Most discussions about restructuring focus on the federal tax code. This is where buzzwords like IRC Section 368 and tax-free reorganization come into play.

What is often overlooked are the state and local tax bills that wouldn’t care if they were a Type A merger or Type C reorganization and send you a bill anyway.

How reorganization type shapes your local tax exposure

Under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 368, the major reorganization structures are defined, and each one of them has different local tax implications which are entirely untouched by federal deferral.

A Type A reorganization is a statutory merger or consolidation. While the federal requirements to obtain tax-free treatment are the most permissive of any structure – you can have boot with the shareholders and still qualify – a consolidation or merger of two legal entities will trigger real property transfer taxes. This may be based on the fair market value of the real estate or on the mortgage that encumbers it, but either way, it’s a potentially large hit. Most of the taxes of this type are based on equitable ownership of the property changing. That would trigger the tax and I don’t know of any way to get out of it, even if the transfer is tax-free for federal income tax purposes.

Type B reorganizations – stock-for-stock purchases – leave the target entity in place as a subsidiary, so there is no immediate transfer of assets. As a result, they cause the fewest local tax surprises, although one must always be careful of successor liability and nexus.

Type C reorganizations occur when the acquiring corporation obtains substantially all of the target’s assets. Here, thinking through local tax consequences is especially important because most asset transfers trigger sales tax on the tangible personal property involved. In many instances, intangibles that are transferred in connection with a sales transaction are also subject to sales tax, although the states may not advertise in advance that they will be looking for these.

Nexus follows people and property – even after a restructure

An unexpected restructuring surprise that is both relatively common and often underestimated is unwelcome nexus expansion.

Like with a competitor acquisition, the realization of new payroll tax filing obligations in multiple states and municipalities with no prior presence can easily cause panic. A remote team in three new states means three potential new nexus positions, plus the new city payroll and property taxes we’ll touch on shortly. A hotel room of a W-2 employee from the acquired company working in a new city will require local registration. Opening payroll tax accounts is a given. Had the target company established payroll/withholding nexus in multiple jurisdictions the acquirer did not know about? That doesn’t go away.

An unsung hero of state and local tax liabilities is property taxes or the gross receipts taxes often paid by businesses that lease property. Special care is needed to ensure potential exposures from the target’s operations are fully evaluated and considered. For example, filing dominion and control forms to report particular kinds of business personal property tax liabilities can be a particularly revealing methodology. Dozens of states still impose these taxes, many jurisdictions have ‘silent’ filings that expose operations you might have otherwise flown under the radar, and questions from tax authorities could generate queries that open audit pathways for years to come.

Entity conversions carry their own local tax penalties

Converting a business entity – an LLC to a C-Corporation, an S-Corporation to a C-Corporation – is often viewed as a non-event. From a local tax perspective, it’s anything but.

When a pass-through entity converts to a C-Corporation, deferred tax liabilities can accelerate immediately. Net operating loss carryforwards built up under the prior entity structure may not survive the conversion, depending on state rules. At the federal level, IRC Section 382 limits how NOLs can be used after an ownership change; a number of states apply comparable restrictions disqualifying local NOL carryforwards in their entirety.

The transition from pass-through to double taxation is also one deserving of special attention. Under a C-Corporation structure, income is first taxed at the entity level and again upon distribution to shareholders. For businesses operating in high-tax jurisdictions, this secondary tax multiplies fast.

The Pass-Through Entity Tax election available in most states does provide a partial solution – it lets eligible entities pay state income tax at the entity level, indirectly preserving the deduction at the federal level and bypassing the SALT cap. However, entities converting mid-year need to decide if they can still make this election and determine the timing implications.

How restructuring reshapes the apportionment formula

For companies operating in multiple jurisdictions, local corporate income taxes are determined by an apportionment formula – a mix of sales, property, and payroll. All three of these components can be impacted by a merger or acquisition. Post-deal, the acquiring company’s business may have more employees in a high-tax city, thus resulting in more income being apportioned to that jurisdiction. If the acquisition added real estate in another municipality, local taxable income is likely to increase there, too. A change in the sales factor – including all-important single-sales-factor jurisdictions – can have a major impact on the state in which the greatest part of taxable income is apportioned.

