Dan Neidle Profile picture
Jul 13, 2022 30 tweets 13 min read Read on X
Nadhim Zahawi founded YouGov, but took no shares in it. A Gibraltar company, Balshore Investments, did instead. Zahawi says this wasn't tax avoidance, but was his father injecting capital into the business.

Here's my hunt for evidence. A very lengthy thread:
I'll start with my conclusion. Only three possibilities:

1. I am missing something.

2. Balshore did provide capital, but this was omitted from all of YouGov's accounts and filings, and not even picked up during the IPO.

3. Zahawi is lying, and this was tax avoidance.
Here's the first YouGov share issuance from 2000

Neil Copp provided £287,500 of capital & got 15% of the shares

Balshore provided no capital and got 42.5%

The same deal as Stephan Shakespeare - one of the founders

Zahawi, the other founder, got nothing.

Why? ImageImage
But perhaps the form is wrong and Balshore did provide capital. Let's look at the accounts.

Here's the balance sheet from two months after that share issuance.

No sign of any equity capital other than Copp's. Image
Startups often make mistakes, and Companies House filings and accounts can be wrong. This is generally picked up as a company matures... particularly if it's planning an IPO (which is the path YouGov was on).

YouGov did just that...
... Two years later, YouGov filed a late form showing Shakespeare & Balshore acquied more shares back in 2000. But for "nominal" value - only £7k each

This wasn't a capital injection - just (typical) cheap shares for founders.

Balshore wasn't a founder. Why did it get this? ImageImage
More share issuances in the next few years.

The wonderful Peter Kellner got involved, so got shares for free. As did Roland Berger & Partners (consulting firm): ImageImage
Small freebie shares dished out to employees and consultants (including @JamesDuddridge). Again, perfectly normal for a startup:

(the last page is missed out, due to Twitter's four image limitation, but it's not interesting) ImageImageImageImage
Chime Communications then acquired 27,500 shares for the (bargain) nominal price of 10p each. There's a good reason for that - we'll come to it later. ImageImage
27 November 2001. More consultants get to buy cheap shares: ImageImage
Then Peter Kellner gets to buy more shares at the cheap but eccentric price of 6.1p each. Then the same a few months later. ImageImageImageImage
... and more Kellner - catching up somewhat with the original founders. He's paying a bit, but it's not what you'd call capital. ImageImageImageImage
August 2003, and another consultant pays nominal 1p each for some shares: ImageImage
There are now a lot of shareholders. At this point, founders often want to preserve their power to direct the organisation and take "special" shares.

That happens here: Shakespeare, Zahawi, Kellner each get two special shares (with Shakespeare's giving one of his to his wife): ImageImage
Start of 2005 - another consultant gets shares for 1p each: ImageImage
And that takes us up to the April 2005 IPO.

At this point I count £113,630 of share capital, £312,711 of share premium.

None of that was from Balshore. Image
That is broadly consistent with the Jan 2005 balance sheet - except it shows £370,767 of share premium.

I can't see where the additional £58k comes from, but it's hardly a significant amount of capital, and it wasn't Balshore (as they haven't received any shares since 2000). Image
What about the creditors? Could Balshore have provided loan finance and that's how it got the shares for free?

Back in the year Balshore got its shares, there were £91,459 of "other creditors". Could that be it? ImageImage
The £91k is still there in the next few years, but there's no corresponding entry in Balshore's accounts. Image
It's possible Balshore's accounts are wrong, and the £91k was a loan from Balshore.

But it's credible (and wouldn't have been legal) for Neil Copp to pay £287,500 cash for a 15% stake, but Balshore to *lend* £91k and get a 45% stake.
There was some debt funding, from Chime Communications. Which explains why (way upthread) they got cheap shares. Image
So to conclude this very lengthy thread: Zahawi is saying that Balshore got a 45% stake in YouGov because it provided capital to YouGov.

There is zero evidence of any capital from Balshore
(except, just about possibly, a £91k loan - but that wouldn't justify a 45% stake).
I see only three possibilities:

1. I am missing something. What?

2. Balshore did provide capital, but this was omitted from all of YouGov's accounts and filings, and not even picked up during the IPO.

