Aim boss makes plea to boost market's appeal after inheritance tax blow
Marcus Stuttard, head of Aim and UK primary markets at the London Stock Exchange, urged the Government to reinstate 'financial incentives' for Aim investors after last autumn's Budget revealed plans to slash inheritance tax (IHT) relief on Aim-listed stock from 100% to 50% from April next year.
Aim has suffered a raft of firms quitting the market in recent years as part of a wider shift away from London towards overseas rivals and as firms are bought out by foreign competitors or taken private.
More than 60 firms – with a market cap of over £12 billion – have already announced plans to leave Aim in 2025 as they look to move to the main market, delist or are bought out.
As Aim celebrates its 30th anniversary on Thursday, Mr Stuttard told the PA news agency that the Government can help stop the outflow of firms on London's beleaguered market, with 'more companies leaving than joining in the last two years'.
He said the cut to IHT relief was a major blow.
'One hundred per cent relief has been and used to be really important to Aim,' he said.
'We are calling on the Government to make sure there's certainty… with financial incentives to support Aim.'
He also backed Government plans to increase pension fund investment in UK stocks, saying it was crucial that 'domestic investors back our domestic economy'.
He told PA: 'International investors understand the quality of our small businesses – we need our own pension funds to be backing that opportunity.
'It's vital that our UK pension funds back the UK economy.'
The Aim – or Alternative Investment Market – was launched in June 1995 to give small and medium-sized firms access to capital.
In the 30 years since, it has admitted more than 4,000 companies and raised over £136 billion.
There were about 1,700 businesses listed on Aim in 2007, but this has dwindled to fewer than 700.
Some of this is down to costs of listing and onerous rules and regulations.
Mr Stuttard said the group is working on a discussion paper to ask firms how Aim could change and evolve and what are the current downsides of listing on the market.
He said 'nothing is off the table' in terms of what could be looked at, with the market keen to see the consensus for a way forward.
He said it is clear there is still a strong need for Aim to help companies get access to capital to grow without resorting to selling.
'From start-up to initial public offering (IPO) to big global business, we want to provide companies with a range of choice of financing options so they don't get sold too early,' according to Mr Stuttard.
'Aim is a really important part of the UK economy and the UK capital markets,' he added.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
34 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Starmer calls for ‘diplomatic solution' after US strikes Iran
There was no British involvement in the action but the Government was informed in advance of the strikes, which involved B-2 stealth bombers and submarine-launched missiles. The Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary David Lammy had sought to persuade Mr Trump's administration from holding off on joining Israel in striking Iran, arguing for de-escalation and a diplomatic process. But Mr Trump pushed ahead with the action anyway, which he claimed had 'completely and fully obliterated' key nuclear facilities. Iran's nuclear programme is a grave threat to international security. Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the US has taken action to alleviate that threat. The situation in the Middle East remains volatile and stability in the region is a priority. We call… — Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) June 22, 2025 The Prime Minister said: 'Iran's nuclear programme is a grave threat to international security. 'Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the US has taken action to alleviate that threat. 'The situation in the Middle East remains volatile and stability in the region is a priority. 'We call on Iran to return to the negotiating table and reach a diplomatic solution to end this crisis.' Cabinet minister Jonathan Reynolds would not say the UK supported the military action nor whether he believed the US strikes were legal. Asked on the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg if the US action was a good thing, he said: 'The outcome. It isn't the means by which anyone in the British Government would have wanted to see this occur.' Pushed on whether the US strike was legal, he said: 'It is where we are today.' He said it would be 'naive' to think the risk of Iranian-backed terrorism in the UK will not increase as a result of the US and Israeli action. The Business Secretary told Sky News: 'This is not hypothetical. There is not a week goes by without some sort of Iranian cyber attack on a key part of UK critical national infrastructure. 'There is Iranian activity on the streets of the UK, which is wholly unacceptable.' He added: 'It's already at a significant level. I think it would be naive to say that that wouldn't potentially increase.' The US attacked Fordo, Isfahan and Natanz which are linked to Iran's nuclear programme. The Tehran regime has insisted its nuclear programme is peaceful but its uranium enrichment process has gone far beyond what is required for power stations. In an address to the nation from the White House, Mr Trump warned there could be further strikes if Iran retaliates: 'There will either be peace or there will be tragedy for Iran.' The strikes followed a build-up of US military equipment, with B-2 stealth bombers – which are the only aircraft to carry a 30,000-pound bunker buster bomb – reportedly used to target the underground facilities. The aircraft have previously used the UK-US airbase on Diego Garcia, one of the Chagos Islands, but it is understood that was not involved in these strikes. The attack on Iran also involved US submarines, which launched around 30 Tomahawk cruise missiles. Mr Trump's move towards military action came despite Sir Keir's pleas for diplomacy and his repeated calls for de-escalation. On Thursday the Prime Minister warned of a 'real risk of escalation' in the conflict, adding there had previously been 'several rounds of discussions' with Washington and 'that, to me, is the way to resolve this issue'. Statement by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of #Iran concerning the #UnitedStates military aggression against Iran's peaceful nuclear facilities بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the… — Foreign Ministry, Islamic Republic of Iran 🇮🇷 (@IRIMFA_EN) June 22, 2025 The Foreign Secretary urged the US to pull back from the brink on a visit to Washington for talks with counterpart Marco Rubio before heading to talks with Iran on Friday alongside European allies. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said: 'By targeting Iran's nuclear sites, the US has taken decisive action against a regime that fuels global terror and directly threatens the UK. 'Iranian operatives have plotted murders and attacks on British soil. We should stand firmly with the US and Israel.' By targeting Iran's nuclear sites, the US has taken decisive action against a regime that fuels global terror and directly threatens the UK. Iranian operatives have plotted murders and attacks on British soil. We should stand firmly with the US and Israel. — Kemi Badenoch (@KemiBadenoch) June 22, 2025 Reform UK leader Nigel Farage also backed Mr Trump's decision to strike Iran. He said: 'Iran must not be allowed to have nuclear weapons, the future of Israel depends on it.' Scotland's First Minister John Swinney called for diplomacy, saying the Middle East conflict has reached 'an alarmingly greater level of danger after the US attacks on Iran'. Iran launched a ballistic missile barrage against Israel in retaliation to the US action. The foreign ministry in Tehran issued a statement condemning 'the United States' brutal military aggression against Iran's peaceful nuclear facilities'. It added: 'The Islamic Republic of Iran is resolved to defend Iran's territory, sovereignty, security and people by all force and means against the United States' criminal aggression.'
Reuters
42 minutes ago
- Reuters
UK could boost growth by radically reshaping the Treasury: Peacock
LONDON, June 20 (Reuters) - UK finance minister Rachel Reeves insists higher economic growth is her top priority, but the government's current plan to address the country's chronically low investment is unlikely to be ambitious enough. What may be needed is a structural rethink of the finance ministry itself. Reeves has adjusted her fiscal rules to allow for an extra 113 billion pounds of investment over five years, while remaining committed to ensuring debt falls as a proportion of national income within five years. In the UK government's latest spending plan unveiled last week, she started to allocate the extra capital to areas including defence, housing, transport infrastructure and a new nuclear power plant. Even so, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility, an independent fiscal watchdog, UK capital spending will climb to a peak of 3.9% of GDP in 2027/2028 but then fall back in the following two years, continuing a limp public investment record stretching back to the global financial crisis. Reeves is searching for other growth levers, including deregulation and increased UK investment by British pension funds. Additionally, the government is seeking to streamline planning laws and taking steps – albeit small ones – to rebuild trade relations with the European Union. But the government is fundamentally hamstrung by its fiscal rules. Departments are currently required to go cap in hand to the finance ministry to learn what they can spend and then undergo frequent check-ins to see if the fiscal position has deteriorated, which could lead to spending cuts or tax rises. This is not a system that will produce a viable long-term growth strategy. The International Monetary Fund – not known for being a fan of unfettered state spending – said last month that the UK should consider taking a more pragmatic approach to avoid having to change policy too often. The IMF suggested minor breaches should not require instant corrective action and that assessment of the rules should be done no more than once a year. But something more radical is likely required for Britain to break out of the low growth, low productivity loop it has been trapped in for almost two decades. Over this period, debt as a proportion of GDP has almost tripled while the national tax take has held steady, suggesting that part of the problem might be with the way the finance ministry operates. The machinery of government needs recalibration to focus more systematically on productive investment that can ultimately help to drive debt down over time. Reeves is trying on this score. She has asked the OBR to assess the long-term impact of capital spending decisions to determine whether they could improve public finances. She is also changing the Treasury's "Green Book" rules that dictate approval of capital projects, shifting from a narrow cost-benefit analysis to an assessment of the impact on broader strategic goals such as lifting poorer regions of the UK. However, a fundamental issue remains. The Treasury still wields huge influence within the UK government, and when growth falls short, the impulse is typically to tighten the fiscal screws, thereby worsening growth prospects. The Institute for Government, a UK-based think tank, has argued that the economic heft of the prime minister's team needs strengthening as a counterbalance. EU nations – Germany, Spain and the Netherlands among others – have both a finance ministry and a separate, growth-focused economy ministry at the heart of government. Calls for a dramatic change in the Finance Ministry are growing. Maurice Glasman, who heads "Blue Labour", a campaign to reverse what it says is the Labour Party's abandonment of working-class communities, advocates abolishing the Treasury, scrapping fiscal rules and pursuing heavy infrastructure investment. While Glasman's prescription has little chance of being implemented in full, his ideas could gain influence within a government threatened by the rise of Nigel Farage's populist Reform UK party, which is targeting traditional Labour voters. Recent opinion polls have given Reform UK 27%-32% public support compared with 22%-24% for Labour. Ensuring public finances do not spiral out of control is, of course, critical for any government. And