A higher overall local corporate tax bill may be in order, just because the apportionment factors have tilted a bit more in the taxing authority’s favor. A flat revenue company post purchase may still have millions of new tax exposure. The only way to effectively manage this risk is to complete accurate apportionment factor projections prior to completing the transaction.

The capitalization trap: what you can and cannot deduct

Legal fees, accounting fees, and advisory costs are often treated as current deductions in a corporate restructuring, but in many cases that’s incorrect. Under the more general Section 263(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, costs that facilitate a capital transaction have to be capitalized. The regulations say that the deductibility of costs that facilitate a capital transaction is governed by a facts-and-circumstances test and that the treatment of these fees is based on the nature of the underlying transaction.

For example, the regulations distinguish between costs incurred in investigating or otherwise pursuing the acquisition, creation, or organization of an entity and costs incurred while facilitating the acquisition. Investigative costs are sometimes currently deductible rather than capitalized, but costs facilitating a capital transaction are generally capitalizable once a transaction has been identified as a specific entity and negotiation and or decision to acquire that entity begin.

At the local level, the treatment gets more complicated. Some jurisdictions follow the federal rules on capitalization; others have their own standards. Deductions that are allowable federally may not flow through to the local return without adjustment. Businesses navigating this kind of cross-jurisdictional complexity are often best served by consulting the best CPA in Queens, NY, since the capitalization question has to be answered separately for each return.

Successor liability: the hidden debt that comes with the deal

When you acquire a company you also acquire exposure to the mistakes the target made in the past. For the most part, a buyer that purchases business assets without obtaining a proper series of clearance certificates becomes legally responsible for the seller’s unpaid taxes – sales taxes, payroll taxes, franchise taxes, local business taxes.

This is known as successor liability and it’s not just a concept. Acquiring entities for predecessor tax debts are aggressively pursued by tax officials. The series of clearance certificates where the state or municipality certifies that there are no unpaid taxes is the protection, but it takes time and must be requested and received prior to closing the transaction. If the timeline doesn’t permit this request or response, then there is an escrow holdback covering the estimated tax exposure.

The majority of acquiring companies first request tax returns and then request the backup documentation to the return to support the filed numbers. In some cases, acquisitions happen before the first tax returns are filed. For those acquisitions, a charge or return for informative research with the major tax jurisdictions for the preceding five years is part of due diligence. The clearance certificate is specific that all applicable returns have been filed, which is why there are frequently late-stage filings post-transaction close.

NYC’s dual tax system requires parallel planning tracks

Businesses operating in New York City face a tax environment that runs on two tracks simultaneously. The New York City General Corporation Tax applies to corporations doing business, owning property, or employing capital within the five boroughs. The Unincorporated Business Tax applies to partnerships and sole proprietors. These are separate tax systems with separate rates, separate filing requirements, and separate administrative rules.

During a corporate restructuring, both can be implicated at once. If the transaction involves entities taxed under the GCT and others subject to the UBT, the combined entity may have obligations under both regimes in the transition year. Local tax auditors are particularly focused on the final returns of dissolved or merged entities – those returns attract scrutiny for constructive dividends, improper expense allocations, and deductions that don’t hold up under local rules.

Localized compliance burdens in environments like New York City can create effective tax rate differences of 5% to 8% compared to neighboring jurisdictions in the same metropolitan area. That kind of variance means that where exactly a business is registered and operating matters as much as how it’s structured. Working with advisors who know the GCT and UBT mechanics is essential during a complex corporate transition, because generalists will miss things that show up later as penalties and back taxes.

Post-restructure audits are more targeted than most people expect

Local tax collectors don’t tend to go easier on restructured entities than they go on operating concerns. When a business terminates, joins itself to another, or changes its legal form, those final tax filings are apt to be subjected to more audit rather than less.

Auditors review transfer pricing to see if deductions or income were inappropriately pushed into the returning entity’s final return. Deductions of costs or losses taken in the liquidation year that should have been capital or spread over a longer period into ongoing businesses. Income deferred beyond the point when the entity’s founders lost the power to declare it. Particularly in closely held firms associated with retirement of the owners, constructive dividends.

