Tag Archives: setting up in the uk

Typical issues facing incoming business

Even in today’s interconnected world, businesses tend to start local and expand their geographic reach over time.  Initially regulations seem relatively straight forward – everyone in the US knows what’s meant by a 401K, just as everyone in the UK knows what a P45 is – because they’re the ones everyone grew up with.  Many of the rules affecting new businesses are ones its management is broadly familiar with.  Managers know what they know, the better ones have a good feel for what they don’t.

The problems start to pile up when that geographic reach extends beyond home territory.  Initially, there aren’t any – businesses find a third party agent with appropriate territorial expertise and stick to their home markets with little more than gentle forays into foreign lands.  But over time, and as those forays become more regular, reliance on third party agents becomes increasingly unsatisfactory.  They may not have done anything wrong, their service may be excellent, but they’re not you, their priorities aren’t yours, their flexibility doesn’t match your own, and if you’ve a growing presence in that territory, the day comes when you have to have your own facility. And that’s when the problems start.

A typical example is a US corporation that’s developed a significant and growing activity this side of the pond.  Up to now it’s used third party agents to distribute goods to retailers / third party installers to install product / third party maintenance technicians to maintain its equipment / third party sub-contract professionals to help fulfil contracts.  They might be in the UK, or Germany, or France – somewhere, anywhere, in Europe or the Middle East, or Asia or further afield.

The decision is taken – “we’ll set up our own support operation”.  Easily said – but then the problems start.  What form should that operation take?  Does every territory require its own operation? Who do we send to set it up, how do we pay them, will they be taxed locally, and on what?  Where will they live?  Will we be taxed locally?  If we are, how will profits be determined?

Over the years we’ve helped many such US businesses get their own European support operation off the ground. The answers to the questions are usually, but not always:  a UK limited company, not necessarily, someone you trust, pay locally, yes they will, on what you pay them, London or home counties’ rented accommodation, yes you will, and “cost plus”.   But there are variances – a US-owned UK registered branch rather than a UK limited company, everything overseas controlled through the UK establishment with no place of business elsewhere, wages paid in the US with a grossing-up process undertaken in the UK to ensure UK tax compliance, and business taxed on apportioned profits to reflect genuine revenue generation outside the US.

There are all the other issues as well – just how adequate are your US employment contracts when it comes to employing overseas (generally, not very!), are you obliged to register for VAT and how do you account for it (answer – not invariably, though it’s usually in your interest to do so), should your UK operation have authority to contract with third parties or should all third party contracts remain in your control (answer is, apart from contacts for overheads, best if authority vests in the US – the more arms-length activity initiated in the UK, the greater the “plus” in “cost plus” becomes).

Expanding your horizons to foreign climes? –  you need the support of those who’ve grown up in them.

The UK is the gateway to Europe – part two

Some weeks back, I talked about the UK being the best place in the EU to set up business.  My principal comparable was Denmark, because these two nations are the only EU members neither in, nor committed to joining, the Euro.

It seems the great and good agree.  The World Economic Forum has recently published its Global Competitive Index for 2012-13, in which the UK was ranked 8th, with Denmark ranked 12th – a swing from last year where Denmark was 8th and the UK 12th.

Ranked above the UK are three non-EU states (Switzerland – 1st, Singapore – 2nd , USA -7th ), and four EU member states, Finland, Sweden, Netherlands and Germany.  With the exception of Sweden, yet to join but committed to do so, all members of the Eurozone.

Given significant concerns about the viability of the Euro, and the inevitable but unmeasurable fall-out on continuing EZ member countries should any Eurozone country leave, that effectively places the UK as the best place to establish  if one wants to tap into the EU market.

The UK scored particularly strongly on labour market efficiency, business sophistication and business innovation.  It also ranked first for legal rights.  It’s no surprise the UK’s principal weaknesses relate to the size of government debt and budget deficit, and the sheer scale of imports.

One statistic did surprise me  – according to the report it takes 13 days to set up in business here.  Nothing like that long if you do it through us!

The UK is the Gateway to Europe

A little over 330 million people live in the Eurozone, a further 170 million within the EU but outside the zone. GDP per capita of Eurozone countries is marginally greater than that of EU citizens outside the zone, but the range covered by each is enormous.

Within the zone, the lowest GDP per capita of a member state (Estonia) is just 48% of the highest (Netherlands) [ignoring Luxembourg – a country with a population of just over 1/2 million, with per capita GDP over double that of the Netherlands]. Interestingly, the best estimate for per capita GDP for Greece puts it at 68% of the Netherlands – not great, but there are several worse.

Outside the zone the range is far wider – Bulgaria’s per capita GDP is only 35% of Denmark’s.

We are all too aware of the fundamental faultlines within the zone, caused by debt-fuelled expansion facilitated only by association with the economic powerhouse of Germany. The devaluation option open to most struggling nation states doesn’t exist, and without fiscal transfers from wealthy states to poor, there appears to be no end in sight to the downward spiral over-indebted Eurozone nations will suffer. Rather than economic convergence, the reverse is happening – Germany’s economy continues to grow a’pace, as it benefits from an exchange rate far below that which would apply were it still using the Deutschmark.

So why does this make the UK the ideal gateway to what remains a huge marketplace?

Within the EU, there are just two countries that aren’t committed by treaty obligations to ever joining the Euro – Denmark and the UK. Both retain sovereignty over their currencies, enabling each to react flexibly to changing market conditions. Those are huge ticks in the box for any inward investment. Both have highly educated workforces, stable political systems and robust legal systems.

Denmark scores over the UK in some respects – for example, its GDP per capita is greater, its indiginous population is multi-lingual – but it loses out in many more. It’s smaller by far, and its transport links are more constrained. More importantly, the minimum Share Capital requirement for a Danish private company is €10,000 and VAT registration is compulsory regardless of turnover levels. It has a light-touch employment regime with lower employer social security contribution rates than in the UK, but typically on higher salaries. Employee representation on the Board is obligatory for all but the smallest companies.

The UK’s great strength is its internationalism. London in particular is home to representatives of almost every nationality in the world. It is the world’s most highly developed financial centre, and is regarded by many as the safe haven in uncertain times. And setting up business in the UK is quick and cheap. With no minimum share capital requirement other than the issue of 1 share that needn’t cost as much as £1 and no compulsory VAT registration until certain turnover thresholds are breached, access to the EU market place coundn’t be simpler.