Some of Britain’s most prominent entrepreneurial voices are pressing the Treasury to introduce a targeted tax incentive designed to keep the proceeds of successful exits circulating within the domestic start-up ecosystem, rather than drifting into passive wealth management or overseas opportunities.

The proposal, which has been dubbed “repeat entrepreneur relief”, would allow founders who sell shares in their companies and reinvest the gains into a new venture within twelve months to defer capital gains tax indefinitely. The liability would only crystallise when the new shares were eventually sold without further reinvestment.

The idea has been put forward in various forms by the Founders Forum Group, Schroders and UK Private Capital as part of a recent Treasury consultation on the tax treatment of entrepreneurs. Each submission makes broadly the same case: that the UK’s tax framework does a reasonable job of supporting businesses as they grow, but does far too little to encourage founders to recycle their capital and experience once they have cashed out.

UK Private Capital, the trade body representing venture capital and private equity firms, argued there is a compelling rationale for aligning tax incentives with the post-exit phase, when founders hold significant capital, possess hard-won operational expertise and face decisions about where to base themselves and where to deploy their money next.

The Founders Forum Group, co-founded by Brent Hoberman and Jonnie Goodwin, drew a comparison with the American Qualified Small Business Stock scheme, under which founders pay no capital gains tax on gains of up to $10 million or ten times their original investment. The group described that exemption as a primary driver of the reinvestment culture that has long defined Silicon Valley, where exit proceeds are routinely funnelled straight back into the next generation of companies.

A survey conducted by the Founders Forum Group found that nearly nine in ten founders said such a measure would make them more likely to reinvest in the UK, with more than seven in ten describing the effect as significant.

The lobbying comes at a sensitive moment for the government’s relationship with the entrepreneurial community. Since taking office, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has progressively increased the rate of business asset disposal relief, the levy formerly known as entrepreneurs’ relief, from its longstanding rate of ten per cent to fourteen per cent last year, then to eighteen per cent from this month. The standard capital gains tax rate remains at twenty-four per cent.

Many founders have argued that the increases make Britain a less attractive place to build and exit a business, though a number of tax analysts have countered that the previous relief was poorly targeted and did relatively little to encourage genuinely productive reinvestment.

The government has sought to balance these changes with fresh incentives at the earlier stages of the company lifecycle. In November, Reeves extended a package of measures making it easier for founders to offer equity to employees and raise capital, provisions that came into force last week.

A Treasury spokesperson pointed to these steps as evidence that the government has the right economic plan in place, highlighting changes to the enterprise management incentive scheme and venture capital tax schemes that are expected to support around £100 million of additional investment annually.

Whether the Treasury is willing to go further and address the post-exit gap that the lobbying groups have identified remains to be seen, but the volume of submissions suggests the argument for repeat entrepreneur relief is gathering serious momentum.

---

Leconfield Industrial Estate is key Cumberland ‘business cluster’

Two new buildings on a Cumbrian industrial estate could get the green light if the plans are approved this week.

Members of Cumberland Council’s planning committee are due to meet at The Civic Centre in Carlisle on Wednesday to consider the application for two sites at Leconfield Industrial Estate in Cleator Moor.

It is proposed that they would be for general industrial and ancillary office use with 6,356 square metres floorspace and associated car parking, hard and soft landscaping, infrastructure and biodiversity enhancements.

The planning application is being placed before the committee because the site exceeds two hectares in area.

It is recommended that members approve planning permission subject to planning conditions and agree a legal agreement to secure:

• a Travel Plan monitoring fee of £6600;
• a contribution of £74,032 towards the highway improvements at Moresby Road, Cleator Moor Road and Main Street; and
• a contribution £30,039 towards the cost of junction improvement works at Cleator Moor Road and Overend Road.

According to the report Leconfield is an established industrial estate which comprises 17.6 hectares in area and is strategically located within Cleator Moor, between the town centre and the built-up area to the north-west.

It states: “It forms part of what is known as Cleator Moor Innovation Quarter (CMIQ), a ‘business cluster’ for the new nuclear and clean energy sectors, as a focus for collaboration, innovation and diversification.

“The estate currently accommodates some 20 industrial and warehouse units of varying sizes, a number of which are vacant.

“There are also several vacant or cleared plots. This established industrial estate has been in use since the 1940s and more recently has suffered from a period of decline.”

The application requests planning permission for two large buildings which will break down further into: Unit nine – four 658 square metre units, and Unit 12 – five 710 square metre units.

It adds: “The intention is for businesses to grow and move nearby within the wider estate into larger more self-contained accommodation. Plots nine and 12 will be ‘Grow On’ units and will cater for businesses in their growth stages and are sized accordingly.”

To find all the planning applications, traffic diversions, road layout changes, alcohol licence applications and more in your community, visit the Public Notices Portal.

India’s stock indices and its currency face reversal risks from last week’s relief-inducing firmness after the US threatened to blockade the Hormuz Strait following the breakdown of peace talks between the US and Iran, spotlighting the fragility of a truce that dictates oil prices and capital allocation.

Last week’s stock market rebound—the best over a seven-day period since February 2021–hinges on the broad direction of oil prices in the aftermath of seemingly inconclusive talks in Islamabad, although Reuters cited shipping data to report the passage Saturday of three fully laden super-tankers through the Strait of Hormuz that accounts for a fourth of the global oil trade. “The market would see a gap down opening, though there should not be panic,” said Sham Chandak, head of institutional equities at Elios Financial Services.

