FT : Waldorf Astoria bids to sell homes despite Manhattan market doldrums

Waldorf Astoria bids to sell homes despite Manhattan market doldrums
New owner Dajia hopes hotel’s cachet will translate into sales of renovated luxury apartments

Manhattan’s flagging market for luxury homes is being put to the ultimate test, with the sale of apartments in the Waldorf Astoria hotel, possibly New York’s most glamorous address.

The art deco building has been synonymous with fame and fashion for more than a century, counting royalty, stars of entertainment and politicians among its guests, and hosting some of the city’s grandest parties. Composer Cole Porter used to live here, as did former US president Herbert Hoover and the Duke and Duchess of Windsor. Frank Sinatra sang in the glittering ballroom.

Its current owner, the embattled Chinese insurer Dajia, hopes the hotel’s cachet will translate into sales of renovated luxury apartments after it spent more than $1.95bn purchasing the building in 2014 and a further $1bn on reconstruction.

Broker Dan Tubb of Douglas Elliman, an estate agent with exclusive rights for marketing Waldorf properties, is convinced buyers will overcome the weakness of the luxury market, where sales have slumped and prices have dropped amid reports of oversupply. “Because of that global awareness and love for the property, I believe there’s going to be a greater passion for this building than really any other residential property in the city,” he says.

Other agents are not convinced. Andrew Brenta, president of New York-based broker UbiQ NY, which has a mostly international client base, says he has yet to receive any inquiries about the development. “Probably due to its location and a saturated luxury market, I have had no interest — literally zero,” he says.

Dajia, formerly known as Anbang, is converting the historic 1,413-room hotel into one with 375 rooms, plus 375 residences for purchase, marking the first time anyone will be able to own a home in the Waldorf. The apartments, which are slated to go on sale before the spring, will hit the market in the midst of one of the worst luxury property slumps in Manhattan in recent years. Sales of apartments priced above $5m were down nearly 38 per cent year on year in the fourth quarter of 2019, according to data from Douglas Elliman.

The market downturn has been caused by oversupply of the most expensive properties, economic jitters among buyers and the expectation that prices may have further to fall. A pullback by foreign buyers, including wealthy Chinese and Russian investors, and tax changes that have negated some incentives to purchase a home rather than rent, have accelerated the slump.

An updated New York City mansion tax, which took effect in mid-2019, added a sliding scale of charges on purchases of homes costing more than $1m. In addition, tax reforms by US president Donald Trump put a limit on how much state and local tax could be deducted from federal taxes, making it more expensive to live in high-tax states such as New York.

Garrett Derderian, managing director for market analysis at New York-based real estate broker Core, says there will “certainly be some buyers who only want to purchase in the Waldorf given the name recognition and historic nature of the building itself, which may result in an initial bump of activity”. But he warns: “I do not anticipate this building bucking the trend in terms of the overall market direction. Competition is exceedingly tough in this space and price point, and many new developments at similar price points offer a [wider] range of amenities.”

Derderian adds that the location in a predominantly commercial district — among the corporate headquarters of Park Avenue — as opposed to an upmarket residential neighbourhood, could be a hurdle.

However, Dajia and its agent hopes the Waldorf apartments will buck the market. “When I speak to people about what I’m doing they light up and tell me their stories [of staying at the hotel]. That is an immediate differentiator between this building and the rest of the buildings on the market,” says Tubbs. He says he has received inquiries from prospective buyers “in every continent except Antarctica”, many looking for pieds-à-terre, plus New Yorkers hoping to buy a piece of history. Some have expressed interest in what were rooms or suites occupied by celebrities known to have stayed at the Waldorf.

Dajia has created a range of smaller, cheaper apartments, starting at $1.7m, in addition to larger, more luxurious options, including two penthouses in the hotel’s two pinnacles. More than half of the 375 units will be studios or one- or two-bedroom apartments, with an average size of 1,560 square feet, making them more affordable.

The hotel was originally opened in 1893 on Fifth Avenue but was later demolished to make way for the Empire State Building. It was rebuilt at its current location in 1931, occupying a full city block between Park and Lexington Avenues and 49th and 50th Streets on the east side of Midtown Manhattan. Debra Schmidt Bach, curator of decorative arts at the New York Historical Society, says the Waldorf’s historic use of cutting-edge technologies sets it apart.

