finance
monthly
Personal Finance. Money. Investing.
Contribute
Newsletter
Corporate

According to EY, UK stock market listings in the first three quarters are the highest they’ve been in 20 years, with 14 IPOs raising £2.9bn on the main market and 19 IPOs raising £1.1bn on Alternative Investment Market (AIM). While an IPO is a notable objective for businesses, with a lot of potential benefits, some risks and considerations come with going public. 

Risks Of Going Public 

Not articulating your Equity Story Properly

An equity story is the cornerstone of a successful IPO, so it’s crucial that it’s articulated well. Equity stories help share a business’ vision while offering compelling reasons why investors should buy stocks. Companies only get one chance to tell their story, and if they get this wrong, they risk being incorrectly valued and investors not understanding the business. 

So what elements must be included to construct a powerful equity story? While there is no one-size-fits-all approach, and every business has its own authentic message, a number of components make up a compelling equity story. Firstly, investors should be able to see profit, growth and return clearly. It’s crucial that they understand the business, its purpose, its key drivers, and its plans to capitalise on future opportunities. When drafting an equity story, consider the three Cs. Is it Clear? Is it Concise?, and is it Compelling? Finally, it’s important not to overpromise. Post-IPO, investors will hold businesses accountable for delivering against those future opportunities in full, and even beyond in some cases.

Costs

Companies must have good visibility of costs before going public. An IPO process isn’t cheap. While the cost of going public varies depending on company size, offering proceeds and company readiness, businesses will likely still have to fork out millions across underwriting fees, legal fees, auditor fees and other transaction costs. 

As well as the costs of going public, Board members must consider the additional costs usually incurred once they are a public company. A survey of CFOs, carried out by PWC found that the incremental costs of being public are broadly split across five areas: incremental audit, public/investor relations, financial reporting, legal and regulatory compliance.

Timing & Resources 

CFOs cannot manage an IPO by themselves, so it’s important that organisations have a well-staffed finance department supporting them. An IPO puts an immense strain on finance teams, with high workloads and strict deadlines accompanying it. If they’re not prepared for this, they run the risk of juggling too many tasks and making mistakes. These errors could seriously impact the company’s valuation or disrupt the ‘business as usual’ activity.

As explained in Protiviti’s Guide to Public Company Transformation, “The failure to fully develop sound business processes, controls and infrastructure, particularly those that support financial reporting processes, is one of the most common mistakes companies make in their public company readiness effort.”

Benefits Of Going Public 

Access to Capital 

One of the most appealing reasons for going public is the substantial amounts of capital that can be raised. Many businesses find it expensive and dilutive to raise equity from venture capitalists and other big investors. However, equity investments from the public can help businesses to gain the capital it needs to deliver their vision. This capital can then be invested back into the company, allowing it to grow and innovate. IPOs have helped corporations fund research, develop new products, increase marketing efforts and reduce debt. 

Publicity 

Going public also gives businesses great exposure. As soon as a company announces its IPO, it receives a lot of publicity and media coverage. This public awareness could not only result in more investors, but it could also bring in more suppliers, customers and even future leadership candidates. As Investopedia shares, “A publicly-traded company conveys a positive image (if the business goes well) and attracts high-quality personnel at all levels, including senior management.”

Validation

A listed business has effectively been sold to the general public. People are putting money behind it and believe in its potential. This validation can have a substantial effect on businesses earlier in their journey or companies going through a transformation or releasing new products.

Final Thoughts 

The decision to go public should not be rushed. While there are some exciting benefits for a growing company, the challenges and risks associated with going public could be too demanding if the timing is not considered. It is the responsibility of Board members to evaluate the company’s readiness for an effective transition. This decision should not be taken lightly. 

About the author: Imran Anwar, Chief Financial Officer at Epos Now has 15+ years of cross-industry experience in maximising sustainable company growth, raising capital, initial public offerings (IPO) and strategic business transformation.

Prior to joining Epos Now, Imran served as Deputy Group CFO at The Hut Group (THG PLC). During this time, he built out the finance, governance and risk infrastructure to drive the company through a successful IPO on the London Stock Market, the largest UK initial public offering for 3 years. 

Over the course of her 25+ years with EY, Marna has held various leadership and client service roles including assisting multinational companies in global tax transformation efforts, optimising financial structuring as well as tax compliance and reporting.

Marna is passionate about ensuring all EY Tax people reach their full career potential and feel a sense of belonging.

She serves on EY’s Americas Operating Executive, which sets strategy and policy for the EY Americas member firms, and the Global Tax Executive Committee, which sets the strategy for the Global Tax practice. She is also a Junior Achievement USA Board member.

Marna has won numerous awards for her leadership, including a “Woman of the Year” Stevie Award, “Executive of the Year” Best in Biz award, “Female Executive of the Year” Women in Business at the Professions World awards and a Finance Monthly Taxation Award.

Besides winning multiple awards and being recognised nationally for her leadership, Marna says her most significant accomplishments are her two sons, Colton and Cooper, who continue to inspire her every day to lead with empathy. Marna, her husband Erick, their two sons and golden retriever, Bear live in Minnesota. We caught up with her to talk about all things tax in the post-COVID-19 world.

What role will tax play as we slowly prepare to step into a post-COVID-19 world?

Tax has always been the mesh point between the government and the private sector. We saw this expand at the beginning of the pandemic last year with the CARES Act as policymakers used tax policy to drive economic stimulus.

As the global pandemic moves into its second year, taxes will continue to play a vital role in aiding economic recovery at all governmental levels. Further coordinated action will be required to preserve economic capacity and help protect vulnerable businesses and communities in the US.

Tax policy has emerged as an essential vehicle to supercharge the path towards recovery here in the US and globally. For example, the infrastructure bill proposes extending the child tax credits, providing two free years of community college and offering green-energy tax incentives. The House and Senate have both approved the $3.5 trillion budget resolution, which will facilitate passage of a human infrastructure bill on issues like health, climate, caregiving, and education, with an as-yet-to-be-determined amount of corporate, international and individual tax increases and more IRS tax enforcement.

Overall, the Treasury’s Office of Tax Analysis predicts that the American Families Plan could help the IRS raise $700 billion worth of additional tax revenue over the course of the next decade (which in turn can help fund our infrastructure plans).

How is the EY Americas Tax department responding to these trends?

