Company news MJ Hudson survey of top venture capital players urges Government to build on what works in current tax relief system
Thought leadership
22 November 2017

MJ Hudson survey of top venture capital players urges Government to build on what works in current tax relief system

Download Print
Text size

Investment Consulting Firm Also Urges Alignment Between Investors and Managers in EIS/VCT Schemes and Says Potential Reforms Hold Important Ramifications for British Film.

London, United Kingdom, November 21, 2017– MJ Hudson, the leading investment consultancy well-known for a specialty in alternatives and venture capital, has released the results of a survey of the UK’s top venture capital managers, investors, and advisers as part of its broader commentary in advance of the Government’s Patient Capital Review, which will be released tomorrow on the same day as the Budget.

The survey, answered by over 120 top venture managers and investors, spoke loudly on the need to close the “scale-up capital gap” identified by the government in its Patient Capital Review, but also showed the extent that current tax allowances are relied on by investors looking to put money into early-stage growth, as well as an industry split over whether government plans for a National Investment Fund aimed at growth capital would be of benefit.

The ten-question survey looked at the general outlook of Venture Capital Investing in the UK as well as taking a closer look at potential reforms to the tax-advantaged system (EISs/VCTs/etc.) currently in place and how it is viewed by the top players in the industry:

On the State of Venture Capital

The findings concerning the wider industry agreed with the Government’s diagnosis of a “scale-up gap” which motivated the undertaking of the Patient Capital Review; and urged the Government to work to improve the current system rather than take more drastic action.

* 80% of top players in venture capital agreed that early-stage businesses in the UK lack the long-term finance to scale up successfully.

* 79% argued that the Government should introduce incentives to encourage investing through the ‘scale up phase’.

* There was a split on whether The Government should launch a new scale-up fund for UK early-stage companies with 45% being in favour and 41% being against. However a majority (51%) felt that Government-run investment funds (e.g. Northern Powerhouse, British Business Bank) are playing an important role.

* Out of five options, 51% thought that in order to close the gap between UK and US successful scale-ups, the bottleneck which is most urgent for the Government to address is access to UK scale-up capital.

* Overall the industry does not seem to place much faith in the likelihood that the Government’s will help to improve conditions in this budget, with only 15% thinking that the upcoming budget will have a positive effect on their or their client’s business.

* Qualitative responses to the survey exhibited a large concern over the ramifications of Brexit, with particular emphasis placed on a lack of access to talent, capital and markets.

On the Current Tax-Advantaged System

The current system of tax advantages, such as the Enterprise Investment Scheme and Venture Capital Trusts have come under scrutiny in the PCR as a potential area for radical reform. Our respondents were generally supportive of the schemes and were clear that any changes had to maintain what worked.

* Over 85% of respondents answered that EIS and Seed EIS has aided the development of the companies they or their clients have invested in with 64% asserting that without EIS/SEIS, they would not have invested in one or more companies they or their clients invested in.

* Answering an MJ Hudson proposal that tax relief should not be lost if (within the obligatory 3-year holding period) the proceeds from a sale were recycled into another qualifying business, 82% either strongly agreed (54%) or agreed (a further 28%).

* However, 75% of respondents believed that the current three-year holding period was appropriate (with those who disagreed splitting between shorter and longer period alternatives).

* 60% stated that the VCT regime has aided the development of the companies they or their clients have invested in, with 58% further suggesting that it has aided their companies’ growth potential (a key line of inquiry for the Patient Capital Review).

MJ Hudson’s Comment on the Survey

‘This survey offers an endorsement and a warning: an endorsement of the Government’s view that the scale-up capital gap needs to be tackled, but also a warning that the reforms should work with the grain of the current system and not against it.’
Karma Samdup, Partner-Venture Capital, MJ Hudson

MJ Hudson’s Thoughts on Potential PCR Reforms

MJ Hudson, a leading reviewer of tax-advantaged products and an investment advisory company with over £60bn under advisement, has spoken more broadly of what it hopes to see in the Government’s Patient Capital Review:

‘We are excited to see the results of the government’s expected announcement of the Patient Capital Review after much anticipation. As the one of the largest specialist independent advisors looking at tax-advantaged investments, we do see that the government needs to take action to ensure that these investor incentives continue to accomplish the government’s intentions and, where asset managers are concerned, to reinforce the need for transparency and alignment of interest with investors. The government has done a great job of identifying the challenges facing venture capital in the UK and the difficulties that companies in this sector face in scaling up. Treasury has a fantastic opportunity to make the market more efficient and to target support from the government at a critical and volatile period for the UK’s economy.’
Odi Lahav, MJ Hudson

There has been much speculation that Film and TV tax incentives will be excluded from the EIS scheme due to a perception that they do not take enough risk and divert capital which might go to more growth companies.

‘Film and TV look to be within the crosshairs of the Treasury because some packaged products don’t take sufficient risk and rely too heavily on government tax reliefs. According to our data, for every one product designed to maximise the tax benefit and not investor return (for a given level of risk) there are four trying to build businesses well within the spirit of the tax-advantaged schemes. It would be a pity to let the bad apples spoil the batch.’
Jack Fishburn and Dr Simon Radford, media analysts, MJ Hudson and authors of the recent Tax-Advantaged Overview of Film and TV Investing

There has also been speculation, not least from the EIS Association (EISA), of Government reform to so-called asset-backed investment products. These can be defined a number of ways but will generally have some form of contractually guaranteed income or the company will own some asset (such as property) which has often been marketed to investors as a way of ‘mitigating risk’, which has come under criticism as being antithetical to the intended ‘high-risk’ nature of EIS and VCT products.

‘When it comes to reforming asset backing the Government has to make sure that the investments allowable under the scheme serve the greater industrial strategy that the Government is due to set out. We saw when renewable energy was allowed under these schemes huge inflows of capital, which allowed the industry to stand on its own two feet after tax relief was withdrawn. Tax relief in asset backed products should show a similar alignment with the best interests of UK PLC.’
Odi Lahav,  MJ Hudson.

Click here to view the full results of the survey.

Download Print
Text size
Get email alerts for tailored content on your favourite topics
Sign up to email alerts

Browser Compatibility Notice

Welcome to MJ Hudson. Please note, this website will not function as intended on Internet Explorer.

For the full experience, we recommended viewing this website on a modern browser, such as Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox.

Share this page using the options below