less oversight by the Treasury could result in wasted taxpayer money spent on unproductive investments that appeal to the political base. Moreover, the bond market has not reacted well to perceived UK fiscal imprudence in recent years, as demonstrated by the rapid demise of Liz Truss's premiership of 2022. But bond investors are apt to respond more positively to a long-term, investment-led approach to reducing public borrowing, even if it involves some upfront spending. It helps that the UK currently faces less political uncertainty than some of its peers and is in the middle of the pack in terms of developed market debt burdens. Reeves appears to understand that an investment-led structural reset is required to jump-start the UK growth engine. But to make that a reality, the first change may need to be rethinking the relationship between the Treasury and the prime minister's office. The opinions expressed here are those of Mike Peacock, the former head of communications at the Bank of England and a former senior editor at Reuters. Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), opens new tab, opens new tab, your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis of everything from swap rates to soybeans. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI, opens new tab, opens new tab can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab, opens new tab and X., opens new tab
The Herald Scotland
6 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Scotland's financial plan must show child poverty funding
The documents set out the Scottish Government's priorities for the next five years, and includes estimates for amounts of tax to be collected, and spending in areas like health, education and local government. Read more: Ahead of the Holyrood statement, Ms Robinson blamed the 'disappointing' outcome of the UK Government's recent Spending Review and Westminster's welfare reforms for worsening Scotland's financial outlook. She said the Scottish budget had been short-changed by £1.1 billion in day-to-day funding compared to UK departments. 'This government has delivered a balanced budget every year while taking steps to improve the overall sustainability of our finances. "This is despite a deeply challenging financial situation caused by rising global instability, persistent higher inflation and over a decade of UK austerity. 'Our disappointing settlement at the recent UK Spending Review has made the situation worse, short-changing the Scottish Government by £1.1bn in our day-to-day funding compared with UK Government departments. "This comes on top of reductions in our funding worth hundreds of millions of pounds as a result of the UK Government's proposed welfare reforms and failure to fully fund its employer National Insurance increase. 'In this context, it is important that we take action to maximise funding targeted at frontline services such as our NHS.' Shona Robison will deliver the MTFS on Wednesday (Image: Robert Perry) The MFTS is usually published each May, but this year's was delayed by four weeks due to the timing of the UK Government's multi-year Spending Review, published on June 11. As a result, MSPs will not be able to scrutinise the document until September, after the summer recess— much to the frustration of Holyrood's Finance and Public Administration Committee. According to the Scottish Fiscal Commission, the gap between what the Scottish Government spends and what it takes in is expected to grow from £1bn in 2024–25 to almost £2bn by 2027–28. The Fiscal Sustainability Delivery Plan, due to be published alongside the MTFS, is expected to set out how the government intends to close this gap—though details remain sparse. Stephen Boyd of the IPPR think tank told The Herald on Sunday that expectations were high for a more detailed and transparent strategy. 'At this stage, and given the month-long delay in publication, it is entirely reasonable to expect that long-standing criticisms will start to be addressed in this MTFS,' he said. "Information presented consistently on a year-to-year basis; more detailed information on spending priorities and future trends; more detailed information on risks and how these will be mitigated.' Mr Boyd said the strategy must outline how the Scottish Government plans to fund the First Minister's key priorities: tackling child poverty, growing the economy, addressing the climate crisis and improving public services. 'It is difficult to see how significant progress can be made on these priorities, especially the first, without spending more money,' he said. 'The MTFS should begin to set out a longer-term tax strategy, recognising that taxes will likely have to rise. 'The tax strategy published alongside this year's budget included a number of commitments for the remainder of this parliament—for example, that over half of Scottish taxpayers will pay less Income Tax than they do in the rest of the UK. 'The MTFS should begin to set out a longer-term strategy recognising that taxes will likely have to rise to respond to the demands of an ageing society and the climate crisis.' Read more: Mr Boyd said that despite increases in the block grant announced in the UK autumn budget and the Spending Review, Scotland's public finances 'remain tight'. 'Unless the Cabinet Secretary is prepared to raise taxes, portfolio funding settlements are likely to be tight, especially if—as it's reasonable to expect—health is protected. 'It is reasonable to expect that parts of the public sector—and their workforces—will be disappointed by the MTFS. 'It is entirely possible that a revised approach to pay and workforce will be signalled in the MTFS. Pay settlements have been relatively generous in the devolved public sector over recent years. 'It will be interesting to see how the Cabinet Secretary navigates this politically fraught terrain. 'As the modelling produced by IPPR Scotland and others shows, it is clear that more generous welfare payments are required to make significant progress on the First Minister's main priority of eradicating child poverty. "Yet, the First Minister recently suggested there will be no further increases in the Scottish child payment. 'The MTFS will provide a clear signal on just how serious the Scottish Government is about meeting this priority.'