The hotel was the first with telephones in every guest room and one of the first to offer room-service dining. In 1939, it was also one of the first in the world to add air conditioning. The original hotel had a roof garden that could be converted to a skating rink in winter, and was among the first to have a men’s barber shop and women’s beauty salon on the premises.

The 1931 building was the first skyscraper hotel, at 47 floors, and had its own private underground railroad platform, where dignitaries such as US president Franklin D Roosevelt could arrive in secrecy. It was also one of the first places in the US where women were allowed to dine or have tea publicly, and where women were allowed to smoke.

“The hotel was expensive to stay in, so it really attracted an upscale and wealthy clientele,” says Schmidt Bach. “It wasn’t built to attract businesspeople, so it became associated with a different social milieu.” The hotel retained a level of glamour through the 1970s into the 1980s but, by the time it was landmarked by the city in 1993, “it had seen better days and there were many other hotels that were newer,” she says.


Dajia has hired French architect Jean-Louis Deniot to design the apartment interiors, which he has given an updated art deco look. The building will have a private porte cochère entrance, and personal concierge closets for secure, discreet package deliveries.

The building’s future ownership may depend on how well sales go. Dajia started life as Anbang, an acquisitive private group run by chairman Wu Xiaohui, who built a debt-fuelled global banking, insurance and property empire, and bought the Waldorf from hotel chain Hilton Worldwide.

But Anbang ran into financial difficulties and was taken over by the Chinese government in 2017. Wu was accused of fraud and later sentenced to 18 years in prison. Beijing, which renamed the company last year, is now in talks with investors over the sale of its 98 per cent stake in the whole group, as well as stepping up sales of Dajia assets, including the Waldorf properties.

Andrew Miller, chief executive of Dajia US, says the state aid has helped the company achieve stability. It is “very firmly committed” to completing the Waldorf project, he says. “There is a broader recognition within the company and beyond of its importance.” The coming months will show whether property buyers agree.

WSJ : Biden Takes Texas, Sweeps the South; Sanders Wins California

Biden Takes Texas, Sweeps the South; Sanders Wins California
Results undercut Bloomberg’s big-spending strategy

Breaking

*Biden won Texas, AP projected, and swept the South. But Sanders won California, the biggest Super Tuesday state, setting up a fight for the nomination.

Joe Biden notched an impressive string of Super Tuesday victories, while Bernie Sanders won delegate-rich California, as the pair broke away from the field in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

The results in Tuesday contests undercut the big-spending strategy of former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who had hinged his candidacy on performing well in March contests. Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s dismal performance ratcheted up pressure on her to prove she still has a viable path to the nomination after losing her home state of Massachusetts to Mr. Biden.

The Top Takeaways From Super Tuesday

The former vice president also won in Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Arkansas, Alabama, continuing his strength in Southern states, and scored victories in Oklahoma and Minnesota, home to his former rival, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who gave him a key late endorsement this week.

Mr. Sanders also won his home state of Vermont as well as Utah and Colorado, the Associated Press projected. Mr. Bloomberg, who had vastly outspent Mr. Biden in some states only to lose to him, won the territory of American Samoa, according to the AP. He appeared likely to pick up a much smaller number of Democratic delegates than the two front-runners.

The other big delegate prize, Texas, remained too close to call late Tuesday. While Mr. Sanders was declared the winner in California shortly after polls closed, the final allocation of the Golden State’s 415 pledged delegates might not be decided for days because of the large number of mail-in ballots. Delegates are distributed on a proportional basis at the district and state level, but the share awarded depends on how many candidates meet the threshold of 15% of the vote.

Speaking at a victory rally in Vermont ahead of the results, Mr. Sanders said he was “cautiously optimistic” about California and noted he had performed well in Texas.

“When we began this race, everybody said it couldn’t be done. But tonight I tell you with absolute confidence, we’re going to win the Democratic nomination,” Mr. Sanders said.

Mr. Biden benefited from the momentum his campaign generated since his South Carolina victory on Saturday, exit polls published by CNN showed. About half of Democratic primary voters in Virginia and Oklahoma said they made their decision within the past few days, and Mr. Biden won roughly six in 10 of those voters in both states. Late-deciders represented a smaller proportion of the vote in North Carolina and Alabama, but he also had the largest share of those voters there.

