This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of SPY, VOO either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. 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.

NAAS, IRELAND — Upcycling may become more widespread across the food and beverage industry as the process gains recognition as a cost-savings and value-adding measure for more volatile supply chains.

“Upcycling historically has been for sustainability purposes, but I think with the resource challenges that we are seeing upcycling is not just for that,” said Zareena Valappil, PhD, vice president of global citrus at Kerry. “For me, it is an innovation space where we are looking at other side streams, which were historically considered as waste, where we can upcycle them to create value-added products.”

Valappil said Kerry is putting upcycling to the test in the citrus segment, where growing challenges have led to significant reductions in output. For instance, in Florida, one of the main producers of oranges for fruit and juice applications, orange production has declined approximately 92% over the last two decades, according to the US Department of Agriculture’s Economic Research Service. Plant diseases and hurricanes are among the primary causes of the output decline.

“Citrus is very sensitive to weather, so if you get very high temperatures or very short cold seasons during the maturing season of the citrus groves, early fruit drop can happen,” Valappil said. “When (early) drop situations happen, we see the total number of crop that’s available from a certain grove during that year drops as well.”

Infected trees

However, the most important factor in the citrus decline is citrus greening disease, Valappil said. The disease comes from a bacterium that is carried by the citrus psyllid, a small plant-feeding insect.

“When it infects the tree, the citrus grove, the bacterium constricts the phloem,” she said. “That’s the nutritional channel of the tree, so the tree is not able to absorb nutrition and is not able to provide you with mature fruit. So, the citrus fruits that are growing on these groves, they are not fully developed. They are very sour, (there’s) less sweetness, even the flavor profile is not fully developed.”

Amid the various production issues facing the citrus supply chain, Kerry has explored upcycling as a method to improve the supply availability and stability of certain citrus ingredients. The company has identified byproducts and molecules that can be upcycled into natural citrus solutions, such as turning pulp waste into fiber texturing agents in dairy alternatives and sauces or extracting leftover taste molecules from peel waste.

“What we do with our extraction capability is identify what are the good products in there, and we extract those out and concentrate them into upcycled or value-added materials, which can be used in delivering the citrus taste,” Valappil said.

Citrus extenders

One cost-saving measure that Kerry has developed is a line of citrus extenders, a flavor solution that offers a one-to-one replacement for citrus oils.

“Citrus flavors typically depend on a lot of the citrus oils, which comes from processing of the fruit, and with the challenges of greening … the citrus oil quality is declining, availability is declining, as well as the price of these products are high,” Valappil said. “To mitigate that, we have developed these sustainable citrus extenders, which incorporate upcycled materials as well as materials from biotechnology.”

Photo: ©JACKF – STOCK.ADOBE.COM

Another upcycling application is Kerry’s JuiceXcel system. The platform uses an upcycled concentrated juice solution and the company’s existing taste technologies to replicate the mouthfeel, taste, aroma and acidity of citrus juice concentrates. The solution can result in an up to 40% reduction in carbon emissions, 60% less water use, and 40% reduction in sugar and caloric content, according to Kerry.

“JuiceXcel is a very concentrated system, so it’s not like a one-to-one use level as a regular or FTNF (from the named fruit) juice concentrate, and because it’s concentrated, its use level is lower in applications,” Valappil said. “So, if you’re replacing 50% of juice, you only need 5% to 10% of JuiceXcel in that beverage, and therefore it helps in reducing the sugar content of that product, thereby reducing the calorie input into that final beverage.”

Alongside the citrus segment, upcycling has gained momentum in other vulnerable supply chains, such as cocoa.

“We’ve seen that there’ve been other areas where these types of technologies have been used, especially in cocoa, where people have looked at upcycling the byproducts after extraction of cocoa extracts,” Valappil said. “Obviously, it has a broader scope across different other vulnerable crops as well.”

Valappil noted that while upcycling has great potential for alleviating some supply chain issues, the practice is not a full-scale solution to the issues facing citrus.

“Upcycling is a very relevant and powerful and strong tool, but it doesn’t solve all the problems that we have,” she said. “Upcycling is more for improving resource utilization, but it cannot completely offset the challenges of supply shortage or quality impact that’s currently impacting citrus fruits.” 

SYDNEY — Separation can raise difficult questions about children, property, finances, housing and the future of a family. For couples in Australia, the legal process does not necessarily begin with divorce. In many cases, important decisions about parenting and finances need to be addressed while the couple is separated but still legally married.

Australian family law has also changed in recent years. Since June 2025, significant amendments have changed the way courts approach property disputes, including the treatment of family violence and financial abuse.

Understanding what happens after separation can help couples make informed decisions and avoid costly mistakes.

Separation is not the same as divorce

The first point to understand is that separation and divorce are different legal events.

A couple can separate without immediately applying for a divorce. Divorce is the legal ending of a marriage, while separation is the point at which the relationship has ended.

Australia operates under a no-fault divorce system. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia says the court does not consider why a marriage ended when deciding whether to grant a divorce. The key requirement is that the marriage has broken down and there is no reasonable likelihood that the couple will resume married life.

Generally, a person must have been separated for at least 12 months before applying for divorce. In some circumstances, couples can be separated while continuing to live under the same roof, although additional information may be required.

Importantly, couples do not have to wait for a divorce before resolving property or parenting issues.

What happens to the children?

For separated parents, decisions about children are often the most important part of the process.

Parents may agree on arrangements themselves, including where children live, how they spend time with each parent, schooling, holidays, medical decisions and communication.

Australian family law focuses on the best interests of the child. Recent changes have also altered aspects of the parenting framework, including removing the previous requirement for parents and courts to consider equal or substantial and significant time as a particular starting point.

Parents can make their own parenting arrangements, but agreements can take different legal forms.

A parenting plan can record an agreement between parents. Parenting orders, on the other hand, are orders made by a court and can provide an enforceable legal framework.

The Attorney-General’s Department says many separated parents prefer to reach agreement themselves because it can reduce time, expense and stress for both parents and children.

If parents cannot agree, family dispute resolution is generally an important step before going to court. The Family Law Act requires separating and separated families involved in parenting disputes to make a genuine effort to resolve the dispute through family dispute resolution, unless an exception applies. Exceptions can include situations involving family violence, child abuse or urgency.

How is property divided after separation?

Property settlement is another major issue.

The property pool can include the family home, investment properties, bank accounts, shares, businesses, vehicles and other assets. Debts and liabilities must also be considered.

Superannuation can be particularly important. The Attorney-General’s Department says superannuation is treated as property under the Family Law Act 1975 and can be divided between separating couples under superannuation-splitting laws.

There is no automatic rule that says a separating couple must divide everything 50-50.

Where a court determines a property dispute, it must identify the parties’ property and liabilities, assess their contributions, consider their current and future circumstances and determine whether the proposed outcome is just and equitable.

That assessment can involve financial contributions, non-financial contributions, homemaking and parenting contributions, as well as the future needs of each person.

Family violence can affect property settlements

One of the most significant recent developments in Australian family law concerns family violence.

Changes that took effect on June 10, 2025, expressly require the economic effect of family violence to be considered where relevant in property and financial matters. The changes also clarify that economic or financial abuse can constitute family violence.

Economic abuse can take different forms. It may involve controlling a partner’s access to money, restricting their ability to work or controlling spending and financial decisions.

The effect of family violence may be relevant when assessing contributions to the property pool or considering a person’s current and future circumstances.

The changes do not mean that every property dispute involving allegations of family violence will automatically result in a particular percentage division. The circumstances of each case still matter.

Couples have a duty to disclose financial information

Separating couples dealing with property disputes are required to provide relevant financial information and documents.

Since June 10, 2025, the duty of financial disclosure has been included directly in the Family Law Act rather than existing only in the procedural rules. The duty is ongoing and applies to financial and property disputes following separation.

This means a person should not assume that assets or financial information can simply be kept out of negotiations.

Failure to comply can have serious consequences. The Attorney-General’s Department says courts can take non-compliance into account, make costs orders and, in serious cases, impose other sanctions.

For separating couples, gathering documents early can therefore be important. Relevant records may include bank statements, tax returns, property documents, superannuation information, loan records, business documents and other evidence of assets and liabilities.

Do couples have to go to court?

No.

Many separating couples resolve their financial and parenting disputes without a contested court hearing.

For property matters, couples can negotiate directly or use lawyers, mediation or other dispute-resolution processes. Where an agreement is reached, the parties may be able to formalise it through consent orders or another appropriate legal arrangement.

The federal government also provides information about amica, an online dispute-resolution service designed to help some couples reach agreements about property and parenting issues with minimal assistance.

Court proceedings may become necessary when negotiations fail, there are serious disputes about children or finances, or safety concerns require court intervention.

Time limits can become a major issue

Separating couples should not assume they have unlimited time to resolve financial matters.

For married couples, applications for property or financial orders generally must be made within 12 months after the divorce becomes final. For eligible de facto relationships, the usual time limit is two years from the breakdown of the relationship.

A court can grant permission to make an application outside the relevant period in some circumstances, but permission is not guaranteed.

This makes it important to obtain legal advice before assuming that an informal agreement has permanently resolved a couple’s financial relationship.

What about child support?

Child support is generally dealt with separately from a property settlement.

Services Australia administers Australia’s child support system, and parents can make arrangements for financial support of their children through the child support framework.

Child support and parenting arrangements are related but legally distinct issues. Reaching an agreement about where children live does not necessarily determine how much child support is payable.

What should someone do immediately after separation?

There is no single checklist that works for every family, but several practical steps can help.

A person separating from a partner should consider documenting the date of separation, securing copies of important financial records and reviewing bank accounts, debts, property ownership and superannuation.

Parents should also focus on creating stable arrangements for children and avoid involving children in adult disputes.

If family violence is present, safety should come first. Legal and support options can differ depending on the circumstances, and urgent legal advice may be appropriate.

Most importantly, people should avoid signing significant financial documents or transferring major assets without understanding the legal consequences.

The bottom line

Separation in Australia does not automatically mean going to court or immediately getting divorced.

For many couples, the process involves resolving several separate issues: parenting, child support, property, debts, superannuation and, eventually, divorce if the parties are married.

The law has also changed. Since June 2025, courts must apply a revised framework to property disputes, including considering the economic effect of family violence where relevant and applying a statutory duty of financial disclosure.

For couples who can reach a safe and informed agreement, negotiation and dispute resolution may provide a faster and less expensive alternative to litigation. Where agreement is not possible, legal advice can help a person understand their options and the deadlines that may apply.

Family law is highly dependent on individual circumstances. Anyone facing separation should consider obtaining independent legal advice before making major decisions about children, property or finances.

Skip To Content

More than £310,000 has been given to help families with back to school costs, the government has said.

Its Back to School Bonus was offered as a one-off payment of up to £150 towards uniforms,  stationery and other essentials for children from reception to Year 11 for families which earn less than £75,000.

The Social Security department said it had approved 2,552 payments for 1,450 primary school pupils and 1,102 secondary school pupils for the start of the upcoming term.

The bonuses come at the same time as a new school uniform policy, which limits States schools to five branded uniform items per child, to help parents save money.

Shares of Sandisk Corporation climbed 3.49%, or $54.82, to $1,623.69 as of 10:46 a.m. EDT Thursday, extending a historic rally that has made the flash memory maker the best-performing stock in the S&P 500 this year, even as the shares remain volatile day to day amid one of the most dramatic single-year runs in recent market history.

Sandisk’s stock has surged roughly 653% so far in 2026, according to FX Leaders, a run driven primarily by surging demand for NAND flash memory used in artificial intelligence data center infrastructure. The stock touched a 52-week high of $2,354.39 on June 22 before pulling back, and even after Thursday’s gains remains nearly 20% to a third below that peak, illustrating both the scale of the rally and the significant volatility that has accompanied it in recent weeks.

The company’s transformation from a traditional NAND flash supplier into what investors increasingly view as core AI infrastructure has been central to the stock’s re-rating. According to FX Leaders, the combination of a bullish Investor Day presentation, new U.S. restrictions on Chinese memory suppliers, and continued confidence in AI infrastructure spending has driven the shift in how the market values the company. Sandisk’s high-bandwidth flash technology has drawn particular attention from analysts; a five-star-rated Bernstein analyst described the technology as a “game changer for AI” in comments reported by TipRanks earlier this month, helping fuel a 3.5% jump in the stock at the time.

At its 2026 Investor Day, Sandisk outlined an ambitious long-term financial roadmap, projecting mid-to-high-teens annual revenue growth from fiscal 2028 through fiscal 2030, alongside a targeted non-GAAP gross margin of approximately 80% and a non-GAAP operating margin near 75%, according to Investing.com. The company also disclosed fiscal fourth-quarter 2026 revenue of $8.965 billion on Aug. 5, with full-year data center revenue surging 437% year over year. Earlier this month, Sandisk added $14 billion to its share repurchase authorization, bringing its total exercisable buyback limit to $15.5 billion, a significant capital return commitment that has further reinforced investor confidence in the company’s cash flow generation.

Wall Street analysts have responded to the company’s improving fundamentals with a wave of price target increases. According to FX Leaders, J.P. Morgan resumed coverage of Sandisk with an Overweight rating and a $2,250 price target, while Wedbush maintained an Outperform rating with a $2,000 target. Some 81% of analysts covering the stock now rate it a buy, according to the same report, marking the highest proportion of buy ratings the company has received since its spin-off from Western Digital. Separately, Investing.com reported that 20 analysts currently recommend buying the stock, against just one sell recommendation, with an average 12-month price target of $2,107.70, implying meaningful additional upside from current trading levels, though individual analyst targets vary widely, ranging as high as $3,600 and as low as $1,000.

Despite the bullish analyst consensus, some market observers have flagged the stock’s elevated valuation as a source of caution. FX Leaders noted that Sandisk, trading around $1,786.85 earlier in the week, carried a market capitalization of $280.5 billion on a price-to-earnings multiple of roughly 62 times, a valuation the report characterized as reflecting “excessively high expectations” alongside the market’s enthusiasm for the company’s structural shift toward AI infrastructure.

The stock’s day-to-day trading has remained highly volatile even amid its dramatic year-to-date gains. According to StockAnalysis, Sandisk and fellow memory chipmaker Micron Technology both fell sharply in premarket trading earlier this week, reversing a powerful rally from the prior session as investors trimmed exposure to what has become one of 2026’s hottest trading themes. CNBC’s Jim Cramer has pointed to a broader structural shift underpinning the volatility, arguing that the AI boom has transformed the historically cyclical memory chip industry, with surging demand and greater supply-side discipline among manufacturers supporting stronger and more durable profits than in past memory cycles.

Institutional investor interest in Sandisk has also drawn attention. According to StockAnalysis, Leopold Aschenbrenner’s investment fund, Situational Awareness, built stakes exceeding $5 billion combined in Sandisk and Micron before the fund encountered difficulties in July, an episode that nonetheless underscored the scale of institutional capital that has flowed into the memory chip trade this year. Separately, Morgan Stanley has offered a comparative analysis contrasting Sandisk with Nvidia, characterizing the two stocks’ respective ownership positioning within institutional portfolios as reflecting different stages of investor conviction in the broader AI trade.

Sandisk’s rise has been remarkably steady in its trajectory, if not always smooth session to session. The stock began 2026 trading around $235, following a strong 2025 in which the company’s shares had already returned 105% year-to-date by mid-February, according to earlier coverage from Barchart, driven at the time by expectations that Sandisk would double the price of its high-capacity 3D NAND memory devices amid surging AI-driven demand. By late February, the stock had climbed to $650, up 142% for the year at that point, according to TIKR’s analysis of the company’s blowout fiscal second-quarter results, which showed revenue of $3.03 billion, up 31% sequentially and 61% year over year, comfortably surpassing analyst estimates of $2.69 billion at the time.

As Sandisk approaches its next scheduled earnings report on Nov. 5, according to TradingView, investors are likely to continue closely watching whether the company’s aggressive long-term growth targets, robust data center demand, and expanded share buyback program can sustain the stock’s extraordinary valuation, particularly given the significant volatility that has periodically punctuated its rally throughout the year even as the broader upward trajectory has remained largely intact.

NEW YORK — The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 349.23 points, or 0.65%, to 53,113.82 as of 10:02 a.m. EDT Thursday, as disappointing sales guidance from retail giant Walmart, a rebound in Treasury yields and rising oil prices tied to escalating tensions with Iran combined to pressure markets in early trading.

Walmart shares tumbled nearly 6% in premarket trading despite the retailer beating Wall Street’s second-quarter earnings estimates, as investors focused instead on comparable sales growth that fell short of expectations. According to data compiled by LSEG and cited by TheStreet, Walmart’s quarterly U.S. same-store sales rose 2.6%, well below the 3.8% increase analysts had projected. Average ticket, or spending per transaction, grew just 1.1%, a sharp deceleration from the 3.1% increase recorded a year earlier. CNBC reported a similar shortfall relative to FactSet’s consensus estimate of 3.5% comparable sales growth. Earnings per share guidance for both the fiscal third quarter and the full year also came in below expectations, according to CNBC’s coverage.

Brian Jacobsen, chief economic strategist at Annex Wealth Management, offered a pointed characterization of what Walmart’s soft guidance might signal about the broader health of American consumer spending. “For the consumer economy, this is like Nvidia posting a slowdown,” Jacobsen told Reuters. “Walmart has been winning the trade-down trade, but that tailwind may be fading.”

Thursday’s declines extended a choppy stretch for U.S. equities that has been dominated by a tug-of-war in the bond market over the past several sessions. Treasury yields advanced Thursday, reversing the decline seen a day earlier after the Treasury Department announced plans to at least double its repurchases of 10-year, 20-year and 30-year government debt over the coming months, a move aimed at easing pressure on longer-dated bonds following a spike in the 30-year Treasury yield to its highest level in nearly two decades earlier in the week. Wednesday’s rally, driven by that buyback announcement alongside a dramatic surge in Moderna shares following positive cancer vaccine trial results, had briefly snapped a three-day losing streak across the major indexes, with the Dow and S&P 500 each closing up roughly 0.2% that session.

Rising oil prices added further pressure to Thursday’s trading, fueled by escalating tensions between the United States and Iran following the expiration of a 60-day negotiating window earlier in the week. Continued attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and broader uncertainty over the conflict’s trajectory have kept crude prices elevated, a dynamic that has weighed on broader market sentiment throughout the week even as individual stock-specific catalysts have periodically driven sharp counter-moves in either direction.

SpaceX shares fell 1.61% to $137.40 ahead of Thursday’s opening bell as the aerospace and artificial intelligence company’s second major post-IPO insider share unlock took effect, with up to 319 million restricted shares becoming eligible for sale, according to TheStreet.

Alibaba’s U.S.-listed shares fell nearly 3% Thursday after the Chinese technology giant reported a 75% drop in profits for its June quarter, a decline the company attributed to a sharp jump in spending on artificial intelligence infrastructure, according to CNBC.

Not every sector faced pressure Thursday. Cryptocurrency-related stocks moved higher, extending a rally in Bitcoin and ether tied to President Donald Trump’s continued push for Congress to pass crypto-friendly legislation. Coinbase and Mara Holdings each rose 6%, Strategy jumped roughly 10%, Circle Internet gained 5%, and American Bitcoin climbed nearly 7%, according to CNBC’s tracking of premarket movers.

Looking ahead to the coming week, investors are turning their attention to Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh’s upcoming speech at the Jackson Hole economic symposium. According to commentary from market strategist Hathorn cited by TheStreet, that speech represents “the next major test” for markets, with investors looking for clues on “whether the hawkish discussion revealed in the minutes translates into his own policy message, and whether he offers greater detail on his broader plans for the Fed.” The Fed’s meeting minutes, released Wednesday afternoon, showed several Federal Open Market Committee members had favored raising interest rates at the central bank’s most recent policy meeting, with some officials suggesting further rate increases could become necessary if inflation fails to moderate, according to Yahoo Finance’s coverage of the minutes.

Thursday’s economic calendar also includes the Conference Board’s Leading Economic Indicators reading for July, alongside earnings from a broad slate of companies including Walmart, Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba, agricultural equipment maker Deere, Chinese internet company NetEase and off-price retailer Ross Stores, according to Charles Schwab’s investor calendar.

The broader retail earnings picture heading into Thursday had shown some more encouraging signs a day earlier, with Target posting solid results and President Trump delaying planned tariffs against Canada, developments that had helped lift major indexes during Wednesday’s session even amid the ongoing bond market volatility, according to Schwab’s market commentary.

Full-year 2026 earnings growth estimates for the S&P 500 now exceed 30%, according to FXEmpire’s market analysis, with upward revisions broad-based across technology, commodity-related and economically sensitive sectors, and all sectors expected to post positive earnings growth for the year. That broader earnings optimism has provided a degree of underlying support for markets even as individual sessions, including Thursday’s, have shown significant volatility tied to specific company results and macroeconomic developments.

With Walmart’s disappointing guidance adding to a mixed picture painted by this week’s retail earnings season, alongside continued uncertainty in both the bond market and the geopolitical situation surrounding Iran, investors are likely to remain focused in the coming days on how the combination of consumer spending trends, Federal Reserve commentary and oil price volatility shapes market direction heading into next week’s Jackson Hole symposium, an event that has historically served as a significant venue for signaling shifts in U.S. monetary policy.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s reported return to Britain has prompted claims that the couple have picked the perfect moment to move for tax reasons, but a specialist has warned there is “no magic date in August” that allows anyone to come home without facing UK tax.

Harry and Meghan are expected to set up a private home outside London while keeping their properties in California and Portugal. Arriving partway through the tax year could offer some advantages, but Molly Monks, an insolvency specialist at Parker Walsh, said the move was far from a simple tax masterstroke.

“There is no magic date in August that allows someone to return to Britain without facing UK tax,” she said. “The rules consider how many days you spend here, where your homes and family are based and several other connections with the country.”

The UK tax year runs from 6 April to 5 April, and anyone who spends at least 183 days in the country during that period will normally be treated as UK-resident. If the couple arrived in late August and stayed continuously until 5 April, they would pass that threshold. UK residents are generally liable for tax on their worldwide income and gains, which could bring American earnings, investments, royalties and overseas property income into scope.

People who move to Britain partway through a year can sometimes qualify for split-year treatment, which divides the tax year into an overseas part and a UK part so that certain foreign income arising before the move stays outside the UK tax net. HMRC’s guidance on the statutory residence test sets out eight cases in which a year can be split, each with its own conditions, all of which must be met.

“Split-year treatment may be what has prompted some of the claims about perfect timing, but it is not automatic,” Monks said. “The couple’s precise movements, homes, working arrangements and future intentions would all need to be examined.

“Moving in August rather than at the beginning of the tax year could reduce the portion of the year treated as UK-resident, but that is very different from avoiding UK tax altogether.”

Based on the publicly known timeline, the couple are also unlikely to benefit from the four-year foreign income and gains regime, which replaced the remittance basis on 6 April 2025. The scheme can provide relief on eligible overseas income and gains, but HMRC guidance says a claimant must be within their first four years of UK residence following a period of at least ten years as a non-UK resident. Harry and Meghan left Britain around six years ago.

“The new regime sounds generous, but the ten-year absence requirement is crucial,” Monks said. “On the information currently available, it would be unsafe to assume that either of them qualifies.”

Meghan is an American citizen and would generally remain subject to US tax reporting on her worldwide income after moving. Tax treaties and foreign tax credits can help prevent the same income being taxed twice, but they do not remove the need for careful reporting in both countries.

Buying an English home while keeping overseas properties could also trigger a substantial stamp duty land tax bill. On a £10 million purchase, Parker Walsh calculates that the bill would be approximately £1.61 million if additional-property rates applied, rising to around £1.81 million if the surcharge for non-UK residents also applied. The final position would depend on the couple’s circumstances at completion.

Timing could matter again if they decided to sell their Montecito mansion, since disposing of an overseas property after becoming UK-resident could create UK capital gains tax considerations alongside any American liability.

Inheritance tax adds a further layer. Since April 2025, whether overseas assets fall within its scope has been based largely on long-term UK residence, broadly measured by residence in at least ten of the previous 20 tax years. Harry and Meghan may therefore have very different positions because of Harry’s long history of British residence. The switch to a residence-based test was part of the non-dom overhaul that preceded steel magnate Lakshmi Mittal’s decision to move his tax residency to Switzerland.

“Their return may have been perfectly timed for the school year or for family reasons, but calling it perfectly timed for tax is premature,” Monks said. “Maintaining homes and income across several countries can produce overlapping obligations rather than an easy loophole.”

She said anyone in a similar position would need specialist cross-border tax advice before selling an asset, buying a British home or changing where income is received. “With sums this large, getting the timing wrong could be extremely expensive,” she said.

Amy Ingham

Amy Ingham is a reporter at Business Matters, covering UK business news with a focus on breaking news, business policy, late payments and insolvency. She joined the magazine in 2026 after completing the NCTJ Diploma in Journalism at Harlow College’s journalism school. Her recent reporting includes British Steel’s nationalisation and its impact on SME suppliers, the decline in late payments by large firms, and Insolvency Service director disqualifications. Reach her at aingham@cbmeg.co.uk.

A £4.75 million UK Gambling Commission settlement in July offered the regulated gambling industry a useful warning about where responsibility can end up.