With all the disruption happening in tax – from fast-changing tax policy globally, to new business operating models, to advancing technology –it is now more important than ever to deliver impactful tax advice and first-class client service through digitally enabled solutions that address our clients’ most complex business challenges.

Despite all the changes, there are many things that need to stay the same: the technical expertise and quality of our Americas Tax professionals will always be at the heart of serving our clients. And our people will always be our best assets.

But there are many things that need to change including the way we deliver information. This must evolve if we want to generate the capital to invest in the future and the way we show up to clients’ needs to reflect our digital-forward mindset and capabilities.

As a result, innovation is in everything we do and we’re constantly disrupting ourselves and our services to be better and to be in a continuous improvement mindset. New systems won’t just clean up data for us, they’ll equip our tax professionals to reach their full potential as trusted business advisers and technicians, making it possible to offer real-time collaborations, scenario planning, cost modelling, and risk simulation tools.

At the onset of the pandemic, my team and I quickly realised that clients needed reliable and swift communication. We were agile and developed many new business offerings that enabled clients to survive and rebuild. Some achievements include:

In all, we learned that the right combination of communication and analytical tools can arm companies with the peace of mind needed to regrow or pivot their business models amid uncertainty.

In the most recent round of EY US partner/principal promotions, 40% were women, an increase of 7% from the prior year, which represents the largest female class ever.

Tell us a little bit about EY’s belief that tax will play a key role in building a more sustainable working world.

Reflecting on the growing number of climate events over the past 12 months, I am encouraged to identify all the ways in which tax intersects with sustainability and how it can help incentivise corporations to reduce their footprint in meaningful ways.

I believe Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance (ESG) reporting and tax strategy will play a growing and pivotal role in sustainability efforts, as more governments and investors ask companies to disclose their strategies for responding to climate change. Increasingly corporate tax departments are being asked to develop tax governance strategies that take into account risk management and ESG considerations—a fast-growing trend.

In the US, sustainability has become an increasing part of the national conversation under US President Joe Biden, with the administration seeking to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. In addition to rejoining the Paris Climate Agreement, President Biden has worked to restore critical environmental protections and pledged to promote job creation in a clean energy economy, with a goal to eliminate carbon pollution from power plants by 2035. As part of his Build Back Better platform, Biden has proposed significant spending for infrastructure and clean energy, which includes money for energy retrofitting, financing to upgrade appliances, windows and to buy electric vehicles and to expand and extend clean energy tax incentives. President Biden has proposed tax changes to pay for these investments in cleantech infrastructure.

The more we champion and inspire, provide advice and professional guidance, dare to provide honest feedback, and rise to the occasion when life happens, the faster we reach gender parity.

At EY, we’re doing our part to help combat climate change and protect the planet for future generations, by assisting our clients to meet their sustainability goals, as well as committing to our own emissions goals. Of course, one of my favourite ways to contribute is through our dedicated sustainability tax team, which helps clients navigate the increasingly complex world of climate-related tax policies. The team also assists in identifying opportunities like tax exemption programs, incentives, and funding for sustainability-related projects.

In an ongoing effort to build a more sustainable working world, my team launched the “Green Tax Tracker” and the “EY Carbon Modelling Tool” to provide clients with an overview of sustainability incentives, carbon pricing regimes and other environmental taxes.

On a personal level, I’m aiming to be more sustainable to reduce my carbon footprint, by planting a garden, walking, and biking locally vs driving, or using a refillable water bottle each day to stay hydrated. Everyone’s contributions to reducing their carbon footprint, no matter how small, matter!

Climate change is one of the most pressing issues humanity faces today. It’s our collective responsibility to act now and work together to build a low-carbon future and protect our planet, for generations to come.

As a woman in finance, what are you doing to promote diversity and inclusion at EY?

I proudly support and am committed to diversity, inclusiveness, and anti-discriminatory initiatives beyond tax. A diverse executive team should be a priority for any business or organisation. At EY, we understand that diversity and inclusiveness at all levels of the company are required to build a better working world.

Diversity and inclusion are a deep part of our culture and are simply table stakes and non-negotiable. We are also very focused on creating an even stronger culture of belonging. One that harnesses our unique differences and allows every individual to bring those differences to work every day and to be valued for exactly who they are. Those differences ultimately allow teams to bring unique perspectives and create better outcomes in our work.

I am committed to fostering belonging for all women. The more we champion and inspire, provide advice and professional guidance, dare to provide honest feedback, and rise to the occasion when life happens, the faster we reach gender parity.

Successful women leaders must juggle everything, literally everything. They are expected to balance family responsibilities, run a business, demonstrate their credentials as well as walk a fine line of “being tough enough . . . but not too tough.” But what I love about EY is that we are myth-busting those gender stereotypes. For example, we had just as many men apply for our summer leave program in 2020 as women. Another example, we are seeing an increase in men taking advantage of our paternity leave program. This speaks volumes about the EY culture. Shattering old stereotypes that men do not have an equal desire to be deeply involved with their children and family responsibilities, and that doing so is not a sign of weakness (an “outdated stereotype”).

I am so proud to work alongside so many talented female Tax leaders and super moms. I have a front-row seat to see what our female leaders collectively create and it’s incredibly powerful. In the next 12 months, I want to continue to diversify our roster of executive leaders within Americas Tax and among the incoming partner class. I also want to focus on strengthening and protecting our culture of belonging.   

What are the most important lessons the pandemic has taught you and how do you plan to implement them in the future?

You don’t know where people are. Make no assumptions about politics, social issues, health issues, home life. There is no one universal experience. Be caring, make others feel secure, hold down the fort. Find optimism and opportunity. Recognise the role we play. Focus on wellness and taking care of ourselves.

Resilience and agility are two themes that emerged during the pandemic. Our 18,000 Americas Tax professionals never stopped providing first-class exceptional client service. The global pandemic has proven that we are stronger together, and above all, we are resilient in times of uncertainty.

The past year gave me a deeper appreciation for the power of empathy and inclusion, driving a recommitment on inclusiveness and belonging for all—EY people, clients, and the communities we serve—with ongoing programs focused on women’s advancement and leadership around the world. In the most recent round of EY US partner/principal promotions, 40% were women, an increase of 7% from the prior year, which represents the largest female class ever.

In FY21, my team hired over 900 students, with women representing more than half of the campus new hires and nearly half racially and ethnically diverse. Similarly, 75% of the US Tax incoming partner class are either racially and ethnically diverse or women. EY and specifically our Americas Tax practice is helping to accelerate women’s equity and driving change—both in the organisation and in the community. This commitment is unwavering and woven into the fabric of our organisation.