The best protection is documentation. Keep meticulous records for costs, categories of business expenses, and the like. During a restructuring event, add solid evidence of what each expense item brought to the company – whether it was an ordinary and necessary business expense for the year in question, or had a direct effect on income, whether for laying foundations for future profit and loss, and so on. Build that paper trail sooner than later.

Corporate restructuring creates real value when it’s executed well. The federal mechanics get the most planning attention, but the local and municipal layer is where the unexpected costs live – and where thorough, jurisdiction-specific advice pays for itself several times over.

Most small businesses do not lose customers because their product is impossible to understand. They lose them because the first few minutes feel harder than they should.

A visitor lands on a website, sees too many options, cannot work out the next step and leaves. The same thing happens in shops, apps, subscription services and even B2B sales. People do not always reject an offer because it is poor. Sometimes they simply run out of patience before they understand its value.

Gaming businesses have spent years dealing with this problem. They know that a player who feels confused in the opening minutes may never return. The lesson for UK SMEs is not to turn every product into a game. It is to make the path from interest to action clearer.

The first few minutes matter more than most businesses admit

A game has a limited window to explain itself. Players need to understand the controls, the purpose and the reward for continuing. If the introduction gives them too much information at once, they stop. If it gives them too little, they do not know what to do.

The same principle applies to a business website. A homepage should answer three basic questions quickly:

• What does this business offer?
• Who is it for?
• What should I do next?

Many SMEs make this harder by trying to say everything at once. They use long introductions, several competing calls to action and broad claims that could apply to any company in the sector. A visitor should not need to scroll through half a page to learn what the business actually does.

A clearer approach works better. State the offer in plain English. Give the visitor one sensible next step. Then provide more detail for people who want it.

That is not about reducing a business to a slogan. It is about respecting the fact that people make quick decisions online.

Too much choice can make people do nothing

More options do not always lead to more sales. If every option appears equally important, customers may delay a decision or abandon the process entirely.

Gaming platforms handle this by grouping choices in ways that make sense to the user. A person does not need to see every possible title or format at once. They need a route that helps them find what they came for.

The same thinking can help almost any small business. A tradesperson might divide services by property type or job size. A marketing agency could separate its support for start-ups, growing firms and established companies. A retailer may help shoppers browse by occasion, budget or need rather than by a long list of product names.

Clear categories do not limit choice. They make choice manageable.

The wording matters too. Labels should be obvious. A category called “Solutions” may sound polished, but it tells customers very little. “Bookkeeping for small businesses” or “Emergency plumbing repairs” tells them exactly where to go.

Good navigation gives people confidence

Customers are more likely to continue when they understand where they are and what happens next. This is one reason clear navigation matters so much.

A platform that separates online slots, online roulette and Megaways slots gives visitors a straightforward way to find a familiar type of game instead of searching through an unstructured list. The same rule applies outside gaming. People should not have to guess which page contains the information they need.

For SMEs, this often means reviewing the website from the customer’s point of view rather than the owner’s. Business owners already know how their services fit together. New visitors do not.

Ask a few simple questions:

• Can someone find the main service in one or two clicks?
• Do page headings match the words customers use?
• Is the contact route easy to spot?
• Does each page explain what happens after an enquiry?

If the answer to any of these is no, the site may be creating work for the customer before the business has earned their trust.

Feedback makes people more likely to continue

Games are good at showing progress. A player can see that they have completed a task, learned a new skill or moved closer to a goal. That feeling encourages them to keep going.

Businesses can use the same principle without adding points, badges or gimmicks. Customers simply need reassurance that their action has worked.

After someone completes an enquiry form, tell them when they can expect a reply. After they place an order, make the delivery process clear. After they sign up for a service, explain the next stage in simple terms.

Silence creates uncertainty. A customer who submits their details and receives no confirmation may wonder if the form worked. A client who has paid an invoice but receives no update may question what happens next. These are small moments, but they shape how reliable a business feels.

The best customer journeys make progress visible. They do not leave people guessing.