“The market will take cues from oil prices, which are at the centre of this conflict.”

Last week, India’s equity indices climbed 6%, snapping a relentless six-week losing run, after the announcement of two-week truce. Oil slumped below $100 a barrel to $95.2 Friday, having climbed to nearly $120 in the immediate aftermath of the war.

For the currency, the bias would likely be weak, too. Stage-gated central bank curbs on speculative trading helped the rupee climb from record lows last week and those regulations could still provide the bulwark against a currency slide due to the oil prices, but the gains are expected to be capped if geopolitical concerns resurface.

The rupee’s upside may be capped in the 92.40/$ to 92.50/$ range in the absence of a further retreat in oil prices. On the downside, the central bank is expected to step up intervention around the 94.80/$ level, which is the currency’s record closing low.
‘TENTATIVE’
“Most avenues for speculative trades have been shut, so the market is now largely left with hedgers and market makers. That does make liquidity thinner, but at this point, stability is more important,” said Anindya Banerjee, head of commodity and currency, Kotak Securities.Banerjee expects meaningful intervention by the central bank at levels beyond 94.50/$, as these levels are psychologically very significant.

The rupee depreciated 10% in FY26, from 85.75/$ in April to close at 94.83/$ on March 31. The currency deprecated more than 4% in March alone, after the war started.

To curb the pace of deprecation, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) came up with two back-to-back circulars on March 27 and April 1, restricting arbitrage trades between offshore and onshore markets.

“Currently, the ‘tweet risk’ outweighs traditional risk concerns. Despite talks of a ceasefire, the absence of a definitive agreement continues to sustain uncertainty,” said Kunal Sodhani, head of treasury at Shinhan Bank India. “This is evident in crude oil prices, which remain elevated in the $95–$100 per barrel range instead of easing meaningfully.”

‘ALL ISN’T LOST’
To be sure, market participants across asset classes expect the two-week time window to be fully utilised to hammer out a solution that is reasonably durable. “The market is cognisant of the fact that the current ceasefire expires on April 22. So there is still time for the parties involved to negotiate,” said Elios’ Chandak.

Some expect short sellers to return, pushing stock prices lower.

“The markets are expected to react negatively to the failure of talks and that is likely to imbue volatility,” said A Balasubramanian, managing director and CEO, Aditya Birla Sun Life AMC. “But typically, these dialogues involve a lot of back and forth and a strong outcome can’t be expected in a single day of talks.”

Some of the large foreign banks are trying a clever ploy to soften the blow from Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) sudden clampdown on speculative bets against the rupee.

They are understood to have passed off some of the arbitrage deals, which were hit by the recent regulatory directives, as transactions done to hedge the capital received from overseas parents, two persons told ET.

Arbitrage deals are cut to profit from price differences in the local foreign exchange forward market and the offshore market for non-deliverable forwards (NDFs).

Banks were forced to unwind these deals after the Indian regulator slapped a uniform limit of $100 mn on the net open position (NOP) a
bank can have onshore.

However, some MNC banks are showing the capital that has come in earlier or flowed in recently from their head-offices as underliers for the onshore forward leg in the arbitrage deals. Thus, this buy-dollar forward contract with a proper underlier is shown as a transaction to cover the risk arising from a slide in the rupee – and not as any part of an arbitrage deal.

Foreign banks function as branches in India which are part of the global books. The capital coming in as dollars or euros into an MNC bank’s India operations, are converted into rupees to support and grow the business here.
“Technically, this may be a response to the NOP limit. But whether this explanation would stand regulatory scrutiny is unclear as RBI may tend to look into the timeline – when the capital came in, when the forward deals were struck, which of these are now claimed as hedges, how they were accounted for, etc. Also, are there communications between India and the HQ to back the explanation?” said another person.THE NDF DEALS
When the rupee comes under pressure, banks cut arbitrage deals by buying dollar forward in India and selling dollar forward in the NDF market which has been flourishing in London, Singapore, Hong Kong, and New York since the ‘90s when foreign portfolio managers,hedge funds and others explored ways to bet on the USD-INR rate following partial convertibility of the rupee.

Typically, when geopolitical turmoil and sell off by foreign funds pulls down INR, the USD trades a little stronger (and INR quotes a tad weaker) in NDF compared to the onshore market. So, the USD-INR rate is higher in NDF than the forward USDINR rates in India.
MNC and Indian banks cash in on this by buying USD in the onshore forward market, and simultaneously selling USD-INR in the NDF market. Forward contracts with tenures of one to three months are the most liquid.

RBI came down heavily as the banks with their arb deals were providing liquidity to hedge funds and other international speculators who were shorting the INR. When these players shorted INR, they went long on USD and therefore bought USD-INR forward contracts in NDF. Their counterparties were the Indian banks selling USDINR forwards in the NDF – the offshore leg in the two-legged arbitrage deals.

REGULATORY BYPASS
The central bank, which rushed in with restrictions in two phases, had also taken an exception to the practice of corporates in India, who cannot access the NDF, using banks to enter the offshore market. Since USD-INR was slightly higher in NDF, large corporate exporters would sign forward deals with banks in India which did a backto-back deal in the NDF market to offer the companies rates that are very close to the NDF rate – thus, allowing clients to convert more rupees from their export proceeds. This partly shifted liquidity from the onshore to offshore market.

While a forex dealer or a corporate treasurer may find such company-bank-NDF deals kosher, legal practitioners would find them in violation of the central tenet of the Foreign Exchange Management Act: what cannot be done directly, cannot be done indirectly.