Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
hagar the horrible

Enterprise Development Scheme.

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, Derek Flint said:

The attempt that they made in drafting a UK scheme here was a joke, HNW tax cappers were essentially excluded from the benefits. It seemed to have been lost that these are the ones with the money, and that if they were investing heavily on the Island, what did it matter if they lowered their tax a bit further?

How on earth they have managed to strangle crowdfunding by regulation is beyond me. But it is what it is, and simply means we lose more and more opportunities. 

It is a crying shame.

It’s literally bonkers that what should be a primary source of businesses feeding into our economy has actually had to shut up shop in the same week that the DfE issues a press release saying how successful it’s schemes have been. We should just stop lying about everything and admit the situation we’re in, all these lies are fooling nobody and actually stopping people from doing what is actually needed. I’m actually thinking of moving off Island for the first time. I don’t see the point in hanging around watching this ship sink. If we can’t even make anything like this work there is literally little chance of anything kickstarting the decline here. As you say the proposed crowdfunding regulations were literally mental I’m not sure they understand what crowdfunding is about - pure speculation on businesses with absolutely no track record in most cases. And the tax cappers being excluded from the proposed investment scheme as the biggest group of people here with any cash to invest was equally bonkers. We really do not have a clue. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Andy Onchan said:

This is an interesting article I wonder how IOM compares?

"Real" Charities on the IoM probably don't have that scale of wealth / worth. I was involved in one of the larger ones which had assets under £3M, mainly land & buildings. Obviously some charities such as Hospice have rather more, but on the whole charities are not rich. 

However, there are many charitable trusts with varying levels of wealth - for instance Albert Gubay's charitable foundation alone was worth c. £700M in 2016 when he died, so it all depends on how you count it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Derek Flint said:

Bridge was a good outfit set up by good people. But the seed investment landscape here is not good. For a start, you can’t get EIS or SEIS tax relief. So if you have a UK exposure, you are better off investing there. The attempt that they made in drafting a UK scheme here was a joke, HNW tax cappers were essentially excluded from the benefits. It seemed to have been lost that these are the ones with the money, and that if they were investing heavily on the Island, what did it matter if they lowered their tax a bit further?

How on earth they have managed to strangle crowdfunding by regulation is beyond me. But it is what it is, and simply means we lose more and more opportunities. 

It is a crying shame.

Whilst Bridge was self-funding (profit making) and intended to piggy-back off the DfE funding scheme, it was very worthwhile and set up with just about the best sponsorship that such a venture could have on this island. That it considers its position solvent but its future untenable is just about the most damning indictment of DfE and FSA that we could possibly have. Shame on them both, and shame on their leaders.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, craggy_steve said:

Whilst Bridge was self-funding (profit making) and intended to piggy-back off the DfE funding scheme, it was very worthwhile and set up with just about the best sponsorship that such a venture could have on this island. That it considers its position solvent but its future untenable is just about the most damning indictment of DfE and FSA that we could possibly have. Shame on them both, and shame on their leaders.

In it's announcement about withdrawing from the Angel Network sector they say:

Quote

.....we have delivered 37 successful events, met with more than 220 entrepreneurs and developed a brand new angel network for the Island which includes more than 95 registered angel investors and many hundreds of start-up and scale-up businesses.

On the face of it, you'd think that the "many hundreds of start-ups" would really have been something to shout about. Well, in DfE terms you would, wouldn't you?

Except perhaps the DfE and the Minister clearly pay no regard to it's own statistics from Companies Registry. Because they tell a completely different story.

At 31.03.2019 there were 2,581 less companies on the Companies Register than there was 10 years ago (both 1931 & 2006 types).

In the last two years alone there are 924 less companies registered (again, both types).

Whilst the 2006 type register has seen the biggest growth in percentage terms over the last 10 years, the last two years have seen a very modest rise of just 3.41% with 325 companies registered but has plateaued with four quarters worth of statistics going into negative territory (up to 31.03.2019)

So, if we're to believe what Bridge says is true (and I guess we shouldn't have any reason to doubt that) and they have indeed assisted hundreds of companies (all 325 of 2006 types?), then the registry numbers would have looked absolutely appalling. 

Meanwhile, DfE still insists that throwing taxpayers money on the Enterprise Scheme creates jobs. The governments own statistics above might suggest otherwise.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Donald Trumps said:

We're going to end up with an economy that's 20% private sector and 80% public sector the way it's going. With that 80% being funded by the 20% and a VAT rebate.

Maybe this is what Govt means by a growing, diverse and successful economy?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We seem to have managed to take the worst aspects of capitalism and fused them with the worst aspects of communism all in the one tiny place. Respect is due.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

In it's announcement about withdrawing from the Angel Network sector they say:

On the face of it, you'd think that the "many hundreds of start-ups" would really have been something to shout about. Well, in DfE terms you would, wouldn't you?