Return visits have to be earned

Many businesses spend heavily on finding new customers, then give little thought to the experience after the first purchase. That is expensive and short-sighted.

Games understand that people return when there is a reason to return. It may be new content, a challenge, a social connection or the simple feeling that progress has not been lost. The equivalent for a small business might be useful follow-up, reliable service or a reason to buy again.

A local retailer could send a helpful reminder when a product needs replacing. A service business could offer an annual check-up. A software provider could explain a useful feature that customers may have missed. The key is relevance.

Not every message needs to be a sales pitch. In fact, repeated sales messages can weaken the relationship if they arrive without a clear reason. Customers remember businesses that make their lives easier, not businesses that only contact them when they want another payment.

Data should explain behaviour, not replace judgement

Gaming companies watch how players move through a product. They look at where people stop, which features they use and what brings them back. SMEs can learn from that, even with far smaller budgets.

Website analytics, customer questions and sales conversations can reveal where people become uncertain. If many visitors leave from the same page, the problem may be unclear wording or a missing piece of information. If customers repeatedly ask the same question before buying, the answer should probably be easier to find.

Data is useful when it leads to a practical change. It is less useful when it becomes a collection of numbers with no action behind it.

A small business does not need a complex dashboard to improve. It may only need to notice that people struggle with a booking form, do not understand pricing or cannot find a phone number on mobile.

The aim is not to make business childish

There is a temptation to talk about “gamification” whenever games and business appear in the same conversation. That often leads to pointless features: badges nobody wants, loyalty systems that are too complicated and rewards that do not match what customers value.

The better lesson is simpler. Make the customer’s next step obvious. Remove avoidable confusion. Give people useful feedback. Make a return visit feel worthwhile.

UK SMEs do not need to copy the gaming industry. They can learn from its understanding of attention. When people know what to do, why it matters and what happens next, they are far more likely to stay.

The story that stuck to retail investors after 2021 was one of impulse: crowded trades, meme stocks, and money chasing momentum. Several years on, that picture looks out of date.

Individual investors now account for a substantial share of daily market activity in major economies, and the way they behave has shifted from opportunistic to deliberate. Understanding that shift is becoming essential for anyone building the platforms these investors use.

The Retail Investor Has Changed

The evidence points to a more disciplined participant, not necessarily a quieter one. Market commentary through the back half of 2025 described retail investors as “getting smarter” and increasingly resistant to panic, delivering one of their strongest years yet by buying dips with conviction through repeated bouts of policy-driven volatility rather than selling into fear. Professionals who once dismissed the group as easily rattled are now building that behaviour into their own models.

That is a different story from the old stereotype. It is not blind headline-chasing; it is a repeatable read on how quickly shocks tend to pass, applied with more consistency than casual trading usually allows. Younger cohorts are the most engaged of all, and they are arriving with more financial knowledge than previous generations did at the same age.

That maturity changes what a platform is expected to be. A tool built for a quick, single-market punt is a poor fit for someone managing a considered, ongoing portfolio across months and years.

Diversification Has Become a Habit

The clearest sign of the change is how widely people now spread their money. The old default of a simple stock-and-bond mix is giving way to a broader toolkit: commodities such as gold have drawn renewed attention as a way to balance currency and policy uncertainty.

What matters is the intent behind it. Diversification is increasingly used as a risk-management strategy, a way to hold different kinds of exposure that behave differently, not simply a hunt for the next winner. For a platform, that raises the bar: covering one asset class is no longer enough when the user is deliberately working across several.

Confidence Is the New Bottleneck

If access to markets has widened, confidence has not kept pace. Research from the World Economic Forum identifieseducation, trust, and guidance as the levers that decide whether people participate successfully, rather than sheer availability of products. The same work points to contextual, personalised guidance across the whole investing journey as one of the most effective ways to build lasting confidence.

The Forum frames access, education, trust, and incentives as the four levers that shape whether participation lasts, and it is the last three, not raw access, where most of the work now sits. Younger investors in particular arrive expecting the platform to help them learn as they go, not just to execute their instructions.

That is the gap the current generation of platforms is being measured against. Opening the door is straightforward; helping someone walk through it and stay is harder, and it is where design, education, and support start to matter more than any single feature.

