Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. So Frank, yesterday we
Speaker 1: did a live recording of Votonomics here at Bloomberg and
Speaker 1: it was very, very striking because at one point John Michaelswaye,
Speaker 1: who's the editor in chief, he asked the audience of
Speaker 1: about one hundred and fifty people in the room, how
Speaker 1: many of you know somebody who who's thinking of leaving
Speaker 1: the UK because of possible changes to taxes. And you know,
Speaker 1: normally in those kinds of questions, you get a handful
Speaker 1: of hands go up, but it was it looked to
Speaker 1: us from the stage like at least three quarters. I
Speaker 1: don't know whether that's accurate, but it looked it looked
Speaker 1: like every sort of almost not everybody, but a lot
Speaker 1: of people put their hands up.
Speaker 2: And so I wonder whether it's like non dame rules
Speaker 2: or people, or whether people actually go through or they're
Speaker 2: just saying that they know people that are vibes kind
Speaker 2: of angry, bad vibes, good vibes only on this podcast,
Speaker 2: so or whether they'll actually follow through totally agree.
Speaker 1: Like, firstly, there's there's a number of things being discussed,
Speaker 1: and each one of them things could be worrying the
Speaker 1: very well off, but equally it could be the kind
Speaker 1: of whole package and this sense of is this any
Speaker 1: more going to be the place to call my home?
Speaker 1: So this week we're going to unpack all of that
Speaker 1: what might be driving the very well off or super
Speaker 1: rich to leave the United Kingdom. I'm Alagri Stratton. I'm
Speaker 1: Francy Laqua and this is in the City.
Speaker 3: Welcome to the City of London, the city of the
Speaker 3: City of London.
Speaker 2: Leave mine a gap between the and the financial heart
Speaker 2: of the country.
Speaker 3: The city, the city.
Speaker 1: Welcome to in the city. Then clear of the doors.
Speaker 3: Pe okay.
Speaker 1: So with us in the studio, we've got City Editor
Speaker 1: Katherine Griffiths, who's familiar I think to lots of in
Speaker 1: the city listeners, and reporter Ben Stupples. Now, Ben, you
Speaker 1: have a brilliant title. You're you're not just a super
Speaker 1: rich reporter, but you're an ultra rich reporter, ultra wealth reporter.
Speaker 2: Forgiven wealth.
Speaker 1: Is there a difference.
Speaker 3: It sounds really snooty, doesn't it, But it actually does
Speaker 3: make a difference. If you're a banker and you're a
Speaker 3: private banker, obviously, if you're serving someone who's worth five
Speaker 3: hundred thousand. With liquid assets, it's different. You can do
Speaker 3: you can do a fewer things and say someone who's
Speaker 3: worth five hundred million and above. So the banker's definition
Speaker 3: would be thirty million pounds of dollars and above in
Speaker 3: liquid assets. So that's my game, is above that threshold.
Speaker 1: I love it.
Speaker 2: Liquid assets is usually worth five percent of their re portfolio.
Speaker 3: Yeah, do the math.
Speaker 2: So it's basically the billionaires of the world.
Speaker 3: Yeah, oh the Yeah, the people who we read about,
Speaker 3: the newsmakers of this world. People we read about the
Speaker 3: newspapers are sort of the people I cover. The founders,
Speaker 3: business founders, all that sort of stuff. They keep me,
Speaker 3: keep me pretty busy at the moment.
Speaker 1: So just quick fire, Catherine. Are the super rich worried
Speaker 1: right now?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 1: They are.
Speaker 4: They are worried, definitely. I think before the election they
Speaker 4: had been encouraged to get comfortable with Kissed Arma and
Speaker 4: Rachel Reeves saying that they loved the wealthy, they loved profits,
Speaker 4: they loved success, wealth creation. Wealth creation was fantastic. There
Speaker 4: was sort of Tony Blair vibes going on, and now
Speaker 4: they're hearing is all doom and gloom in the UK
Speaker 4: and they've heard the Prime Minister talking about those with
Speaker 4: the broadest shoulders having to take the biggest burden. So
Speaker 4: they are somewhat worried.
Speaker 1: Yes, and what about your people?
Speaker 3: They are? I think it's very safe to say that
Speaker 3: they are really concerned. There wasn't really a any We
Speaker 3: have lobby groups for all sorts, but actually the non doms,
Speaker 3: just to categorize what they are, there's a typically artcha
Speaker 3: hein not worth individuals the type that I cover, they
Speaker 3: when they come to the UK obviously the normally from overseas,
Speaker 3: they don't pay UK tax and that overseas wealth that's
Speaker 3: their income and earnings. It's a good tax perk in exchange.