It’s a delicate balance to provide essential communications and analytical tools for clients to allow them to pivot their business while keeping DE&I and ESG-related initiatives at the forefront, something many businesses lost sight of given other pandemic responsibilities.

Recent consultation papers have included a number of key measures in order to diversify the UK professional services sector for audits to improve standards and offer viable alternatives to the Big Four. There have been three independent reviews so far and major failings are still happening due, in many cases, to the Big Four’s monopoly. As such, the consultation papers include provisions that challenger firms will be required to conduct a meaningful portion of the audit for the UK’s large companies, namely through shared audits, a proposal that has sparked significant controversy in recent weeks.

The Big Four have stated they will not be supporting proposals for shared audits, citing the potential doubling down on work, that they see no evidence the measure would improve the quality of audits and fears that not enough smaller firms would be interested in taking part. These firms audit 97% of the FTSE350 and also compete for hugely more lucrative ‘other professional services’ with the same client. As such, the introduction of these proposals will have huge knock-on impacts on the choice, quality, and availability of audit services in the market, meaning positive collaboration with the Big Four and alignment in assessments for how to effectively transform the sector will be near essential.

The Big Four’s reluctance to enter into shared audit seems to predominantly boil down to a risk issue; albeit a combined or shared audit, the Big Four will undoubtedly be in the firing line for the overall quality of the audits by virtue of their status, who they are as a company, and their having the ‘deepest pockets’.

The public must perceive audits as independent at all times in order to avoid their losing faith in the market, making these diversification processes more essential than ever.

The Big Four have already made clear that their appetite for shared audits is next to none due to the additional costs incurred in order to ensure the quality of these audits throughout are at the standard required to avoid the aforementioned ‘firing line’.

What’s more, concerns from the Big Four surrounding how the riskier areas of these shared audits will be managed would not be misplaced. Will it be expected that one firm will cover these more risky areas? Or will these areas remain combined? If the latter, this runs the risk of the audit and its riskier areas becoming ever more complex, running increased risks of shared audits failing to meet the standards required.

Due to the monopoly of the Big Four in the audits of these companies, smaller firms often also have less expertise and significantly less experience with the audits of these major UK companies. Thus, both these smaller firms as well as the Big Four firms managing these shared audits in collaboration may not have the confidence in the quality of certain areas of the audits they are undertaking.

It seems, therefore, that while these shared audits have been proposed with the best of intentions for a highly anticipated diversification of the sector, improving standards in the process, there are some growing pains left to work out. Indeed, some of the smaller or ‘challenger’ audit firms have expressed the view that the shared audit requirement falls some distance short of the Competition and Market Authority’s (CMA) envisaged joint audit approach.

The proposed time period (5-9 years) over which the progress of market capture by these challenger firms would be monitored may also potentially prove to be far too long, with the approach appearing to be incremental in nature as opposed to more immediately transformative.

However, the initial response of many ‘challenger’ audit firms to proposals for a diversification and transformation of the sector have been encouraging. Firms are keen to see diversification, providing for a much-needed revamp and improvement of standards following scandals surrounding Pâtisserie Valerie, Carillion, Thomas Cook and more.

Before some of these challenger firms can take on large and complex audits, they will naturally need to invest in their audit capabilities in order to give confidence in their ability to audit some of the most complex businesses. Such investments may not be financially feasible for firms of a certain size, meaning we could therefore see fewer challengers entering the space, this is an excellent opportunity for professional service firms that have grown and significantly increased their experience here.

This is an excellent opportunity for many firms to expand their experience, taking on the audits of larger companies. Nevertheless, some challengers may not want to enter such a high risk space, especially if they perceive proposed shared audit structures to mean these increased risks will not be matched by the rewards. Additionally, some other firms may instead wish to focus on non-audit services, resulting in less choice for businesses, proving counterintuitive to the intended outcome of the proposals – an impact that could become even starker when, in due time, the elements of the operational separation requirements are also applied to these smaller, challenger firms.

It will therefore be essential for challenger audit firms to evaluate the investment needed to be able to take on more complex and demanding audits and start to plan how to position themselves in the future. While they naturally carry increased risks, the potential long-term rewards are great not only for individual challenger firms but for wider industry health and staying ahead of the curb, as the UK professional services sector has done so successfully for years.

Independence of the Big Four’s audit and consultancy services is crucial. While we are seeing a number of challenges with shared audits, other methods to diversify the sector also offer significant potential and must be explored as professional services seek to diversify and seek to stay ahead of the curb. We cannot risk jeopardising the independence of audits for UK firms because of lucrative consultancy services provided by the same client, as much as we cannot risk the quality of audits due to lack of experience.

Almost as important is the issue of ‘perception’. The public must perceive audits as independent at all times in order to avoid their losing faith in the market, making these diversification processes more essential than ever.

At Theta Global Advisors, we do not audit and hence, we are one of the few truly independent accounting advisory firms for non-audit professional services. Mid-sized firms such as ours that are disrupting the industry in a truly unprecedented manner are seeing great success having worked on major accounts this year. Kwasi Kwarteng’s proposals for shared audits working with the Big Four is just one way we can attempt to seamlessly diversify the sector, with mid-sized firms having shown they can take on previously inaccessible, large clients already without necessarily the need for shared accounts with larger, Big Four firms. For London to continue as a top choice globally for professional services, it is essential to stay ahead of the curb moving forwards, be that through shared audits or caps on the Big Four’s existing monopoly.

According to data from EY,  the UK acquired 99 investment projects in financial services in 2019. However, in 2020, just 49 were acquired, a significant drop that puts the country only 14% ahead of France. 

The latest EY UK Attractiveness Survey for Financial Services found that foreign investment fell by 23% across Europe in 2020, as the pandemic impacted business confidence and foreign travel. It is expected that the UK will continue to outperform its European neighbours as global markets and economies begin to recover from the economic impacts of Covid-19. In a survey of global investors, the UK was found to be the European country with the most investment-friendly Covid-19 recovery plans. It was also labelled most attractive for financial services investments. 

Germany came second on both of these assessments, with France and Switzerland coming in joint third place. London remains Europe’s most attractive destination for financial services foreign investment after Stockholm and Amsterdam.