“It’s a good night. It’s a good night,” Mr. Biden said to cheers at a rally in Los Angeles, adding: “They don’t call it Super Tuesday for nothing.” On Tuesday, one-third of the party’s pledged delegates were allocated to the party’s summer convention.

He credited Ms. Klobuchar for his win in her home state, where exit polls showed about half of Democratic primary voters made their decisions in the last few days and the largest share went for Mr. Biden.

Ahead of the contests, Ms. Warren and Mr. Bloomberg signaled they didn’t think any candidate could capture enough delegates to win the nomination outright, instead viewing their path as coming from a contested convention.

But early signs indicated that Mr. Bloomberg’s big-spending strategy hadn’t paid off in some states, and an adviser said the former mayor would be reassessing his investment in the coming days. For example, the billionaire’s campaign spent about $18 million—about 50 times as much as Mr. Biden and his allies put in—on TV and radio ads in Virginia. A similar story played out in North Carolina, where Mr. Bloomberg spent about $17 million to Mr. Biden’s roughly $466,000.

Speaking to supporters late Tuesday in West Palm Beach, Fla., Mr. Bloomberg said, “No matter how many delegates we win tonight, we have done something no one else thought was possible. In just three months, we’ve gone from just 1% in the polls to being a contender for the Democratic nomination.”

For her part, Ms. Warren largely ignored Tuesday’s results in an appearance in Detroit, sticking to her stump speech. She was expected to return to Massachusetts on Wednesday.

Mr. Sanders had a head-start on collecting delegates and momentum by winning in New Hampshire and Nevada and achieving a virtual tie in Iowa. He also painted the coalescing of other candidates around Mr. Biden as an effort by the political establishment to hamstring his candidacy.

Mr. Biden’s campaign was boosted in recent days by the endorsements of Ms. Klobuchar, former Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., and former Rep. Beto O’Rourke of Texas.

Mr. Biden, who said he had raised about $15 million in three days, placed a new $1.5 million in TV ads in Michigan, Missouri and Mississippi, which will hold contests later this month.

Earlier Tuesday, Mr. Bloomberg, who has spent more than a half-billion dollars of his own money on his campaign, said he wasn’t planning on dropping out, despite Mr. Biden gaining endorsements from the more centrist candidates.

“Have you asked Joe whether he’s going to drop out?” Mr. Bloomberg said. The former mayor, who skipped the four February contests, had poured more than $170 million into advertising in Super Tuesday states and spent tens of millions more on an extensive ground operation for those contests.

The rallying behind Mr. Biden and clearing of competitors in the party’s moderate wing played into the decision-making of Jennifer Felix, a 51-year-old real-estate agent from Alexandria, Va.

At her polling place in the city’s Old Town section, Ms. Felix said she voted for Mr. Biden after seeing the party come together in recent days.

“I think Joe Biden has the experience, and I’m looking forward to who he picks as vice president,” she said, noting that she considered Ms. Warren and Mr. Sanders to be too divisive.

Meanwhile, Mr. Sanders’s economic message appealed to other voters. In the Los Angeles neighborhood of Mar Vista, Anya McGrath said she voted for the Vermont senator because she believed he was “more in touch with people like me, middle America.”

“He speaks for underserved people. I’m kind of all about getting money out of the hands of billionaires and getting it back to the people,” said Ms. McGrath, a 36-year-old preschool teacher.

One question that loomed was the effect of early voting on the outcome, with more than 1.4 million Democratic ballots in California and another million in Texas cast before last weekend.

When many voters cast early ballots, Mr. Sanders was riding high off his early victories, Mr. Buttigieg was close on his heels—and Mr. Biden’s campaign was sputtering. Billionaire activist Tom Steyer, who spent more than $210 million on advertising, including a heavy investment in California, was also in the race until he dropped out Saturday.

As Democrats fought for Super Tuesday primacy, President Trump, who faces no serious opposition in the Republican primaries, took to Twitter Tuesday night to tout his wins. As each state was declared, Mr. Trump tweeted “THANK YOU” alongside a picture of himself giving a double thumbs up.

FT : Hedge funds Caxton and Kirkoswald profit from bets on lower rates

Hedge funds Caxton and Kirkoswald profit from bets on lower rates
Soaring government bonds deliver bumper returns in angst-ridden markets

Bets on lower interest rates have fuelled profits for hedge fund managers including Andrew Law’s Caxton Associates and former Moore Capital whizz Greg Coffey in a chaotic period for markets.