Speaker 3: Initially they can claim it for free. In the long
Speaker 3: run it costs them as much as sixty They are worried.
Speaker 3: They didn't really have a lobby group before. Now they do,
Speaker 3: which she wrote about this week's Yeah, that's a big deal.
Speaker 3: So they have broken cover through us to say that
Speaker 3: they are really concerned, and they actually met for the
Speaker 3: first time as a group at UK Treasury officials and
Speaker 3: HMRC UK tax officials last week. It's a big deal
Speaker 3: because unlike previous reforms the UK, the government isn't actually
Speaker 3: offering any official consultation here, so they're really knocking on
Speaker 3: the door literally.
Speaker 2: But then so this is, you know, they have a
Speaker 2: new government to lobby who've been in power Central lifeifs,
Speaker 2: but essentially it was actually the previous government that changed,
Speaker 2: you know, initially the non dom rules. So are they
Speaker 2: upset now because they don't really know what happens because
Speaker 2: there's no official consultation or are they upset because they
Speaker 2: don't understand what labor actually want to do with their group.
Speaker 3: Yeah, they've been caught up in a like previous reforms,
Speaker 3: I would say a bit of cat and mouse between
Speaker 3: the Tories and labor. Now, the crucial thing to understand
Speaker 3: here is that labor have gotten further than the Tories
Speaker 3: and they have said if you have assets that you
Speaker 3: held offshore in trusts, so that could be for example,
Speaker 3: your shares if you're own a clothing business over in India,
Speaker 3: for example, the shares that you hold in Jersey or
Speaker 3: guns or maybe even Switzerland, Labor have said that they
Speaker 3: will impose UK inheritance tax that's forty percent on those assets.
Speaker 3: That is massive, So that's making a lot of families
Speaker 3: go hang on. I love the UK. I love living
Speaker 3: in the UK, my kids are here, I've been living
Speaker 3: here for the last ten years. Yeah yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 3: stable climate whatever. I love the political stability. That's why
Speaker 3: they came here in the first place. Suddenly all those
Speaker 3: reasons have washed away like the Thailand Sea for them.
Speaker 1: Is it actually mission critical or is it, Oh, I'm
Speaker 1: going to be a little bit less ultra wealthy than
Speaker 1: I was before, or is it? You know, when you
Speaker 1: talk about these inheritance tax bills that could be quite
Speaker 1: kind of game changing.
Speaker 3: That is a game changer. The inheritance tax factism is
Speaker 3: the game changer because it's not just the founder or
Speaker 3: the patriarchs and matriarchs of the family anymore. It's the
Speaker 3: it's the planning about life for the next twenty years.
Speaker 3: That's a massive decision that's making people think, Okay, where
Speaker 3: I want to settle myself and my family for the
Speaker 3: next ten years at.
Speaker 2: Least, Catherine, how does the labor government actually think of this?
Speaker 2: So that they want and they've said this, you know repeatedly,
Speaker 2: they want a fair of society, but they're also they
Speaker 2: want to be seen as pro business friendly. What does
Speaker 2: that mean for the ultra wealthy.
Speaker 4: Yeah. I think, well, we'll find out a lot more
Speaker 4: with the budget which is coming very soon on October
Speaker 4: the thirtieth. I think Labor is keen to say that
Speaker 4: it wants to promote wealth creation. It wants to create,
Speaker 4: you know, the sort of the NASDAC of Europe. It
Speaker 4: wants to sort of have startups. It's very conscious of
Speaker 4: how Britain's big companies are all created probably one hundred
Speaker 4: or more years ago. It wants to sort of have
Speaker 4: these new vibrant companies which begins with entrepreneurs and startups,
Speaker 4: and it wants to sort of through that help the
Speaker 4: whole country create growth, which wants to sort of see
Speaker 4: filtering down to communities around the country. But at the
Speaker 4: same time, I think people take the view that Kiss
Speaker 4: Starmer and maybe Rachel Reeves are definitely more left leaning,
Speaker 4: certainly Kiss Starmer than the previous Labor government and probably
Speaker 4: does in a more fundamental sense believe in a fairer society,
Speaker 4: and probably is less sympathetic therefore to some of these
Speaker 4: people and some of these arguments than they would like.