With a career as a tax adviser spanning over 23 years, Saul has extensive experience in assisting clients with the evaluation of different aspects relating to national and municipal tax application. He has supported clients in corporate restructuring processes (mergers and incorporation of new companies) from a corporate law perspective, including the evaluation of different schemes for the optimisation of the respective tax burden and the effects of such structures on foreign investments. He’s also worked on numerous tax litigations - both at the administrative and judicial level, including at the Venezuelan Supreme Court of Justice.

What have been the tax developments in Venezuela in response to COVID-19?

Since March 2020, a State of Alarm has been in place in Venezuela in order for the National Executive to dictate measures regarding the COVID-19 pandemic.

Under such rule, there were no general tax exemptions or tax benefits granted by the National Government due to the pandemic. Instead, there have only been specific measures regarding the reduction or elimination of import taxes on determined items associated with the health sector.

A series of additional tax measures have been put in place, including the exoneration from the payment of the Value Added Tax (VAT), Import Tax and Rate by determination of the customs regime:

In addition, other norms have been published regarding:

How can Venezuelan businesses optimise their corporate tax position following the pandemic, while adapting their organisations for post-coronavirus trading?

Considering Venezuela’s five-year economic recession, the pandemic has put additional pressure on business management to optimise tax burden. For multinational business, we have seen more interest not only in validating the alternatives or measures that can be evaluated to achieve that goal but also a significant pressure to execute these alternatives in a short time, considering that as mentioned, the Government has not implemented any general tax benefit schemes for businesses as a consequence of the pandemic.

In recent years, due to the combination of hyperinflation and permanent devaluation of the local currency (VES), tax planning has been focused mainly on optimising the FX gains on assets denominated in foreign currency or the use of FX losses in an efficient manner.

The rapid increase of e-businesses during 2020, including in the deliveries sector, is also evidence of the changing environment generated by restrictions imposed under the pandemic. Many traditional Venezuelan businesses have reacted to this trend to maintain their market share. This has highlighted the need from clients to analyse the tax aspects related to these forms of businesses as well as the operational and security aspects derived from its implementation.

Aside from COVID-19, have there been any important corporate tax planning developments in Venezuela over the past two years?

In recent years, due to the combination of hyperinflation and permanent devaluation of the local currency (VES), tax planning has been focused mainly on optimising the FX gains on assets denominated in foreign currency or the use of FX losses in an efficient manner.

It’s worth noting that during the last two years, there has been additional pressure from the Tax Administration to increase tax collection, as explained below:

What is the purpose and objective of a Tax Compliance Management System (Tax CMS) under German law?

Despite the utmost care on the part of any tax department, tax returns can contain errors. The most common cause is a lack of transparency and insufficient data quality for tax declaration purposes. The high complexity of internal processes requires a clear allocation and documentation of responsibilities and persons in charge. Missing or inadequate process and role definitions can lead to tax-relevant information not being passed on and considered accordingly. If an error is caused by inadequate processes or lack of controls, this will be categorised as a tax offence or at least as carelessness. Both could lead to fines, reputational damage and criminal or monetary consequences for the persons responsible, in particular for the management.

Proof of an adequate Tax CMS can refute the allegation of tax evasion or carelessness in connection with an incorrect tax return. With the guideline of the Federal Ministry of Finance dated 23 May  2016, the fiscal administration has paved the way for companies to correct errors in tax returns without being subject to criminal charges. This means that when an error is discovered and disclosed accordingly, the tax authorities will assume that the error was not caused by an organisational deficiency if an adequate Tax CMS is in place.

What are the benefits of a Tax Compliance Management System for companies?

Besides providing protection against consequences for the management and other tax responsible employees, a Tax CMS also protects companies against penalties, late payment interest, and non- budgeted tax payments. From an organisational point of view, a well-implemented Tax CMS also provides high transparency and efficiency in all tax-related processes. The implementation of a Tax CMS is furthermore a great opportunity for further standardising and automating processes and moving the tax department and the entire tax function to the next level. In the near future, the role of the tax department will be to organise, manage and control processes inside and outside the tax department instead of being reactive and wasting time and resources on the collection of poorly structured data. There is a significant outcome in freeing up resources within the tax function to generate additional value not only in terms of tax optimisation but also in terms of supporting management decisions with current and well-substantiated information and data.

Does the use of a Tax Compliance Management System provide advantages when dealing with the tax office in Germany?

Currently, German tax authorities start tax audits with the question of whether a Tax Compliance Management System is implemented in the company or not. If the answer is yes, the tax auditor usually requests a description of the Tax CMS. However, this does not currently trigger any direct consequences. In the near future, the expectation is that the existence of an effective Tax CMS will greatly influence how the tax auditor will deal with findings. Companies which can prove an effective Tax CMS might not undergo further criminal investigations by the tax authorities in the case of tax audit findings. The existence of a Tax CMS will also support the company and its representatives in negotiations with the tax auditor. The reason for this is that more substantial data and transparency provide an improved basis for argumentation. Furthermore, in this case, it becomes very unlikely that the tax auditor tries to support his position by threatening the negotiators of the company with criminal consequences.

From an organisational point of view, a well-implemented Tax CMS also provides high transparency and efficiency in all tax-related processes.

How can companies structure an effective Tax Compliance Management System?

A Tax CMS consists of three levels.

The first level is the conception of the Tax CMS. It includes the entire guidance and all principles for all personnel dealing directly or indirectly with tax matters, such as a group tax policy, single specific policies for all relevant taxes, documentation of tax-related processes and last but not least a training concept concerning relevant tax matters.

The second level is supervision. This includes risk management driven by a dedicated person or a team, the so-called Tax Compliance Officer or Tax Compliance Office.

Another key element is the risk assessment, providing a complete directory of all potential risks of error and all mitigating measures and controls belonging to these risks. Other elements of the supervision level are monitoring of processes, defined controls and an internal audit ensuring that all tax guidelines have been adhered to. The core of the supervision level is to link the level of execution with the level of conception.

The third level is the execution. All guidance and principles are worthless if they are disregarded in daily business. It is the main challenge of a Tax CMS implementation project to go live with the conception. With regard to limited resources and budgets, the digitalisation of processes and integrated controls has become a critical success factor. A greater share of manual work will lead to a higher density of the control framework and hence more money and resources are required.

What is the best way to start a Tax CMS Project?