Mr Law’s London-based Caxton, one of the world’s oldest and best-known funds, has gained more than 3 per cent in its main Global fund since the start of last week, taking returns this year to 7 per cent. A portfolio run solely by Mr Law also profited and is up 8 per cent this year.

Mr Coffey made a 5.2 per cent gain last month at New York-based Kirkoswald Capital Partners, the hedge fund he started in 2018 after coming out of retirement, said two people who had seen the fund’s performance figures.

Like a number of macro traders — fund managers who bet on moves in bonds, currencies and stocks — both Mr Law and Mr Coffey have been wagering on rising prices for bonds. Such assets have been lifted in anticipation of further easing of monetary policy by central banks to combat the economic damage caused by the coronavirus, and as investors have sought havens from the stock market rout of the past week.

Yields on two-year Treasuries have slumped from 1.35 per cent going into last week to 0.83 per cent as of Monday, and they dropped briefly below 0.75 per cent following the US Federal Reserve’s surprise 0.5 percentage point cut in interest rates on Tuesday. Yields fall when prices rise.

Yields on the 10-year US Treasury note, meanwhile, have dropped from 1.47 per cent going into last week to a low of 1.02 per cent on Tuesday.

“With recessionary fears in the air, funds that own bonds have done well,” said Amin Rajan, chief executive of consultancy CREATE-Research. Equity funds, however, “are having a torrid time”.

The gains take returns for Mr Coffey, who manages close to $2bn in assets, to more than 6 per cent this year. Last year he posted returns of 28 per cent.

Funds that bet on volatility have also gained. The Vix index — known as the stock market’s “fear gauge” — jumped from 17.1 percentage points going into last week to nearly 50 at one stage last week. During the course of that week the S&P 500 dropped 11.5 per cent, although it has recovered around 2 per cent so far this week.

Greenwich, Connecticut-based One River Asset Management, posted a 17.2 per cent gain in its Long Volatility fund last week, taking this year’s gains to around 14.5 per cent. Its computer-driven Dynamic Convexity fund made 7.8 per cent last week, taking this year’s gains to 8.2 per cent.

The gains come at a testing time for hedge funds, many of which have been running bets on rising stock prices. Equity hedge funds were down 3.8 per cent on average in February, according to data group HFR.

Among funds to have been hit are computer-driven funds that bet on market trends and patterns. Aspect Capital, which made 20 per cent last year, lost 4.3 per cent last week, according to numbers sent to investors and seen by the Financial Times, reducing gains this year to 0.6 per cent. The fund lost money betting on rising stock prices but made some back with its positions in bonds.

Man Group’s $4.1bn AHL Evolution fund, which bets on trends in niche markets such as emerging-market interest rate derivatives and German power, fell 3.8 per cent last month, meaning it is down 3.9 per cent this year. Its $6.3bn Dimension fund, which uses machine learning and other techniques to trade volatility, stocks and other assets, lost 3.7 per cent last month and has dropped 3.4 per cent this year.

>>> What to look at today - 4th of March 2020

U.S. stock futures rebounded after Tuesday’s sharp decline, and the yen dipped, as investors took in Super Tuesday election results alongside the Federal Reserve’s emergency interest-rate cut. Treasuries pared gains.
Joe Biden’s surprise comeback in the race blunted the chance of the Bernie Sanders nomination that had unsettled some investors. Futures on the S&P 500 rose more than 1% after the index tumbled almost 3% in wake of the 50 basis-point Fed move that failed to ease concerns about an economic downturn. A volatile session for Asian stocks saw declines in Australia offset gains in South Korea, while Japan ended little changed. Chinese and Hong Kong shares fluctuated. Ten-year Treasury yields stayed below 1% after falling below that level for the first time Tuesday.
US After Hours CVET +14.8%, BNFT +9.5%, FOXF +7.1%, AMBA +6.7%, YEXT +6.2% up strongly on earnings; CDLX -28.2%, AVAV -9.5%, JWN -7.3% lead on downside

Nikkei +0.08% Hang Seng -0.18% CSI +0.15% Shanghai +0.23% Shenzen -0.25%

Eur$ 1.1157 CNH 6.9359 CNY 6.9379 JPY 107.42 GBP 1.2814 CHF 0.9573 RUB 65.8751 TRY 6.1281 WTI$47.75 +1.20%

S&P +1.18% EuroStoxx +0.27% FTSE +0.02% Dax +0.20% SMI

Macro :
- U.K. May Levy 3% Tax on Non-Residents Buying Property, FT Says
- Fed Should Have Stuck to Wait-and-See Approach on Rates: BBH