What Experts at ImVivo Take From This

Experts at ImVivo read these trends as a mandate rather than a marketing opportunity. Their view is that a platform serving the matured retail investor has to pair genuine breadth with structure: multiple asset classes in one place, but wrapped in reporting, education, and guidance that help users make sense of what they are holding.

That thinking is visible in how the platform is put together. It spans currencies, commodities, equities, market benchmarks, and store-of-value instruments, and organises the experience through a tiered structure that scales guidance alongside involvement.

Analyst access, educational material, and steady reporting sit next to the market tools, and a security framework built on encryption, two-factor authentication, and cold storage underpins the whole thing. Experts at ImVivo describe the aim as helping people participate with more clarity, a professional and increasingly necessary position for a multi-asset provider to take.

The Direction of Travel

The lesson of the past year is that the retail investor is no longer a stereotype to be entertained but a serious, diversified participant to be equipped.

Experts at ImVivo expect the platforms that endure to be the ones that treat guidance and education as core infrastructure rather than optional extras, and that keep breadth and support moving in step. On the current evidence, that is where the market is heading, and the providers reading the shift correctly will be the ones that matured investors choose to stay with.

The government began its free product scheme in October 2022, providing sanitary items in a range of locations including public toilets and government buildings.

In exchange, it reversed its decision to remove the GST.

Millar said there was no need to remove tax from products in the shops as people could get them for free instead.

She said: “If you look at simple facts, simple maths, if you’re spending £5 a month on sanitary products, taking GST off, if the saving was passed on, would save you 25 pence.

“With free products, you’re saving £5 because you’re getting the entire product free.

“I don’t think it would be effective and, if people have issue with affordability and accessibility, we have resolved that by the free product scheme.”

The only goods and services which are exempt from GST are: financial services, insurance, postal services, medical supplies, medicines on prescription, supplies by charities, registered child​care, some burial and cremation services, and school fees.

To an outsider, the review process behind a property development website can appear excessive. Drafts circulate for months. New versions arrive weekly.

Comments accumulate from architects, sales agents, marketing teams, lawyers, development managers, and executives. Images are replaced, floor plans revised, disclaimers updated, and project timelines adjusted. Long before the public ever visits the website, hundreds of individual reviews may already have taken place.

It is tempting to interpret this as indecision or perfectionism. In reality, it reflects something much more significant.

A property development website is rarely just a marketing asset. It becomes the operational meeting point for an entire project. Every discipline involved in bringing a development to market eventually intersects with the website because it is where commercial messaging, technical information, legal obligations, and buyer expectations all converge.

That is why reviewing the website is never simply about correcting spelling mistakes or improving layouts. It is about coordinating a constantly changing development while ensuring that every public-facing detail remains accurate, commercially effective, and internally consistent.

The complexity has very little to do with web design. It has everything to do with managing information across an organisation where dozens of people own different parts of the same story.

A Development Website Mirrors a Living Project

Unlike the websites of many established businesses, a property development website represents something that is still evolving.

Planning approvals may alter apartment layouts. Engineering requirements can affect building specifications. Landscape concepts mature as consultants refine designs. Construction milestones shift because of weather, contractor availability, or regulatory approvals. Marketing campaigns evolve in response to buyer demand, while pricing strategies are adjusted as sales progress through different release stages.

Every one of these changes has consequences beyond the project team itself.

A revised floor plan might require updates to downloadable brochures, apartment selectors, enquiry forms, display suite materials, advertising campaigns, and investor presentations. A small amendment to completion dates can affect website copy, social media scheduling, media releases, and automated email sequences.

This is one of the defining characteristics of property development. The website is not documenting a finished product. It is documenting a project that continues to change while being marketed to the public.

Review cycles therefore become part of project delivery rather than a final quality assurance exercise.

Every Stakeholder Is Reviewing a Different Project

One of the reasons property websites generate so many revisions is that no two reviewers are looking for the same thing.

Marketing teams examine whether the project narrative is compelling enough to generate enquiries.

Sales teams compare website messaging with the conversations they are having every day inside display suites.