Generally, this depends on the individual situation and the individual level of maturity of the tax function in a company. In tax fields in which robust processes are already in place, the first step should be a risk assessment including the review of the adequacy of measures and controls. In fields where nothing or nearly nothing is in place, the project should be started with the conception and implementation of the required elements.

What are the current trends in Kazakhstan’s investment and business climate?

Kazakhstan has always aspired to enhance its investment attractiveness by implementing a wide range of systemic reforms, including continuous work on improving its legislative framework. This has been done as part of the overall 2050 development strategy adopted back in 2012. Being viewed by many as predominantly a natural resources-driven market, Kazakhstan has adhered to the notion of significantly diversifying its economy. In this regard, the country’s leadership has emphasised the need to keep up with the current global trends of transforming the idea of investment attractiveness and the criteria by which it is evaluated. In other words, in a situation where investors are increasingly deciding in favour of technologies and brands developed in a country as opposed to only focusing on its natural wealth, Kazakhstan will have to envisage a similar model. To this end, the government has repeatedly indicated that the country’s longer-term strategy should be less dependent on abundant natural resources and more focused on offering investors high-quality human capital, technological infrastructure and conditions for the development of science, digital and innovations.

The course was set toward accelerated industrial and innovation-driven development and related programs (GPFIIR 2010-14, then GPIIR 2015-19 as part of the above mentioned 2050 Strategy and the Vision of Kazakhstan’s Inclusion in the Top 30 Most Developed Countries).

What is the government doing to boost and encourage investment in the country?

The country has in principle adopted a forward-thinking policy – both externally (i.e. in view of its efforts to better position itself in attracting foreign investments) and on the domestic market (with some incentives to encourage reinvestment by existing investors).

Kazakhstan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, embassies and Kazakh Invest are making headway on the external front. There have been roadshows, with President and top government members participating, to different countries, one of the most recent ones being to Germany. The idea behind these roadshows is to further promote Kazakhstan as an investment destination. Some of the other initiatives worth mentioning include establishing the Astana International Financial Centre, joining the Belt and Road project and a few more. One of the practical measures aimed at easing administration for foreign businesses in the country was the introduction of a one-stop-shop mechanism for resolving all investors’ issues.

Being viewed by many as predominantly a natural resources-driven market, Kazakhstan has adhered to the notion of significantly diversifying its economy.

Furthermore, policy dialogue has been held through various business associations/ advisory councils, such as the Foreign Investors’ Council (FIC) chaired personally by the head of state, and the Prime Minister's Council on Improvement of the Investment Climate organised together with AmCham.

The National Investment Strategy for 2018-22 tops the list of initiatives (drafted by what was then the Ministry of Innovation and Development and the World Bank with input from foreign investors submitted via the forums already mentioned). This strategy identifies priority areas for investment, including areas with current potential (the food industry, deep oil processing, gas and minerals and machine engineering) and others that hold promise for the future (ICT, tourism and finance). The strategy also identifies 36 countries that offer the potential for closer cooperation, including 11 priority countries (the US, Russia, the UK, Germany, France, Italy, China, Japan, South Korea, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates). The industry and country priorities identified in the strategy will help to achieve the desired results.

What should companies that wish to do business in Kazakhstan consider?

Modern investors (especially now, with a wide choice of countries to invest in) are paying increased attention to transparent and predictable legislative environments, the rule of law and independence of the judicial system. They naturally want to safeguard their investments and to be able to rely on the market in the long term. In this respect, while Kazakhstan has made great strides by undertaking major reforms, there are still many areas where improvements are required. One of the most common issues raised by existing investors, both foreign and national, is the rule of law. While the laws and regulations have been significantly improved, the lack of consistency in their application continues to be a challenge. Often, decisions made by local authorities are not consistent with how investors read the applicable legislation. The resolution of such cases, including tax and customs disputes, is typically a time and resource-consuming process.

On the other hand, human capital constraints, as in many other countries, must be carefully considered. The lack of qualified personnel in quite a few industries coupled with relatively tough regulations for importing foreign labour place staffing issues at the top of many businesses’ agendas. Many companies, foreign and local, have addressed this issue by setting up their own corporate universities/academies of business to bring up the desired number of trained professionals fitting their requirements.

You were recently elected the Chairman of the Governing Board of the Kazakhstan Foreign Investors’ Council Association. Tell us more about what your role would include and what your plans for it are.

Kazakhstan Foreign Investors’ Council Association (KFICA) could be briefly described as the foreign side of the above-mentioned Foreign Investors’ Council (FIC) chaired by the President of the country. EY has been an active member of the FIC since 2001.

I have been a member of the Operating Committee of FIC as well as a member of the Governing Board of KFICA and for about eight years now. I have also served as KFICA’s treasurer for the last three years. Apart from that, I have co-chaired the Council’s Investment Policy Working Group (IPWG) since 2011. In IPWG, we collaborate with the Ministry of National Economy, with the Minister being the other co-chair, by formulating and executing an annual action plan. The plan includes a number of issues pertaining to and impacting the investment climate in Kazakhstan. In my capacity as the IPWG co-chair, I have led the policy dialogue with the Government side in terms of the improvements required for the business and regulatory environments to make the country’s investment climate more attractive.

Now that I have become the Governing Board Chairman, my role will be more around leading KFICA’s overall collaboration with the Government. To this end, I will actively engage with the President’s Administration as well as the top Government members (including the relevant ministers) to facilitate the work of FIC and KFICA. I will also support the activities of the working groups constituting the main platform through which the FIC’s most important work is carried out. (Apart from the above-mentioned IPWG, there are three other working groups: Energy, Human Capital and Joint Events.) There are other strategic and administrative tasks I will tend to.

In doing all of this, I am honoured to work alongside six other Board Members and four working group co-chairs representing a good mix of different industries. I must, of course, mention the entire KFICA, which currently consists of 32 members and five observers. I take pride in being a part of this great group of company executives and their GRs and to have the opportunity to contribute to the policy dialogue with the Kazakhstan side aimed at enhancing the country’s investment climate.

Nonetheless, last month high street retailer Sports Direct pleaded with the Big Four to take over their auditing process, which it said a smaller firm would not be able to handle. Sky News reported that the Shirebrook company, the firm heading up Sports Direct’s insolvency, approached Deloitte, EY, PwC and KPMG to ask them to take on one of the toughest jobs in the profession. But is it actually true that any of these Big Four firms would do a better and more thorough job than a smaller firm?