Speaker 1: And there's something particularly going on with private equity, isn't there, Catherine,
Speaker 1: which you follow a.
Speaker 4: Lot, yes, so, as well as the inheritance tax issue
Speaker 4: for non doms, as Ben has been highlighting, which seems
Speaker 4: to be a massive sort of hot rod that everyone
Speaker 4: is very worried about. On private equity, Labor has said
Speaker 4: that it's going to close what it's calling the loophole,
Speaker 4: which is at the moment private equity people pay carried
Speaker 4: interest tax relief at capital gains tax rate of twenty
Speaker 4: eight percent. Labor is going to change that. We don't
Speaker 4: know what to. Potentially, they could raise the rate up
Speaker 4: to forty five percent, the top rate of income tax.
Speaker 4: They could go somewhere in the middle. We don't know
Speaker 4: whether they will make a distinction between people who put
Speaker 4: their own money into funds and those who don't. They
Speaker 4: probably will make that distinction, but then it's really not
Speaker 4: very clear at all how they will exactly define the rules.
Speaker 4: And then there's a big issue as to when the
Speaker 4: rules will start. They could start immediately with the budget,
Speaker 4: maybe in January, or maybe with the tax year.
Speaker 2: You speak to the big bankers and they say, well, rightly,
Speaker 2: so private equity to be taxed, right, do they have
Speaker 2: a fair advantage? And actually, you know, some of the
Speaker 2: big banks and asset managers don't. Does the city of
Speaker 2: London actually lose a lot if private equity either has
Speaker 2: to pay this extra, will they actually leave or do
Speaker 2: they just suck it up?
Speaker 4: I think I think a lot of the senior private
Speaker 4: equity people in London will suck it up. I think that,
Speaker 4: you know, there's a sort of a tranch of them
Speaker 4: at the top of the big firms who have already
Speaker 4: made an absolute king's ransom and have their lives in London,
Speaker 4: have their very nice Kensington homes, and who don't want
Speaker 4: to leave for other countries. They may well be from
Speaker 4: other countries, but they've chosen to live in London for
Speaker 4: certain reasons. There's a whole load of other people who
Speaker 4: work for those firms, who are younger, who may well
Speaker 4: be more mobile, and who may well think about other countries.
Speaker 4: But it's really very unclear, I think, as to what
Speaker 4: that will really mean for investment in the UK, because
Speaker 4: there will still be big funds that are looking at
Speaker 4: opportunities in the UK. Some of private equity's biggest investments
Speaker 4: in this country are actually run out of funds that
Speaker 4: are not based here in London. They may be global
Speaker 4: funds or US funds. So there's an awful lot of
Speaker 4: sort of threats and warnings, but the reality could be
Speaker 4: quite different.
Speaker 1: But the fundamental thing, right is, do you two, as
Speaker 1: people who cover this stuff day and day out, we
Speaker 1: have a government that came in saying they want to
Speaker 1: be on the side of wealth creation. It's kind of
Speaker 1: one of their top three points they were making. Do
Speaker 1: you think right now they're getting the balance right?
Speaker 4: Well? I think no. I think is at the moment
Speaker 4: because it's all this kind of rhetoric and we don't
Speaker 4: really know what they're going to do in any of
Speaker 4: these areas. I think we're sort of massively waiting for
Speaker 4: the budget.
Speaker 1: It is this period which is quite familiar preer brudshet
Speaker 1: where they know they scare the horses, they make everyone
Speaker 1: think it's going to be terrible, and then in the
Speaker 1: end it's not as bad as all that. But I'm
Speaker 1: getting some vibes from yourselves but also your colleagues in
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg newsroom that actually this period is damaging too.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 4: I think definitely. People in the city do feel it's damaging.
Speaker 4: People who have been pretty interested and supportive of the kids.
Speaker 4: Arma Rachel Reeves Project are now quite cross.
Speaker 3: I have no doubt actually that labor will create British
Speaker 3: wealth out of the UK. What labor court in here
Speaker 3: is two different worlds. We've got British businesses, British business
Speaker 3: owners creating businesses, jobs great. What labor maybe haven't factored
Speaker 3: in as much is that in this global world where
Speaker 3: we have offshore wealth, there's existing wealth that exists globally.