Architects scrutinise plans, elevations, terminology, and visual accuracy.

Development managers focus on construction milestones and project sequencing.

Legal advisers assess disclosures, planning references, and contractual language.

Finance teams may review investment messaging or pricing information.

External agencies check branding, photography, advertising consistency, and campaign execution.

Each stakeholder approaches the same website with a completely different definition of quality.

An architect may identify inaccuracies that buyers would never notice. A sales consultant immediately recognises questions that repeatedly arise during inspections. Legal teams focus on reducing regulatory exposure. Marketing teams care about clarity, engagement, and conversion.

None of these perspectives compete with each other. They simply represent different responsibilities within the broader commercial process.

This explains why large property launches often generate hundreds of review comments. The volume is not evidence of confusion. It is evidence of organisational complexity.

Most Review Cycles Are Actually Coordination Cycles

One of the most misunderstood aspects of property marketing is the assumption that website reviews exist primarily to improve design.

In practice, many review rounds have very little to do with visual presentation.

A comment about apartment numbering may uncover inconsistencies between architectural documentation and sales brochures.

Questions about amenities may reveal that product positioning has shifted since the original marketing strategy was developed.

A discussion about investment messaging may expose unresolved commercial decisions between finance, sales, and executive leadership.

Website reviews frequently become the place where organisations discover that different departments are working from slightly different versions of reality.

This creates an operational contradiction that experienced developers recognise immediately.

The closer a project moves towards launch, the less tolerance exists for uncertainty. At exactly the same time, the number of people involved in decision making usually reaches its highest point.

Every additional reviewer improves accuracy.

Every additional reviewer also increases coordination.

That is why the largest bottlenecks rarely emerge from technical production. They emerge from aligning decisions across specialists who all possess legitimate authority over different parts of the project.

As McKinsey has frequently observed, organisational performance increasingly depends on cross-functional coordination rather than individual excellence. Property development illustrates this principle exceptionally well. Successful launches depend less on any single department than on the quality of communication between them.

The Greatest Risk Is Losing Context Between Reviews

Collecting feedback has never been particularly difficult.

Managing it is another matter entirely.

Comments arrive through email, PDFs, spreadsheets, messaging platforms, video calls, phone conversations, and meeting notes. Different stakeholders review different versions of the website at different times. Some comments are duplicated, others contradict previous decisions, and many lose the explanation that originally made them meaningful.

Eventually, project managers begin spending more time interpreting feedback than coordinating delivery.

This creates what might be called “context erosion.”

Information does not disappear.

It becomes separated from the reason it existed in the first place.

A request to change a headline may have originated from legal advice. A revised floor plan may reflect planning approval conditions rather than a design preference. Weeks later, that context is often missing, leaving teams to revisit conversations that had already been resolved.

One of the clearest signs of operational maturity is recognising that website reviews are not simply about capturing comments. They are about preserving context while information moves between specialists. This is why many developers and their agencies have adopted online proofing workflows that keep feedback connected directly to website content, making it easier for every participant to understand not only what changed, but why it changed.

Technology alone does not solve coordination problems. However, preserving context dramatically reduces the amount of interpretation required before productive work can begin.

The Best Property Launches Are Built on Review Systems, Not Heroic Effort

The smoothest property launches often look effortless.

Websites appear polished. Information feels consistent. Marketing campaigns align perfectly with display suites, brochures, and advertising. Buyers experience confidence because every touchpoint tells the same story.

Behind that experience is rarely a team that made fewer revisions.

It is usually a team whose review process allowed hundreds of revisions to happen without losing control of the project.

That distinction matters.

Many organisations assume operational maturity means reducing review cycles. In reality, large developments will always require extensive review because they involve extensive expertise. The objective is not fewer reviews. The objective is better coordination between them.

As projects become larger, stakeholder groups become more specialised, and buyers expect increasingly accurate digital experiences, review systems become a strategic capability rather than an administrative process.

Implementing structured online proofing is one reflection of that broader shift. Property developers are discovering that the quality of a launch depends less on how quickly comments are collected and more on how effectively information moves between the people responsible for turning those comments into confident commercial decisions.