3. Zahawi is lying, and this was tax avoidance.
If the answer is 1 or 2 then Zahawi should prove it by pointing us towards some actual evidence, and not just making assertions in background briefings to journalists.
For anyone wanting to go hunting:

Here are all the pre-IPO 88(2) forms in one place: taxpolicy.org.uk/assets/pre-IPO…

Here are the 2000 accounts: taxpolicy.org.uk/assets/yougov_…
Here's the Jan 2005 balance sheet: taxpolicy.org.uk/assets/yougov_…

And all the Companies House filings are here: …te.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/036073…
My full analysis is here: taxpolicy.org.uk/zahawi
I've compiled this thread into a blog post for those who find that more convenient: taxpolicy.org.uk/2022/07/13/zah…
Obviously I would be delighted if @nadhimzahawi or his team would get in touch and explain their position. My DMs are open and my email address is at taxpolicy.org.uk.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Dan Neidle

Dan Neidle Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @DanNeidle

Feb 5
Mandelson's firm, General Counsel, covered-up Mandelson's relationship with Epstein.

Here's Global Counsel's CEO and co-founder, preparing to tell the press that Mandelson barely knew Jeffrey Epstein.

Who did he check that line with?

Jeffrey Epstein. Image
They're responding to this Telegraph story, the previous day, revealing that Epstein planned to meet a British Government Minister in New York on the weekend of 12/13 December 2009. Image
Image
The Telegraph had picked up on a 2009 court application by Epstein to be released from house arrest so he could meet a senior British government figure in New York. Image
Read 9 tweets
Feb 4
Peter Mandelson is telling the truth on one thing: the idea he was bought for a $4k “bursary” or a $75k gift is ridiculous

The real incentive was a post-government payday - one so big he *rejected* a $3–5m-a-year offer

And Epstein enabled that payday

Here’s the evidence. 🧵 Image
The timeline is damning.

While still in office, Mandelson was warned by JPM’s Jes Staley (via Epstein) that sticking with Gordon Brown would be "bad form commercially".

Translation: It would hurt his future earning potential.

He got the message. Image
Just 48 hours after the government fell in May 2010, the "commercial" phase began.

Epstein immediately began brokering a role for Mandelson at Deutsche Bank.

("Petie" being Epstein's affectionate name for Mandelson) Image
Read 16 tweets
Feb 3
Epstein made $10k+ payments to Mandelson's partner around the time of the email leaks.

Mandelson says he thought the payments were bursaries from an educational foundation.

We're not allowed to say famous people are lying. But is Mandelson lying?

A 🧵 on the evidence: Image
The offer to help came from Epstein alone. No mention of a foundation/bursary. Image
Mandelson's partner sends payment details to Epstein personally. No sign of any foundation being involved. Image
Read 11 tweets
Feb 2
There's more.

On 31 March 2010, Lord Mandelson's principal private secretary sent him a note of a meeting between the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Larry Summers, US Treasury Secretary.

Lord Mandelson forwarded it to Jeffrey Epstein five minutes later. Image
Image
Image
This was a pretty detailed discussion. Epstein responded with suggestions as to how hedge funds should be taxed, and then detailed questions about the drafting of the new US rules ("may" vs "shall).
The next day, Lord Mandelson met Larry Summers himself.

Lord Mandelson's private secretary sent a note of the meeting to him at 1.22pm. Within two minutes, Lord Mandelson forwarded it to Jeffrey Epstein. Image
Read 7 tweets
Feb 2
Who leaked this Number 10 discussion to Jeffrey Epstein? And are there consequences for the leaker?

It’s an internal discussion re. getting markets moving in the aftermath of the financial crisis. No doubt of great interest to Epstein and his financial market clients. Image
The name of the leaker is redacted. Could be any of Vadera, Pond, Heywood, Mandelson, or anyone they forwarded the email to.

I guess we'll never know the leaker's identity.
On a completely different subject, here's Peter Mandelson (a few months later) leaking an unrelated policy discussion to Jeffrey Epstein. Image
Read 13 tweets
Feb 1
New Epstein emails show Peter Mandelson secretly advising JPMorgan’s CEO on how to fight Labour’s 2009 bankers’ bonus tax - even suggesting he “mildly threaten” the Chancellor.

Mandelson was Business Secretary at the time.

A year later, he was seeking work with JPM. Image
On 9 December 2009, Alistair Darling - then the Chancellor of the Exchequer - announced a one-off 50% tax on bankers’ bonuses. Image
On 15 December, Jeffrey Epstein asked Lord Mandelson if the tax could be amended so it applied only to cash bonuses (not the, much more valuable, non-cash elements such as share options).

Mandelson said that he was trying hard to amend the tax. Image
Image
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(