Business
Revealed: how Tory co-chair’s offshore film company indirectly benefited from £121k tax credits
Revealed: how Tory co-chair’s offshore film company indirectly benefited from £121k tax credits
Ben Elliot, the Conservative party’s embattled co-chair, jointly owned a secret offshore film financing company that indirectly benefited from more than £120,000 of UK tax credits.
The revelation that Elliot has a British Virgin Islands-based company – which he owns with Ben Goldsmith, the brother of the Tory peer and minister Zac – will raise fresh questions for the businessman, whose courting of ultra-wealthy but controversial political donors has already provoked widespread criticism.
On Monday, the Pandora papers – the largest leak of offshore data in history, which has been shared with the Guardian and other media by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists – helped expose how a series of substantial Conservative party funders are facing a range of allegations about their links to offshore finance.
Today, the same leak shines a light on a BVI company Elliot and Goldsmith created to fund the making of Fire in Babylon, the pair’s 2010 documentary film about the great West Indies cricket team of the 1970s and 80s.
Analysis of financial disclosures suggests the duo’s BVI company held a controlling stake in a British subsidiary that made the film. The UK company received a £600,000 loan from its BVI parent in 2008, plus £121,000 from a government scheme designed to incentivise film production in the UK between 2009 and 2011.
The film made a small loss, and without the tax credits the subsidiary would not have been able to fully repay its offshore creditors, the largest of which was Elliot’s and Goldsmith’s BVI company, which had loaned the UK business most of its funds.
While the arrangement does not appear to have breached any tax regulations or laws, it does raise questions about whether government film schemes should be helping to fund projects that are controlled in a tax haven. If Fire in Babylon had become profitable, then the structure might also have provided some tax advantages.
Elliot, a well-connected Old Etonian and the nephew of the Duchess of Cornwall, co-owns luxury concierge group Quintessentially, which has earned him a reputation as a fixer for the super-rich. He is credited with raising a record £37m for the Tories’ general election campaign in 2019.
Goldsmith, who also attended Eton, is a financier and a non-executive director at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), where his brother is a minister.
Both Elliot and the Goldsmiths are close to Boris and Carrie Johnson. In July 2020, Elliot screened Fire in Babylon for the prime minister and his wife at their Downing Street flat, with the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, and Ben Goldsmith also present.
“I got a call saying the PM was planning to watch Fire in Babylon and would I like to come along. Ben [Elliot] was there too. They loved it,” Goldsmith said.
The film, which starred cricketing greats including Sir Vivian Richards and Michael Holding, failed to achieve commercial success.
Analysis of company filings suggests the documentary made a £70,000 loss. Without the HMRC cash rebates, it appears the UK business would not have been able to fully repay its offshore investors – the largest of which was Elliot and Goldsmith’s BVI company, E&G Productions, which had provided the £600,000 loan.
Goldsmith said a group of cricket enthusiasts had financed the film, chipping in £5,000 to £100,000 each. It is not clear if these contributions – mostly made by UK residents – were then converted into the £600,000 offshore loan from a BVI company, nor how much came from Goldsmith and Elliot.
One former HMRC tax inspector, who reviewed the structure, said: “In practice, I cannot see that the use of the BVI company by two UK residents could be anything other than tax motivated.”
Prem Sikka, emeritus professor at Essex Business School and a Labour peer, added: “With tax havens, there are two advantages: opacity and tax avoidance. There’s nothing else there.”
Elliot and Goldsmith, who were both prominently credited as “executive producers” on the film, said the project was never expected to make a profit and so the choice of the BVI was not intended to avoid taxes.
Goldsmith confirmed to the Guardian that, at the time the film was being financed and made, he was a so-called “non-dom”, meaning he did not have to pay UK tax on overseas earnings and assets, despite being a UK resident.
For non-doms, only income and capital gains generated in the UK – or funds sent back to the UK – would attract tax.
So by investing in Fire in Babylon in the form of a loan from the BVI, rather than by a direct remittance to the UK company, Goldsmith appears to have ensured his investment was tax-free.