Except perhaps the DfE and the Minister clearly pay no regard to it's own statistics from Companies Registry. Because they tell a completely different story.

At 31.03.2019 there were 2,581 less companies on the Companies Register than there was 10 years ago (both 1931 & 2006 types).

In the last two years alone there are 924 less companies registered (again, both types).

Whilst the 2006 type register has seen the biggest growth in percentage terms over the last 10 years, the last two years have seen a very modest rise of just 3.41% with 325 companies registered but has plateaued with four quarters worth of statistics going into negative territory (up to 31.03.2019)

So, if we're to believe what Bridge says is true (and I guess we shouldn't have any reason to doubt that) and they have indeed assisted hundreds of companies (all 325 of 2006 types?), then the registry numbers would have looked absolutely appalling. 

Meanwhile, DfE still insists that throwing taxpayers money on the Enterprise Scheme creates jobs. The governments own statistics above might suggest otherwise.

The "hundreds of start-ups" are those which have attended Bridge events or been facilitated by Bridge to consider coming to the IoM, not the number which have actually established here. 

The falling number of companies registered is concerning, but in part reflects the extortionate registry fees and the new requirements for beneficial ownership registration and transparency. At least three lost in that timescale are companies which I was a director of, shuttered because it was not worth keeping them registered here given the costs of the IoM. Many others will go over time for similar reason. One could argue that these are no great loss because they were marginal or speculative businesses - except that some will have been start-ups which will succeed given time, but will be domiciled elsewhere in a more friendly regime, and others will be the PSCs of freelancers who have moved their tax base and incorporated elsewhere due to aggressive anti-PSC tax measures.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Donald Trumps said:

So from there, over five quarters from Q1 2018 through Q1 2019 we have had employed:

Public Administration    4,798  4,829  4,879  4,965  5,024 (added 226)

Education                      5,585  5,571  5,666  5,781  5,841 (added 256)

Medical and Health       7,298  7,193  7,260  7,384  7,519 (added 221)

I appreciate that there will be a small private sector contingent in education and health categories that might have added a few, but otherwise, WTF is going on? We are paying for this nonsense and being told we cannot afford to pay state pensions on time. Obviously our leaders know something that we don't.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, craggy_steve said:

The "hundreds of start-ups" are those which have attended Bridge events or been facilitated by Bridge to consider coming to the IoM, not the number which have actually established here. 

The falling number of companies registered is concerning, but in part reflects the extortionate registry fees and the new requirements for beneficial ownership registration and transparency. At least three lost in that timescale are companies which I was a director of, shuttered because it was not worth keeping them registered here given the costs of the IoM. Many others will go over time for similar reason. One could argue that these are no great loss because they were marginal or speculative businesses - except that some will have been start-ups which will succeed given time, but will be domiciled elsewhere in a more friendly regime, and others will be the PSCs of freelancers who have moved their tax base and incorporated elsewhere due to aggressive anti-PSC tax measures.

Does the amount of companies registered matter to anyone ?

I could own 100 companies or 1000 companies, or have things changed now ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, the stinking enigma said:

We seem to have managed to take the worst aspects of capitalism and fused them with the worst aspects of communism all in the one tiny place. Respect is due.

 

National Broadcaster has awarded them 'reactionary government' status!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dilligaf said:

Does the amount of companies registered matter to anyone ?

I could own 100 companies or 1000 companies, or have things changed now ?

Yep, it matters because companies are mechanisms people use to generate wealth and employment, directly and indirectly via service providers. Also matters because Go'v't makes money in company fees.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Extortionate company fees compared to UK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dilligaf said:

Does the amount of companies registered matter to anyone ?

I could own 100 companies or 1000 companies, or have things changed now ?

Of course it matters. It's the main barometer that shows how the private sector is performing. Without companies there would be no employees and no employees equals zero tax or NI contributions.

As far as I know you wouldn't be able to take advantage of any of the Enterprise Scheme funding arrangements unless the business was properly constituted. That's why I find it difficult to understand why or how DfE can't quantify the new number of people in work. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:
16 minutes ago, dilligaf said:

Does the amount of companies registered matter to anyone ?

I could own 100 companies or 1000 companies, or have things changed now ?

Of course it matters. It's the main barometer that shows how the private sector is performing. Without companies there would be no employees and no employees equals zero tax or NI contributions.

As far as I know you wouldn't be able to take advantage of any of the Enterprise Scheme funding arrangements unless the business was properly constituted. That's why I find it difficult to understand why or how DfE can't quantify the new number of people in work. 

I only asked because unless things have changed, I could register 1000 companies, pay  the fees and in reality have no employees , so no vat N.I. ITIP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...