Speaker 3: It's a global market and London, well, the UK in particular,
Speaker 3: London is part of that market. For a long time
Speaker 3: we've been number one. We haven't really had to look
Speaker 3: over our shoulders so much. But now we've got other
Speaker 3: territories actively courting London algehin at Worth individuals who do
Speaker 3: create wealth here because they come here, they set up businesses,
Speaker 3: because they've been here for tenth for the last ten years.
Speaker 3: But that's the difference that labour caught between two different
Speaker 3: types of old I think they haven't quite got it.
Speaker 3: I think to get over the line. For the UK election,
Speaker 3: it was a good pitch to say we want to
Speaker 3: get UK wealth's creation because a lot of them were voters.
Speaker 3: Now that they're in government, they're having to reconcile with
Speaker 3: the fact that to keep the wheels turning for the UK.
Speaker 3: There's this other part where they may not be voters,
Speaker 3: but their UK residents and they do contribute a big
Speaker 3: part of the UK economy.
Speaker 2: But haven't we lost so many people in high finance
Speaker 2: in these type of jobs with gregsit anyway, I mean,
Speaker 2: there were so many relocations right in the last couple
Speaker 2: of years. I don't know what's left. I know, I've
Speaker 2: been speaking to you know, contacts and sources, and for
Speaker 2: years I didn't even know they were nondumb because they
Speaker 2: were here for such a long time, or you know,
Speaker 2: so often that they took every meeting in London. Then
Speaker 2: when they you know, when they were angry about some
Speaker 2: of the proposals, Wait, wait, you're NONDMB. So it's difficult
Speaker 2: to see how many have already gone in these high
Speaker 2: finance jobs, and actually how many non doms are left
Speaker 2: here in London and the UK.
Speaker 3: We have about seventy five thousand at the moment. That's
Speaker 3: already halved from a bad a decade ago. But that's
Speaker 3: partly because if you remember, don't go into the weeds
Speaker 3: too much. But Edmond abandoned, George Osborne traded blows and
Speaker 3: eventually George Osborne stopped permanent use of NONDMN status. But
Speaker 3: I think what's happening here is Yeah. I think it
Speaker 3: is difficult to quantify exactly how damaging this is going
Speaker 3: to be, but there's still seventy five thousand people who
Speaker 3: are paying.
Speaker 2: Yeah psychologically And this always fascinates me because you speak
Speaker 2: to a lot of these high flyers and I think
Speaker 2: there's there's a deep wanting to be almost loved or
Speaker 2: cared for in the country, and so I wonder again
Speaker 2: whether they just need to get used to that things
Speaker 2: are changing. I know I've had conversations with you know,
Speaker 2: very ultra high networth that feel slighted.
Speaker 1: Do they think it's fast and in that context do
Speaker 1: they think, hold on a second, this is my wealth
Speaker 1: from outside the UK, so of course I would keep
Speaker 1: it text elsewhere. Do they do they actually have a
Speaker 1: kind of intellectual response to it or is it just
Speaker 1: a kind of I've been getting away with it for
Speaker 1: a long time, Just let me carry.
Speaker 2: On getting away with it. I think it sends a message.
Speaker 2: I think if you feel like you're you know, you're
Speaker 2: at the top of your game because you've made a
Speaker 2: lot of money and manage a lot of money. You
Speaker 2: maybe just want that level of respect, respect or just
Speaker 2: a little bit of love right from the people in charge.
Speaker 2: But I don't know then whether it really translates into
Speaker 2: people packing and leaving right.
Speaker 4: What's so?
Speaker 3: There is a nondum who we've reported on who has
Speaker 3: left or finalized his plans ready to leave the UK.
Speaker 3: He said he'd be willing to pay more than double
Speaker 3: the cost it was taking him to claim non non
Speaker 3: status in the UK. He was actually saying I'd go
Speaker 3: above and beyond rival regimes in Italy and in Greece
Speaker 3: one hundred thousand years a year to claim that effectively
Speaker 3: non non status there now just to circle back on.
Speaker 1: So that rather than the inheritance tax.
Speaker 3: But the inheritance tax thing is to kill a blow
Speaker 3: for him. It's a case study and literally why people
Speaker 3: are going this is an art China Worth, who's a
Speaker 3: business founder, He's got international assets and the IHT forty
Speaker 3: percent inheritance tax on his global assets. I'm going to go,
Speaker 3: but just to circle them back on the other regimes.
Speaker 3: Non norms are often caught between these worlds in politics.