Challenges faced by Big Four

Following the demise of Carillion and BHS, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) recently entertained the possibility of the Big Four being split up, forcing them to work with smaller rivals. However, it instead recommended that government officials hold the Big Four accountable when it comes to the close relationship between their auditing divisions and more lucrative consulting services, in order to avoid a conflict of interest. It also stated that it is open to revisiting the prospect of a breakup in five years if the performance of these firms does not improve.

Splitting up the Big Four would certainly change the dynamic completely, and allow smaller firms to show their worth when it comes to larger Sports Direct level ordeals, but it would also create a much more competitive playing field for smaller firms, leaving large organisations without a go-to solution.

Another challenge the Big Four currently face is the rise in new technologies, especially on the back of digitisation and increased regulation. According to a survey from the Chartered Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA), just under 60% of auditing firms believed these factors to be significant problems ahead in 2019.

According to Christian Wolfe, a regular reporter on the Big Four firms, machine learning, artificial intelligence and blockchain accounting solutions are fair game for all smaller firms, and the way it currently works is that “if you want public financial statements that investors trust, you must use a Big Four accounting firm.” However, he points out that once you’ve eliminated the margin for human error, recording and verifying transactions will be equally as trustworthy regardless of which firm you approach for the job.

That sounds a lot like a level playing field when it comes to accounting and auditing performance.

Spread of audit work

This leads me to discuss why in fact it is not an actual level playing field in the auditing profession. Simply put, the spread of work when it comes to the larger Carillion or BHS situations is too much for a smaller company to handle. In this regard, Sports Direct are correct. The Big Four, individually, never mind put together, have the manpower and resources, on a global level, to confront the largest tasks.

The spread of work when it comes to the larger Carillion or BHS situations is too much for a smaller company to handle.

Economia reports that the amount of FTSE 100 clients on retainer between the Big Four has never been closer. In 2005, EY held the least, at 19 FTSE 100 clients, while PwC held the most at 41 FTSE 100 clients. In Q3 2019 the numbers are much closer. EY now holds the least at 22 FTSE clients, while PwC still holds the most at 27 FTSE clients. Clearly, the spread between the Big Four has become more even over the past 15 years, however 100% of FTSE 100 companies are now on the books of a Big Four auditing firm. In September, Steve Smith, research manager at Adviser Rankings Ltd told Bloomberg that “the Big Four have cornered the FTSE 100 market.” And he’s not wrong.

This is not yet the case with FTSE 250, but it’s not far off. According to the figures from Adviser Rankings, the Big Four currently control 95% of the FTSE 250 market in terms of number of clients, and 96% in terms of market capitalisation. The parity between the Big Four and all other auditing firms, based on the number of the UK’s largest companies that contract them, is worrying. The other two firms that control a small share of the auditing of FTSE 250 companies are BDO LLP and Grant Thornton LLP.

These numbers are the real figures on client retention, and should essentially serve as proof that the Big Four are in fact still the best, otherwise, surely the FTSE 100 or 250 would seek auditing services elsewhere?

How much they are paid

As the Big Four are by default considered the best, they of course also cost the most, and partners in these firms are earning figures you can only write on paper. Recent reports indicate Deloitte Partners are due their biggest payday in a decade; the average pay for 699 of Deloitte’s equity partners is $882,000 in 2019, moving up an average of $50,000 from last year.

In addition, Deloitte’s combined member firm revenue has risen a chunky 9.4% to $46.2 billion (£37.4 billion) since last year, and in 2018 this number had already grown 11.3% on the previous year. The growth is volatile, but it is significant growth for the company’s bottom line.

Based on the above, you would figure Deloitte, the largest of the Big Four, is charging its worth in gold, but are the companies that are paying these huge firms getting a fair deal in return?

[ymal]

Quality Ranking

In terms of quality standards, the Big Four auditing firms are assessed and regulated, often by each other, which in a market of fierce competition between them, is a fair and appropriate method of benchmarking standards. There aren’t rankings available per se, but each of the Big Four has its own strengths and weaknesses; EY, for example, is more Europe centred and therefore by default performs better for European based firms.

On the topic of performance quality, Gennaro Senatore, former Transaction Services AM at KPMG, said on a Quora forum: “…with IFRS and Generally Accepted Audit Standards I can tell you the differences are getting less and less noticeable.” He mentions PwC having an edge, or “at least perceived.” While he says that in terms of advisory, in Europe PwC has the most successful treasury practice, EY is stronger on internal audit and Risk Services, and Deloitte in implementation and IT projects. He concludes that KPMG is very good all-round and has a very strong tax practice. However, the performing results will be different for each client, for each auditing firm, so these opinions are after all highly subjective.

More recently, the UK Financial Reporting Council issued a serious warning about the quality of audits of financial statements in the UK. The watchdog stated that the Big Four have YoY failed to meet the benchmark 90% target of large company audits requiring no more than limited improvements. In 2019, of all auditing firms, 75% of audits reached that level of quality. The consequence was £32 million ($39.5 million) in fines (see above for Deloitte’s bottom line and then think about how this could possibly disincentivize poor performance).

Sir Winfried Bischoff, the outgoing chairman of the FRC, said in the watchdog’s report: “We are not seeing more immediate improvements from the [audit] firms and there is undesirable inconsistency across the market.”

The Big Four have YoY failed to meet the benchmark 90% target of large company audits requiring no more than limited improvements. In 2019, of all auditing firms, 75% of audits reached that level of quality.

Clients Dissatisfied

Despite not improving their performance, the Big Four are set to maintain the top tier stranglehold in the auditing sector, which is strange because a study by Source Global Research found that although over two-thirds (68%) of audit clients still rank a Big Four firm as their go-to external auditor, over half (58%) do not name their current auditor as their first choice.

In the US, there are reports of the Big Four bungling 31% of their most recent audits, as analysed by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). The data shows that in 2019, Deloitte bungled 20% of audits examined, PwC bungled 23.6%, EY bungled 27.3%, and KPMG bungled 50%. For what is expected of the Big Four, falling short of near-perfect is a bad image, so missing the mark on 31% of audits could be considered poor performance for the top firms; firms which are paid and are growing as if they were truly the best of the best.

(Source: www.pogo.org/investigation/2019/09/botched-audits-big-four-accounting-firms-fail-many-inspections/)

 

According to The Independent, Stephen Haddrill, the FRC’s chief executive, said: “At a time when the future of the audit sector is under the microscope, the latest audit quality results are not acceptable.