Also, had the film proved to be a commercial success, experts said the structure could have meant that profits flowed offshore. Money from TV screening deals with foreign territories such as Australia or India, for example, could have avoided UK tax for Goldsmith.
Elliot and Goldsmith added: “A Caribbean company was used at the outset because we anticipated securing investment to make Fire in Babylon largely from investors outside the UK and specifically in that part of the world. As it turned out, more UK-based investors than we expected backed the film, although as you have spotted, some of the film’s investors were indeed in the Caribbean.”
However, Fire in Babylon appears to have only attracted two Caribbean-based investors, and an offshore finance expert challenged the idea that a BVI company would have encouraged others.
“It is no more attractive for Caribbean investors to invest in a BVI company than a Netherlands company, or a Luxembourg company,” he said. “Perhaps even the reverse, as generally there is little substance to litigate. If anything, BVI is less attractive to a Caribbean investor.”
While Elliot and Goldsmith say that the film was always unlikely to make a profit, the creators appear to have been more optimistic at the time.
The Guardian has seen the contract used by the film-makers to persuade the cricketing greats to appear in the film, without whom there would have been no documentary. It states that the players were paid a nominal fee, but also promised a share of the film’s profits in return for their participation.
A spokesperson for Elliot and Goldsmith said: “The film was made by a UK company and subject to UK taxation. All taxes have been correctly and transparently declared to the relevant authorities.”
Neither Elliot nor Goldsmith answered the Guardian’s questions about whether any loan interest was paid by the UK production company to their offshore company, nor why the pair’s names were initially kept off publicly available Companies House filings, which would have shown how they had a controlling stake in the UK production company via their BVI company.
The connection only formally emerged in 2016, when Elliot and Goldsmith were registered as “persons of significant control” of the UK firm, WIB Productions Ltd, which made the film.
They said the idea that they “might have attempted to conceal our involvement in the making or financing of Fire in Babylon is patently absurd, given our names were all over it from the start, in the credits, on the invitations, in newspaper and radio interviews and so on.”
Goldsmith added: “It is a love letter to one of the great sporting stories of all time.”
Business
FCCPC to partner with traders to curb consumers’ exploitation
The Federal Competition and Consumers Protection Commission (FCCPC) has appealed to stakeholders in the production and distribution value chain of the economy to join the crusade to curb price fixing and other unethical practices.
The call was made by FCCPC boss, Mr. Tunji Bello, in Lagos on Wednesday while addressing a hall pack full of captains of large/small-scale industries, leaders of market associations, transport operators and service providers at a town-hall meeting hosted by the commission.
The one-day stakeholders’ engagement on Exploitative Pricing was held in Oregun area of Lagos.
According to him, the meeting was necessitated by startling discoveries made by the commission during a survey conducted nationwide.
“We discovered that some traders form cartels in the markets and put barriers in form of ridiculous membership fees intended to ensure price fixing in the market. Without joining them, they won’t allow anyone to sell goods in the market or provide services. Such practices are against the law and constitute some of the offences the Commission is against,” said the FCCPC boss.
He added: “The purpose of the town-hall meeting initiative is to engage you the stakeholders in the production and retail segment of the market as well as service providers, to hear your own stories, with a view to achieving a consensus for the benefit of all of us.”
The Lagos stakeholders’ meeting is sequel to the one held in Abuja two weeks ago.
The FCCPC initiative is coming at a time Nigerians are experiencing sharp increases in the prices of food items and transportation costs across the country.
While acknowledging that the exchange rate and the increase in petrol price make the old prices unsustainable, Bello however, frowned at disproportionate increases in the prices of food items which he said are often perpetrated by “cartels” to exploit consumers.
Even though sections of the law empower the commission to deal decisively with offenders, Bello said FCCPC chose to first explore the option of dialogue with a view to arriving at a consensus to deal with the growing trend.
Section 17 of the FCCPC Act empowers the Commission to eliminate anti-competitive practices, misleading, unfair, deceptive or unconscionable marketing, trading, and business practices. It prescribes sanctions including a fine of up to N10m and a jail term of three years for anyone found guilty by the court.