Speaker 3: Italy has just doubled the amount it's going to cost
Speaker 3: for those coming to Italy to claim non non status.
Speaker 3: So you've already got a pushback folks or wanting to
Speaker 3: leave the UK going gosh, okay, where do I go?
Speaker 3: Suddenly their opportunities, if they're factoring in politics as an issue,
Speaker 3: then their options are far narrower.
Speaker 2: Well where do they go? I mean again, these are
Speaker 2: countries or you don't think they do well? I mean,
Speaker 2: you know, it has a huge budget hall. I mean
Speaker 2: every country is going to try and find money, and
Speaker 2: so they're easy targets.
Speaker 3: That is the problem, and it's forcing non norms to go. Okay,
Speaker 3: I don't Monico is great for the tax, but hey
Speaker 3: it's a bit smaller than Central Park and I've got
Speaker 3: up my wife and kids to go, you know what,
Speaker 3: my husband and kids to get to this place. It's
Speaker 3: making them make uncomfortable choices. Do they go to Dubai? Okay, yeah,
Speaker 3: they can go to Dubai, but it's actually so hot
Speaker 3: for them in the summer, and you know, their children
Speaker 3: like the friends that they have in London or or
Speaker 3: elsewhere in Europe. So it's making non norms really compromise
Speaker 3: on some key parts of their lifestyles.
Speaker 1: In a way, it sounds like they've given them the
Speaker 1: off ramp, which is the flat tax. What's the chances
Speaker 1: do you think of this treasury and this chancellor. It
Speaker 1: would look like a climb down, wouldn't it.
Speaker 4: I think, I mean, I think they will possibly tweak
Speaker 4: both on the carried interest for private equity people and
Speaker 4: maybe on the inheritance tax, maybe on things like amounts
Speaker 4: of time or sort of certain details. They won't want
Speaker 4: to completely climb down, even though maybe in both cases
Speaker 4: actually they may end up not raising you know, in
Speaker 4: both cases possibly it might be sort of a counterintuitive
Speaker 4: measure in terms of how much tax is actually coming
Speaker 4: in through the door. Which is how we get back
Speaker 4: to this point that there is an ideological argument that
Speaker 4: this labor government probably does feel there's a sort of
Speaker 4: a fairness point at stake. But I do think Roan,
Speaker 4: you are absolutely right. And it's the same with Brexit.
Speaker 4: There's a lot of people in the city and in
Speaker 4: the in the sort of wealthy financial world who do
Speaker 4: just want to feel loved and if they want the
Speaker 4: red carpet, they just want warm words, They want to
Speaker 4: be invited.
Speaker 1: They are welcoming on the in the City podcast.
Speaker 4: They can come in and tell us their waes. But
Speaker 4: I think if so, to that point about the rhetoric
Speaker 4: at the moment from this government, a lot more kind
Speaker 4: of rhetoric about opportunity and positivity and going back to
Speaker 4: those sorts of phrases will go a long way.
Speaker 2: Do we know how much you know, these seventy five
Speaker 2: thousand actually contribute. I mean I've heard from like you know,
Speaker 2: it's difficult to say if you're again ultra hight do
Speaker 2: you give.
Speaker 1: Back to the law.
Speaker 3: We do have some sense of the h MRC UK
Speaker 3: Tax Authority publishers and your data. They have pretty big figure.
Speaker 3: It's more than ten more than ten billion pounds and
Speaker 3: that's just in employment taxes, capital gains obviously not inheritance
Speaker 3: tax for the moment, but we don't know, for example,
Speaker 3: and this is a crucial point, how much they're spending
Speaker 3: in the at and you know, these aren't people who
Speaker 3: sit at home making cups of tea all day. They
Speaker 3: are going out in Mayfair, Chelsea, Westminster. They're going and
Speaker 3: that these are the folks that are in top restaurants
Speaker 3: really keeping key parts of you think about who serves
Speaker 3: you at the table and when you go to a
Speaker 3: high end restaurant. There is a trickle down effect in
Speaker 3: terms of the economics that is impossible to quantify. You
Speaker 3: can make broader points about the fact whether the trickle
Speaker 3: down economics works or not, but there is this sort
Speaker 3: of part that we can't quantify that fits into what
Speaker 3: when people think about London, it's it's the glips and
Speaker 3: the glamour. To an extent, non doms do contribute to
Speaker 3: sort of keeping the cocks turning, the wheel's turning, and
Speaker 3: that's part of society.