Ultimately, successful property websites are not built through perfect design alone. They are built through hundreds of well-coordinated decisions that allow architects, marketers, lawyers, sales teams, consultants, and executives to contribute their expertise without losing sight of the project as a whole. In property development, the website is often the last thing buyers see before making an enquiry, but it is also one of the first places an organisation discovers whether its internal communication is truly working.

I was keen to find out what the younger generation think, so spoke to a group of students.

Jess Rolf, 23, says having children was “never something she worried about”, and trying to build a settled life was “very stressful with the cost of living and the job market”.

“I’m from Lincolnshire and people my age back home are buying houses with their partners and talking about starting families.

“I don’t think that’s on the cards for me.”

Charlotte Ward, 26, has said planning ahead is difficult.

“A lot of people our age are quite disenfranchised.

“You put all your energy into school, university and work, then wonder, ‘do I want to bring somebody else into that if I can’t even support myself right now?’

“When parents or grandparents ask ‘what happens when you have children?’, I can say, ‘I might not’.

“There’s a small element of emancipation from the expectation that you definitely will have children but if I’m progressing in my career and my male counterparts don’t have to take time out to have a child, that could put me at a disadvantage.”

Millicent Angel, 24, says it is hard to envisage a future when the world feels “so unstable” but she still definitely wants children.

She adds there’s “a million and one things” she would like to do first, including developing her career.

This article was written by

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

Shares of Vedanta Oil & Gas fell as much as 3.4% to their day’s low of Rs 33.66 on the BSE on Wednesday after the company disclosed two separate legal matters involving the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited (ONGC) and the Directorate General of Hydrocarbons (DGH), Government of India.

In the first matter, the company said it had received demand letters from the DGH regarding four blocks awarded under the Open Acreage Licensing Policy (OALP) bidding rounds. According to the company, DGH has not granted further extensions for the four blocks and has sought payment of liquidated damages along with applicable interest.

Vedanta said it believes it has valid grounds in the matter and is pursuing appropriate legal remedies available. The company has also requested DGH to refer the matter to the Committee for External Eminent Experts (CEEE) for resolution through conciliation or mediation.

Also read: Vedanta Aluminium vs Power vs Oil & Gas vs Iron & Steel: Which stock should you buy?The company said the financial impact, if any, arising from the DGH matter will be assessed and accounted for, as required, based on the outcome of the proceedings and in accordance with applicable accounting standards. The aggregate amount claimed by DGH is approximately $35 million plus interest.

Vedanta Oil & Gas and ONGC

In a separate disclosure, the company said it had received a copy of an enforcement petition filed by ONGC before the Delhi High Court seeking enforcement of an arbitral award dated July 31, 2023, arising from arbitration proceedings between ONGC and Vedanta Limited.

At a hearing on July 20, the Delhi High Court issued a notice to the company to file its reply. No interim adverse order has been passed against the company, and the next hearing is scheduled for September 11, 2026.
The arbitral award relates to an amount of approximately $37 million applicable to Vedanta Limited and its subsidiaries. The company said the amount has already been provided for in its books of account. Vedanta is evaluating the matter and said it will pursue appropriate legal remedies.

Crisil upgrades Vedanta Oil & Gas

Earlier this week, Vedanta Oil and Gas Ltd’s long-term rating was upgraded to CRISIL AA+/Stable from CRISIL A+/Watch Developing, while its short-term rating was withdrawn.
CRISIL said the upgrade factors in the company’s stronger business and financial risk profile following the transfer of Vedanta’s oil and gas undertaking into the company as part of the demerger. Vedanta Oil and Gas is one of India’s largest private-sector oil and gas producers, operating 44 blocks covering more than 47,000 square kilometres and producing approximately 87 kilo barrels of oil equivalent per day (kboepd) in fiscal 2026.

Read more: Vedanta shares drop 26% in two months, erase all post-demerger gains. Time to buy or better to avoid?

The rating agency said the company benefits from a healthy reserve base, established producing assets and a competitive operating cost structure. More than 80% of production comes from its Rajasthan assets, while operating efficiency remains strong, supported by first-quartile operating costs and the production-sharing contract framework.

(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times)