“Audit firms must identify the causes of their audit shortcomings and take rapid and appropriate action to improve quality. Our latest results suggest that they have failed to achieve this in recent years.”

So are the audits that were surveyed by both the UK and US watchdogs actually botched or bungled, or are the firms simply not as good as everyone thinks they are? Are the Big Four really still the best?

Based on what we’ve looked at, it is apparent that action should be taken, and further regulation implemented, while large companies should start considering the auditing and accounting services of smaller consultancy firms and perhaps then the status quo on the Big Four will change. What are your thoughts?

From the pending implementation of VAT to the introduction of Inter-Governmental Agreements with foreign countries, below Finance Monthly hears about Kuwait’s most recent tax affairs through the lens of one the world’s largest professional services and accountancy firms, EY, and one of its top Partners and experts in Kuwait, Alok Chugh.

 

Despite previous plans, Kuwait’s parliament has recently announced that it will not implement VAT before 2021. What could this decision mean, both in the short and long term?

We are closely monitoring the progress in implementation of VAT and are in regular contact with all the key officials. Based on our discussions, we believe the VAT may be implemented sooner than 2021 (probably by January 2020).

While some businesses take a sigh of relief, this only seems to be short term, as once the other countries implement the VAT, the pressure on Kuwait will only increase.

 

What are the key challenges that could come with this decision?

Timing difference in implementation of VAT in Kuwait and in the neighbouring countries will have concerns by businesses involved in cross border transactions that may result in higher cash outflow. For Kuwaiti businesses, this is a blessing in disguise as this gives them additional time to prepare for VAT and also leverage from experiences of other countries.

 

What have been any other tax trends in Kuwait in the past six months?

Kuwait has signed the Inter-Governmental Agreements with the United States (US) for implementation of US FATCA. The financial institutions are required to do an annual FATCA reporting to the Ministry of Finance (MoF) and audit report prepared by a certified auditor is required to be submitted by the FIs on an annual basis.

In addition, Kuwait is a signatory to CRS Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement (MCAA). The MoF has recently issued additional guidelines for CRS, which among other things include appointment of an auditor for CRS reporting purposes (similar to the requirements for FATCA reporting).

Besides, from corporate tax point of view, there have been recent legal cases decided in the Kuwaiti courts, where the MoF has subjected the foreign principals and suppliers of products to tax in Kuwait, based on certain types of agency/distributorship agreements/arrangement. This effectively means a significant potential increase in the tax base. Kuwait is largely an importer of products and services wherein a number of foreign principals sell products and services through Kuwaiti agents.

 

Are there any concerns or future considerations regarding long term attractiveness for Kuwait as a place to do business? If so please elaborate.

Kuwait government is making efforts for: ease of doing business in Kuwait and has brought about legislative changes to attract foreign direct investments in Kuwait. Kuwait continues to spend on the mega projects in strategic Oil & Gas and Infrastructure projects. In addition, there are various other mega projects in pipeline, for which the tenders will be issued soon during the course of the year.

These projects definitely have promising business opportunities for local business as well as international companies wanting to participate in the Kuwait projects as subcontractors.

In addition, Kuwait has recently announced its Vision 2035, which will require significant investments in infrastructure, education, healthcare, over the course of 5-10 years.

 

Is there anything else you would like to add?

I take this opportunity to share our firm credentials. Our firm represents about 70% of the tax payers in the country and we are proud to serve almost all the major market players. We are a team of about 50 tax specialists, the largest tax team amongst the tax service providers, which includes team of experts in VAT, BEPS, Transfer Pricing, cross border tax advisory and tax compliance services.

 

Alok is a partner with EY’s Middle East practice and is based in Kuwait. He has lived and worked in Kuwait for over 25 years and has detailed knowledge of business and taxes in Kuwait. He has considerable experience in advising entry-level strategies for foreign multinationals wishing to do business in Kuwait.  Alok has been involved in a number of consulting assignments (including cross-border planning, application of double tax treaties and the efficient handling of tax and commercial affairs for project due diligence, business paper preparation or review, and structuring operational activities). Alok is a member of the Institute of the Chartered Accountants of India and is an active member and frequent lecturer at the American Business Council, French Business Council, British Business Forum and Canadian Business Council in Kuwait. He is also on the Board of the American Business Council in Kuwait. Alok has been consulted by various government organizations in Kuwait on the practical implementation of various regulations in Kuwait, including the Ministry of Finance. Alok also works closely with the Kuwait Direct Investment Promotion Authority (KDIPA) and a number of other government institutions.

 

Contact details

Alok Chugh

Partner - MENA Government and Public Sector Tax Leader

Mobile: +965-97223004 / +965-97882201

Phone: +965 22955104

alok.chugh@kw.ey.com

www.ey.com

Floor 18-21, Baitak Tower, P. O Box: 74, 13001 Safat, Kuwait

EY further expands it growing consultancy and advisory practice with the appointment of Chief Economist Neil Gibson. Former Professor with Ulster University, Gibson who has been economic advisor to the firm for over 10 years will provide economic analysis and insight to clients on a range of issues arising from continued change within Ireland’s economic landscape.

Prior to taking up the role at Ulster University, as an economist with Oxford Economics, Gibson developed marco, regional and sub-regional economic forecast models and most recently has worked with clients across the Island of Ireland on scenario planning for current and future implications of Brexit.

This appointment follows a number of strategic appointments the firm has made recently including, Shane Mac Sweeney as Partner and Head of Government & Infrastructure, along with a number of Senior Directors including Ferga Kane, Anthony Rourke and Conor Gunn who will work alongside him in providing solutions for Government and private sector clients in collaboration with EY’s existing government and infrastructure experts.

Mike McKerr, Country Managing Partner, EY Ireland: “EY Ireland welcomes the appointment of Neil Gibson as Chief Economist to the firm, having served as economic advisor to EY for the past ten years. Ireland in particular is at a critical economic cross-roads with Brexit, wider geopolitical and technological disruption.  We believe that it’s essential we work in collaboration with business and Government to ensure that the UK’s exit from the EU has limited impact on the free movement of labour and trade, not just between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, but also with the mainland UK. Neil will bring unique perspectives to both the public and private sectors and I would personally like to welcome him to EY Ireland.