Speaker 2: So I haven't figured out on the school fees that
Speaker 2: will go up for private schools by twenty percent, Catherine,
Speaker 2: whether you know some people say well they will, whether
Speaker 2: actually it's counterproductive because it means that more foreigners will
Speaker 2: put their kids less in UK educated you know school,
Speaker 2: or that the kids will end up not being UK educated,
Speaker 2: which goes to like the soft power of you know,
Speaker 2: money around the world. Or whether again it's just a
Speaker 2: fairness and people suck it up and just pay that
Speaker 2: twenty percent extra as long as they can.
Speaker 4: I think they've sucked that one up. Actually, I think
Speaker 4: on the whole, you know, very broadly speaking, they're sort
Speaker 4: of in a category of people who can afford that
Speaker 4: twenty percent and they pay it, and I don't think
Speaker 4: it sort of goes to their feeling of not being
Speaker 4: loved and being rejected because because of course there's anyone
Speaker 4: paying those school fees British or from any other country
Speaker 4: compared to these other points where they are feeling a
Speaker 4: bit targeted.
Speaker 3: Yeah, just to chime in there, that's not a big
Speaker 3: deal really for the UK China Worth individual It sounds
Speaker 3: really sorry, it's snooty to say that, but I've spoken
Speaker 3: to private bankers who've just scoffed at that and gone,
Speaker 3: they just pay them upfront. And we've seen that with
Speaker 3: We've actually reported that parents you know, with children are
Speaker 3: eating on the UK's top schools. They've seen an increase
Speaker 3: in parents paying fees upfront, and that's maybe one way labor.
Speaker 3: I've got one actually over there that as a policy
Speaker 3: does bring in fairness when you compare it to other sectors,
Speaker 3: and does contribute towards the UK's education's education system. It's
Speaker 3: more issue for lower down the ranks of the well
Speaker 3: spectrum people who you know, Tony Blow once upon a
Speaker 3: time called you know the strivers, you know that sort
Speaker 3: of part of the UK population.
Speaker 1: How much is Labor getting the vibes wrong on CGT
Speaker 1: and so on for the kind of small and medium
Speaker 1: sized enterprises, for the kind of you know, back the
Speaker 1: small British business rather than the titans of the City
Speaker 1: of London.
Speaker 4: Well, I think that Labor will probably seek to make
Speaker 4: sure that those people are not hit by changes a
Speaker 4: CGT or ones. But I think the reality surely is
Speaker 4: that somewhat sadly perhaps you know those folks, you know,
Speaker 4: they just stuck here doing their thing in London. They
Speaker 4: can't really do very much. So we hear the people
Speaker 4: from the people who have leverage that at the higher
Speaker 4: end of the spectrum.
Speaker 3: I think it's a really interesting point. People are catching
Speaker 3: in capital gains now in anticipation of an increase in
Speaker 3: capital gains at the budget, which is weeks of in
Speaker 3: our October thirtieth. I think lab and really needs Rachel Reeves
Speaker 3: and Kissed Armor probably do need to sit down and
Speaker 3: think what sort of Britain do we want to want
Speaker 3: to create. If you come into ten Downing Streets saying
Speaker 3: or you want to have the wealth creation for UK
Speaker 3: businesses great and UK entrepreneurs wonderful that's great. But then
Speaker 3: when they want to crystallize that game and they've built
Speaker 3: a business that employs hundreds of people, thousands, and they've
Speaker 3: seld it to a private equity firm, let's say US
Speaker 3: private equity firm sells it for a hundred million or
Speaker 3: maybe even billions, but the founders cashing out and they're British. Okay,
Speaker 3: Now are they going to be happy about the fact
Speaker 3: that the Ratiaris raised capital gains at that budget their
Speaker 3: first one? I don't think so.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much, Katherine Griffiths and Ben Stubbers. Have
Speaker 1: I pronounced your sign him correctly?
Speaker 3: The only one who does? Thank you?
Speaker 1: I've thought it could be stupid. I'm doing. Thanks for
Speaker 1: listening to this week's In the City from Bloomberg. This
Speaker 1: episode was hosted by me Allegri Stratton and Francine Laqua.
Speaker 1: It was produced by Someasadi, production support from Moses and Am,
Speaker 1: and special thanks to Katherine Griffiths and Ben Stuffles. Please subscribe, rate,
Speaker 1: and review wherever you listen to podcasts.