-ranging investigation into how multinational firms pay UK tax. Her tough questioning of company executives, big-four accountancy partners and HMRC bosses has played a major role in keeping tax reform high on the political agenda.

After firms such as Google and Amazon were subjected to a barrage of angry questioning from Hodge's committee, George Osborne responded a year ago by issuing a joint statement with his German counterpart Wolfgang Schäuble, calling for urgent reform of the international tax rules. "Some multinational businesses are able to shift the taxation of their profits away from the jurisdictions where they are being generated, thus minimising their tax payments compared to smaller, less international companies," they said. "We want global companies to pay those taxes."

Since then, however, Schäuble has dramatically switched his view of Britain's commitment to shoring up the integrity of international tax regimes, attacking Osborne's "patent box" tax break. "That's no European spirit," he said. "You could get the idea they are doing it just to attract companies."

Behind the scenes, a growing number of fellow G8 nations have also become increasingly irritated at the apparent gap between Cameron's use, on the one hand, of a language of ethics on tax reform, and, on the other, what some see as begger-thy-neighbour measures to poach business activity from rival economies.

Zero-hours contract workers in UK find their shifts are cancelled at will

Many told shifts cancelled just hours before starting work – but CIPD says survey shows the contracts are unfairly demonised

Almost half of zero-hour contract workers have had their shifts cancelled without any notice, according to the first in-depth study of the way more than 1 million people on the controversial contracts are treated.

Two out of five workers on the contracts said they had been informed only hours before starting work that a shift had been cancelled. A further 6% had been told as their shift was about to begin.

The study also found that 20% are sometimes or always docked wages or penalised in some way if they are not available for work. But the survey of 1,000 zero-hour workers by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) found they were happier with their work-life balance than the average worker and equally satisfied with their job. Almost half of zero-hour workers were satisfied with their job against 27% who were dissatisfied.

A CIPD spokesman said the findings showed calls for restrictions on the contracts' use were misplaced and firms using them had been "unfairly demonised".

"The use of zero-hours contracts in the UK economy has been underestimated, oversimplified and, in some cases, unfairly demonised," he said. "Our research shows the majority of people employed on these contracts are satisfied with their jobs."

But the CIPD admitted that employers exploited the contracts to cancel shifts with little or no notice and penalised staff who were unable to attend a shift.

"However, we also recognise that there is a need to improve poor practice in the use of zero-hours contracts, for example the lack of notice many zero-hours staff receive when work is cancelled.

"If this is unavoidable then employers should at least provide some level of compensation. In addition, it seems that many employers and zero-hours staff are unaware of the employment rights people on these types of working arrangements may be entitled to."

In the summer the institute said the initial findings of its employment survey found that 1 million workers were employed on the contracts, at the time quadrupling the official figure.

The contracts, which allow an employer to hire staff without an obligation to provide any minimum working hours, are used widely in the care industry, hotel and leisure sector and by many retailers. In the last two years public sector organisations have transferred staff to zero-hour rotas.

Labour said the findings showed there was still widespread abuse of the contracts and the government needed to act.

Ian Murray, shadow minister for trade and investment, said Labour would ban employers from insisting workers be available when there is no guarantee of work. It would also let workers work for more than one firm without being penalised and force firms to give a minimum hours contract to longstanding zero-hours workers. "While the government has failed to act, Labour would outlaw the exploitative use of zero-hours contracts," he said.

Ian Brinkley, policy director at the Work Foundation, an employment thinktank, said the report showed there was a large minority of affected workers citing significant problems around pay, hours and the fear of being penalised.

Monday, 25 November 2013

Energy firms' profit from customers has risen 77% in a year, says Ofgem

The big six energy firms have been exposed to further accusations of profiteering after the industry regulator revealed that profits per customer last year rose by 77%.

On the eve of a protest by anti-poverty campaigners against power suppliers, Ofgem said the profit per household had risen from £30 in 2011 to £53, driven by higher prices and increased demand for heating during last year's winter snap.

"Any profit margin at a time when people are dying because they cannot afford to turn their heating on is unacceptable," said Clare Welton at the Fuel Poverty Action group, which will mark the publication of the latest winter mortality figures on Tuesday with a protest at RWE npower's headquarters in central London. Protests will also be held at the new British Gas headquarters in Oxford. Alex Smith, a spokesperson for UK Uncut, a co-organiser of the protests, described the latest data as unsurprising. "We have seen nothing but profiteering from the big six," he said.

The big six – British Gas, npower, SSE, Scottish Power, E.ON and EDF – argue that their industry is misunderstood and higher bills are the inevitable consequence of external factors such as green levies passed on by the government, higher wholesale prices and increased power transmission costs. However, the industry's trade body admitted this month that the big six had become a "lightning conductor for the general concern about the cost of living."

As a result, the companies have faced cross-party condemnation for average increases to consumer bills well above inflation. Labour leader Ed Miliband has pledged a price freeze, while former prime minister Sir John Major has called for a windfall tax on profits. The Ofgem data does not cover profits related to the latest series of price rises, which has reignited the debate about whether the big six make "fair" profits.

Ofgem said rising prices, rather than lower costs, were a factor in the profit increase. "There is some evidence of rising profit margins. This rise has been due to a combination of higher prices and volumes rather than lower costs," said the regulator.

But Richard Hall, director of infrastructure at Consumer Futures, a consumer watchdog, said Ofgem had "produced a lot of evidence that would persuade a third party that there is a trend [of rising prices]".

He pointed out that other Ofgem data showed "a steady escalation in profit". The regulator's own forecast data shows an average profit per customer of £105 in November 2013.

Caroline Flint, Labour's spokesperson for energy and climate change, said the Ofgem report showed why a price freeze is needed: "Labour's price freeze will save money for 27 million households and 2.4 million businesses and our plans to reset the market will deliver fairer prices in the future. People are sick and tired of paying over the odds because David Cameron is too weak to stand up to the energy companies and just stands up for a privileged few."

A spokesperson at the Department for Energy and Climate Change said: "Profits are a matter for energy companies to justify to their customers and shareholders, but profits are needed if they are to continue to invest in Britain's energy security and infrastructure."

Although energy companies have been making more money from supplying households, overall profits were down 3.4% in 2012 on the previous year, from £3.7bn to £3.9bn, as firms were hit by depreciation costs and declining profitability from their gas-fired power stations.

Consumer groups are calling on Ofgem to compel energy companies to publish financial information closer to real time. The regulator has been criticised by MPs for dismissing recommendations from its own consultants to make the energy market work more transparently. Ofgem had "room for significant improvement" said Hall. "It feels as though we are only now starting to see the implementation or possible implementation of changes that we could have been done a couple of years ago."