Neil Gibson, Chief Economist with EY Ireland: “I’m delighted to be joining the EY team to take up this new role at a time of great change in the economy. I have worked with EY over the last decade and I look forward to working with our clients, helping them to continue to succeed during what is set to be a period of unprecedented uncertainty. Tapping into the global EY economic team and working alongside our local EY teams, I am looking forward to enhancing our economic services in Ireland.”

(Source: EY)

Levels of financial technology (FinTech) adoption among consumers has surged globally over the past 18 months and is poised to be embraced by the mainstream, according to the latest EY FinTech Adoption Index. An average of 33% digitally active consumers across the 20 markets in the EY study now use FinTech.

The study, based on 22,000 online interviews with digitally active consumers across 20 markets, shows that the emerging markets are driving much of this adoption with China, India, South Africa, Brazil and Mexico averaging 46%.

China and India in particular have seen the highest adoption rates of FinTech at 69% and 52%, respectively. FinTech firms in these countries are particularly successful at tapping into the tech-literate but financially under-served segments, according to the study.

The UK has also shown significant growth, with adoption rates now standing at 42%.

The EY FinTech Adoption Index evaluates services offered by FinTech organisations under five broad categories – money transfers and payments services, financial planning, savings and investments, borrowing and insurance. It reveals that money transfers and payments services are continuing to lead the FinTech charge with adoption standing at 50% in 2017, based on the consumers that were surveyed. 88% of respondents said they anticipate using FinTech for this purpose in the future. The new services that have contributed to this upsurge include online digital-only banks and mobile phone payment at checkout.

Insurance has also made huge gains, moving from being one of the least commonly used FinTech services in 2015 to the second most popular in 2017, now standing at 24%. According to the study, this has largely been due to the expansion into technologies such as telematics and wearables (helping companies to better predict claim probability) and in particular the inclusion and growth of premium comparison sites.

Imran Gulamhuseinwala, EY Global FinTech Leader, says: “FinTechs are clearly gaining widespread traction across global markets and have achieved the early stages of mass adoption in most countries. The EY FinTech Adoption Index finds, on average, one in three consumers already consume FinTech services on a regular basis. FinTechs, particularly in the payments and insurance space, have been very successful in building on what they do best – using technology in novel ways and having a laser-like focus on the customer. It really is now a critical time for traditional financial services companies. If they haven’t already, they need to urgently reassess their business models to ensure they are able to meet their customers’ rapidly changing needs. Disruption is no longer just a risk – it is an undisputable reality.”

According to the study, 40% of FinTech users regularly use on-demand services (e.g. food delivery), while 44% of FinTech users regularly participate in the sharing economy (e.g. car sharing). In contrast, only 11% of non-FinTech adopters use either of these services on a regular basis.

The demographic most likely to use FinTech are millennials – 25–34-year olds, followed by 35–44-year olds. The study revealed that people in this age range are comfortable with the technology and that they also require a wide range of financial services as they achieve milestones such as completing their education, gaining full-time employment, becoming homeowners and having children.

There is however also growing adoption among the older generations: 22% of digitally active 45–64-year olds and 15% of those over 65 said they regularly use FinTech services.

The study has also identified a new segment of users, the ‘super-user’. These individuals use five or more FinTech services and account for 13% of all consumers. ‘Super-users’ generally consider FinTech firms to be their primary providers of financial services.

The EY FinTech Adoption Index says that FinTech adoption is set to increase in all 20 markets covered by the study. Based on consumers’ intention of future use, FinTech adoption could increase to an average of 52% globally. The highest proportional increases of intended use among consumers is expected in South Africa, Mexico and Singapore.

Imran Gulamhuseinwala says: “There are those who believe that FinTechs struggle to translate the innovation and great customer experience that they create into real customer adoption. The EY FinTech Adoption Index suggests that thinking is now outdated.

“FinTechs are not only becoming significant players in the financial services industry, but are also shaping its future. Their new propositions are increasingly attractive to consumers and this trend is only set to continue as awareness grows, concerns are allayed and new advancements are made. Traditional firms, who sometimes struggle to deliver the same seamless and personalised user experiences, will undoubtedly need to step up their efforts to remain competitive. I think it’s likely that we will see greater collaboration between traditional firms and FinTechs in the future.”

(Source: EY)

The world's 500 largest family businesses account for a combined USD 6.8 trillion in annual sales, enough to be the third-largest economy in the world (surpassed only by the US and China) and employ nearly 25 million people. These and other findings were released in the biennial Global Family Business Index compiled by the University of St. Gallen, Switzerland, in cooperation with EY. The study highlights the 500 largest family businesses in the world by revenue.

Peter Englisch, EY Global Leader, Family Business Center of Excellence, says: "Behind a successful family business there is usually a story of hard work, dedication, inspiration and sacrifice. It may even be a tale of someone achieving great things and superior growth against incredible odds. Family businesses have the potential to be better, to differentiate themselves in the market, to be more agile in a changing environment, to invest more in innovation and to have superior attractiveness to talent. Family businesses in the US and Germany succeeded in realizing their full potential and became home to more than 2/3 of all Top 500 largest family businesses in the world."

The index reveals that by geography, Europe leads with 44.8% of the index companies calling the continent home, followed by 27.8% of family businesses domiciled in North America.

Thomas Zellweger, Chair of Family Business at the University of St. Gallen, says: "The prevalence of large family businesses in the US and Europe challenges the idea that the widely held and manager-run company should suppress all other forms of economic organization. Family businesses are thus a future-oriented way of organizing economic activity, and the businesses on the list may tell us how this is best achieved."

Consumer Products & Retail companies make up the largest share of the index with 40%, followed by Automotive & Transportation (10%) and Diversified Industrial Products (9%). Of the top 10 automakers, 4 are family-controlled companies. In contrast, only 3 family businesses on the list are predominantly active in banking.

(Source: EY)

About Finance Monthly

Universal Media logo
Finance Monthly is a comprehensive website tailored for individuals seeking insights into the world of consumer finance and money management. It offers news, commentary, and in-depth analysis on topics crucial to personal financial management and decision-making. Whether you're interested in budgeting, investing, or understanding market trends, Finance Monthly provides valuable information to help you navigate the financial aspects of everyday life.
© 2024 Finance Monthly - All Rights Reserved.
News Illustration

Get our free monthly FM email

Subscribe to Finance Monthly and Get the Latest Finance News, Opinion and Insight Direct to you every month.
chevron-right-circle linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram