2% Base Rates: Who Gets CICk’ed in the Teeth? : Social Business Blog
Search this blog...

On Thursday the Bank of England cut the base rate to 2%, matching the lowest level in its 314 year history, according to reports. This is good news for many cash-strapped borrowers, though I suspect that in this financial maelstrom, it will be insufficient to help most struggling companies. One group which is negatively impacted by the recent declines, rather severely so, in my judgment, are the beleaguered investors in Community Interest Companies (CICs as they are more commonly known). For non-British readers, these are a relatively new form of company set up by the Government as a well-meaning intention to give social enterprises an appropriate structiure. They are also gaining interest in other countries, such as Canada, for example. We have argued elsewhere and previously that they are a pretty bad idea. The recent decline in interest rates only adds to this fact. If the Government does not take action they will look increasingly silly. Why is this?

With CICs, a great deal of effort is expended to try to protect the “community’s” interest utilising another well-intentioned device, the venerable “asset lock”. It sounds very serious and air-tight, but frankly, even experts agree they can be circumvented–but this is another matter. One aspect of the asset lock is that the returns to investors are limited to 500 basis poiunts (5%) over the base lending rate. At current rates this is 7%. Now this is a very nice return, but I imagine well-below market for the types of projects and enterprises being funded in CICs. The result is that the availability of such finance, already severely limited, will simply dry up.

I do not think this is what the Government intended–in fact I am sure it is not, but it ought to be fixed AND SOON, especially as rates look as if they may be heading even lower. It is one thing to limit returns in order to prevent expropriatory payments which undermine the asset lock, it is another to allow a crazy circumstance to persist, where the limit is preventing capital from coming into the social enterprise sector.

There is much in the CIC legislation which is badly done and would be difficult to fix. This would be easy. C’mon guys!

Rodney Schwartz

Book Mark it-> del.icio.us | Reddit | Slashdot | Digg | Facebook | Technorati | Google | StumbleUpon | Window Live | Tailrank | Furl | Netscape | Yahoo | BlinkList

 

Comments

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

Speak your mind

1 Comment so far

  1. Rod Schwartz on March 11, 2009 11:43 pm

    John

    Thank you so much for your comment
    Very few people take the time to post genuine criticisms–yours is very much appreciated

    If your company is a CIC it is definitely a social enterprise.
    What my post seeks to point out is that the legislation creating CICs is flawed and, for the benefit of CICs, should be strengthened

    As for being elitist about what a social enterprise is, in fact, I would support a very broad view
    Furthermore, I think we should spend less time debating this stuff and more time doing good things

    Good luck with your CIC–we at socialinvestments.com accept, embrace and try to support what CICs are doing

    regards, rod

Join us
  • Get discounts on all our conferences and events
  • Save money on professional services
  • Get exposure to new sources of capital
  • Post jobs for free
RSS Feed
 Subscribe here

If you’re having problems subscribing, try updating your web browser (you need to have IE7 or similar) or click here to download a free news aggregator

Bad Behavior has blocked 523 access attempts in the last 7 days.

catfund:mercury1:status:ok