To facilitate a better engagement, Bello disclosed that the FCCPC has upgraded its portal through which aggrieved consumers could lodge a complaint and their grievances would be addressed promptly.
On the economic outlook, Bello stated that the removal of taxes on imported food items, pharmaceutical products and transportation was part of measures being taken by the Tinubu’s administration to cushion the effects of the reforms introduced to reposition the Nigerian economy.
He sought the cooperation of the traders to ensure that the consumers get the benefits through reduced prices.
“Such laudable measures by President Tinubu would however be in vain if the benefits are not passed down to the consumers,” said Bello.
The Executive Commissioner, Operations, FCCPC, Dr. Abdullahi Adamu, emphasised during his welcome address that the purpose of the stakeholders’ engagement is to tackle sharp practices and address the role of market associations in contributing to price hikes of goods and services.
Adamu highlighted that President Tinubu’s administration is committed to reducing the cost of goods and services, urging stakeholders to collaborate with the government to find amicable solutions.
“The government of President Tinubu is interested in bringing the prices of goods and services down,” he stated, calling on stakeholders to engage in constructive dialogue to achieve this goal.
Speaking at the event, the Iya Oloja General of Nigeria, Folasade Tinubu-Ojo, echoed these sentiments, urging traders to refrain from exploitative pricing practices.
She called on the traders to support the government’s efforts by being considerate in their pricing.
“We need to assist the government in forcing down the prices of goods and services by being considerate and shunning the tendencies to make abnormal profits,” she said.
The General Manager of the Lagos State Consumers Protection Agency (LASCOPA), Mr. Afolabi Sholebo, also weighed in, questioning the logic behind punitive pricing practices.
“Why are we punishing ourselves? If we love ourselves so much, why are we punishing ourselves?” he asked.
Sholebo expressed concern over the influence of market associations that often pressured traders into maintaining high prices, even when some are willing to sell at cheaper rates.
“There is always a gang-up against some traders who decide to sell their goods and services at cheaper rates through market associations,” he lamented.
He further emphasized the need for a shift in mindset regarding pricing.
“We have to consider this issue of pricing. This is not the time to start arresting people. We know what is happening—some of us are our own enemies. Some people buy at cheaper prices and sell at exorbitant rates. We cannot blame the government for everything,” Sholebo concluded.
Business
NAFDAC orders recall of Dove Beauty Cream Bar soap
The National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control has ordered the recall of Dove Beauty Cream Bar Soap (100g) with batch number 81832M 08, produced in Germany.
In a statement released on its X handle, the agency said the recall was due to the presence of a chemical impurity.
According to NAFDAC, the product violates the Cosmetic Products Regulation by containing Butylphenyl Methylpropional, also known as Lilial, a chemical associated with serious health risks.
The agency explained that BMHCA has been banned in cosmetic products because it can harm the reproductive system and potentially affect the health of unborn children.
It added that the chemical has been linked to skin sensitisation, triggering allergic reactions in some users.
The statement reads;
“The National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) is alerting the public about the recall of Dove Beauty Cream Bar Soap (100g) with batch number 81832M 08, produced in Germany, due to chemical impurity. The product does not comply with the Cosmetic Products Regulation, as it contains Butylphenyl Methylpropional (BMHCA), which is prohibited due to its risks of reproductive harm, danger to unborn children, and potential for causing skin sensitization. Several regulatory authorities in the EU have already banned its marketing.”
Other Dove cosmetic products recalled/banned in other countries due to the presence of BMHCA are Derma Spa Goodness, Men Care, Men Care+ Sensitive Shield, Natural Touch, Nourishing Body Care Light Hydro, Pampering Body Lotion, Go Fresh, Talco con Crema, Go fresh Pera, Extra Fresh, Goodness3 Skincare Ritual, invisible dry antiperspirant spray + Go Fresh Revitalize nourishing shower gel, Caring hand wash and invisible dry.
The agency said the soaps are not on its database. NAFDAC urged the public to be cautious and vigilant within the supply chain to avoid the importation, distribution, sale and use of the products.
“Importation of soaps is prohibited in Nigeria as per the restricted and import prohibition list. Beyond the import restrictions soaps and cosmetics are parts of the items ineligible for foreign exchange to import in Nigeria. These products are also not available in the NAFDAC database. Importers, distributors, retailers and consumers are advised to exercise caution and vigilance within the supply chain to avoid the importation, distribution, sale and use of the above-mentioned products. Members of the public in possession of the product should discontinue the sale or use and submit stock to the nearest NAFDAC office.”
NAFDAC also urged health experts to report adverse events experienced with the use of regulated products to its nearest office.
The statement added
“Healthcare professionals and consumers are encouraged to report adverse events experienced with the use of regulated products to the nearest NAFDAC office, via pharmacovigilance@nafdac.gov.ng, E-reporting platforms available at www.nafdac.gov.ng or via the Med-safety application for download on android and IOS stores.”
Business
FG denies report of increasing VAT to 10% despite hardship in Nigeria
The Finance Minister and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Wale Edun, has denied a report of a potential hike in the Value-Added Tax (VAT) rate from 7.5% to 10%.
In a statement released Monday, Edun clarified that the VAT rate is still firmly set at 7.5%, as outlined in Nigeria’s tax laws.
“The current VAT rate is 7.5% and this is what the government is charging on a spectrum of goods and services to which the tax is applicable. Therefore, neither the Federal Government nor any of its agencies will act contrary to what our laws stipulate,” Edun affirmed.
He elaborated on the need for a balanced tax system, emphasizing that Nigeria’s tax framework operates on three key components: tax policy, tax law, and tax administration.
“The tax system stands on a tripod, namely tax policy, tax laws, and tax administration. All the three must combine well to give us a sound system that gives vitality to the fiscal position of the government,” the minister explained.
Advertisement
Edun addressed concerns from the public about policies that might seem burdensome, assuring that fiscal measures are designed to foster sustainable growth and reduce poverty, not the opposite.
“Our focus as a government is to use fiscal policy in a manner that promotes and enhances strong and sustainable economic growth, reduces poverty as well as makes businesses flourish,” Edun stated.
In response to media reports suggesting the government is imposing undue hardship on citizens, Edun refuted such claims.
Edun also pointed out recent government actions aimed at reducing the financial strain on Nigerians, particularly by eliminating import duties on key food items like rice, wheat, and beans.
“The imputation in some media reports on the issue of VAT and the opinion articles that have sprouted from them seem to wrongly convey the impression that the government is out to make life difficult for Nigerians. That is not correct. If anything, the Federal Government has, through its policies, demonstrated that it is committed to creating a congenial environment for businesses to thrive.
“In fact, it is on record that the Federal Government, as part of efforts to bring relief to Nigerians and businesses, recently ordered the stoppage of import duties, tariffs, and taxes on rice, wheat, beans, and other food items,” Edun noted.
Edun reiterated that the VAT rate remains at 7.5% and will continue to apply to all eligible goods and services.
“For emphasis, as of today, VAT remains 7.5% and that is what will be charged on all the goods and services that are VAT-able,” he concluded.
-
News5 days ago
Four dead in Nasarawa boat mishap
-
News4 days ago
Oyebanji, Fayemi others bid farewell to ex- Commissioner, Titilayo Ojo
-
News4 days ago
NAFDAC Shuts Down Illegal Sachet Water Factory in Apapa
-
News5 days ago
NURTW boss, Koko Zaria remanded in prison over assault
-
News4 days ago
Presidential Spokesman Ajuri Ngelale Proceeds On Indefinite Leave Of Absence
-
Education4 days ago
Students Loan: NELFUND receives another N2m refund
-
News3 days ago
NSCDC arrests 60-year-old man for alleged cable theft in Katsina
-
News2 days ago
Tinubu condoles with families of victims, Niger govt over traffic petrol tanker explosion
-
Business3 days ago
FG imposes levy on transactions above N10,000 on Opay, others
-
News17 hours ago
Court Jails Internet Fraudster in Enugu
-
Education4 days ago
Delta govt suspends head teacher over extortion of pupils