The case in question involved Evolution Malta Holding, whose games were found on six unlicensed websites accessible to consumers in Great Britain. The Commission concluded that weaknesses in the company’s risk assessment and controls had failed to prevent its products from appearing in parts of the illegal market. Its enforcement director specifically pointed to the need for operators to understand where their products are actually accessed.

That phrase becomes considerably harder to satisfy when VPNs enter the equation. Technology designed to conceal a user’s location is increasingly intersecting with a regulatory system built around knowing customers, markets and distribution routes.

For licensed UK operators, the resulting blind spot deserves much attention.

A VPN Problem That Does Not Stay With the Player

VPN gambling is often framed as a consumer issue. Players mask their IP address, reach an offshore site unavailable in Britain, and accept the risks that come with using an unlicensed operator. On the surface, the licensed sector appears to sit outside that transaction.

Licensed businesses don’t get that clean a separation.

In a 2025 freedom of information response, the Gambling Commission noted that operators need to know where their customers are located to ensure they act legally and in compliance. It has warned software providers to monitor business relationships so their games do not become available to British consumers through illegal operators.

VPNs can therefore create a gap between the location recorded by a system and the place where gambling actually occurs. The Evolution case didn’t hinge on VPN use itself, but it showed how quickly weak supply-chain visibility can become a compliance-by-gambling issue.

The Illegal Market Is Harder to Measure Than It Looks

Gambling Commission research published in 2025 found that 26% of surveyed consumers who admitted using unlicensed gambling sites used a VPN either all the time or specifically when visiting gambling websites. Because that activity can be obscured in conventional location-based traffic data, the regulator increased its estimates of illegal-market traffic by between 24% and 51%.

By April 2026, those assumptions were under review again. VPN use had jumped around the implementation of Online Safety Act measures in July 2025, and the Commission cautioned that web traffic is more useful for reading trends than pinning down the absolute size of the illegal market.

This sort of uncertainty has a business cost. If hidden traffic makes the black market look smaller than it is, estimates of customer leakage and competitive pressure can start from the wrong baseline.

Regulated Offers and Offshore Alternatives Can Sit One Search Apart

That regulatory divide can sit inside the same search session. For example, a customer comparing the best bingo bonuses on licensed sites remains in a market where UK rules govern promotions, identity checks and complaints processes. A few searches later, an offshore operator may be advertising a larger headline offer specifically because it sits outside GAMSTOP.

Search engines are an established route into the illegal market. The Commission’s consumer research records self-excluded gamblers describing searches for sites not registered with GAMSTOP, while enforcement teams have increasingly targeted search listings and the infrastructure supporting illegal websites.

Geo-blocking is where we’ve witnessed some of the stronger results.

Commission data covering 53 domains associated with GEO IP blocking showed an average 60% drop in engagement following the disruption. The regulator added an important caveat: the block remains effective only if consumers aren’t getting around it with a VPN.

Supply-Chain Monitoring Is Moving Closer to the Centre

Software suppliers have already seen how this can move from theory to enforcement. In April 2025, the Commission warned that games developed by licensed businesses had appeared on unlicensed websites accessible to British consumers. It told operators to actively monitor commercial relationships and terminate them when illegal GB activity is identified.

The July 2026 Evolution settlement gave that warning teeth. John Pierce, the Commission’s Director of Enforcement, said in the 23 July enforcement notice that operators need to understand “who they are supplying their games to, how and where those games are being accessed in practice”. Risk assessments that look credible in a board pack still have to survive contact with the live internet.

In practice, that pushes attention beyond contracts and onboarding files. Reseller arrangements may need testing after the relationship begins, especially where traffic patterns or market intelligence suggest a product has travelled to a destination it should not. The Commission is doing much the same on the regulatory side, using test purchasing, search engine referrals and financial intelligence to disrupt illegal gambling sites.

The Blind Spot Will Not Disappear

VPNs are legitimate privacy tools, and their use does not automatically indicate wrongdoing. A licensed operator also cannot control every attempt by a consumer to disguise a location or visit an offshore website.

Even so, the direction of travel is becoming clearer. Regulators are treating visibility as something businesses need to establish and test, rather than assume from a contract or an IP address. That is a tougher standard in an illegal market that can imitate the games and user journeys of regulated brands surprisingly well.

No, a compliance team doesn’t need perfect sight of every internet session. However, it does require sufficient evidence that, when an IP address ceases to be trustworthy, the remaining controls remain trustworthy.