Keep an eye on :
- AMBA US : Ambarella First Quarter Revenue Forecast Beats Highest Estimate
- AMZN US : Amazon Employee in Seattle Has Confirmed Case of Coronavirus
- ANDR AV : Andritz Fourth Quarter Net Income Misses Lowest Estimate
- ARCAD NA : Arcadis CFO Leaves Dutch Company After Roughly Two-Year Stint
- ATOCA SS : Atlas Copco 1Q Growth Seen Softer After Virus Impact: Berenberg
- AUTN SW : Autoneum Full Year Ebit Loss Wider Than Estimates
- BARC LN : Banks issue emergency loans to firms hit by coronavirus crisis
- BYW6 GY : BayWa Full Year Ebit EU188.4 Mln, +9.3% Y/y
- BEKB BB : Bekaert Full Year Adjusted Ebit 2.5% Above Estimates
- BIM FP : BioMerieux Offering by Holder Prices 600k Shares for EU49m
- BOSN SW : Bossard Full Year Ebit CHF95.7 Mln
- BNR GY : Brenntag Full Year Oper Ebitda Meets Estimates
- BUCN SW : Bucher Full Year Dividend Per Share CHF8 Vs. CHF8 Y/y
- CSGN SW : Credit Suisse Sees Funding-Strain Risk Without Fed Liquidity
- DAI GY : Daimler Unit Plans Bond Issuance in Hungary, Scope Ratings Says
- PBB GY : Deutsche PBB Oper Income Beats Highest Est., ‘Cautious’ for 2020
- DLG GY : Dialog Semi Sees First Quarter Revenue $220 Mln To $250 Mln
- DOKA SW : dormakaba First Half Net Sales Match Estimates
- ELIS FP : Elis Sees 2020 Organic Revenue About +3%
- ERF FP : Eurofins Scientific Boosts 2020 Adjusted Ebitda Forecast
- EVN AV : EnBW Is Said Close to Sell $970 Million EVN Stake to Vienna
- EVK GY : Evonik 2020 Adjusted Ebitda Forecast Midpoint Meets Estimates
- EXO IM : EXOR in Pact for Sale of PartnerRe to Covea for $9B (1)
- EXO IM : Agnelli Family Agrees to Sell PartnerRe to Covea for $9 Billion
- FCA IM : Fiat Resumes Normal Production at Parts-Constrained Serbia Plant
- GLEN LN : Glencore Wins Approval for Glendell Coal Mine Extension
- HMB SS : H&M opens up global supply chain to rivals in green push, Swedish group is launching a new service to allow smaller retailers to use its supply chain - FT : https://on.ft.com/2x1ekCu
- HELN SW : Helvetia Full Year IFRS Net CHF538.1 Mln, +25% Y/y
- HWDN LN : Howden to Benefit From Better Kitchens Market, U.K. Budget: Peel
- MS IM : Mediaset Says Vivendi Threatens New Legal Action Against Merger
- MOR GY : MorphoSys, Incyte Get Antitrust Clearance for Tafasitamab Pact
- NESN SW : Nestle Waters to Cut 105 Jobs in New York State
- NOKIA FH : Nokia Cuts Max. 148 Jobs in Finland, Fewer Than Planned
- ONTEX BB : Ontex Sees 2020 Comparable Sales Growth +1% To +3%
- PNDORA DC : Pandora Cuts 180 Jobs as Part of Reorganization
- PSH NA : Pershing Says Coronavirus Likely to Have ‘Substantial’ Impact
- SESG FP : Intelsat Payout Little Changed in FCC’s Order for Airwaves Plan
- SFZN SW : Siegfried Full Year Sales Meet Estimates
- SXX LN : Sirius Shareholders Back Anglo Rescue Plan, Saving Potash Mine
- SNBN SW : SNB Is Becoming Gloomier About Global Growth, Maechler Says
- TMV GY :TeamViewer Holder Tigerluxone Sarl to Offer 22m Shrs, Share Sale by Permira Said to Be Covered @ €32
- TSLA US : World’s Biggest Wealth Fund Slashed Tesla Stake Before Rally
- UEX LN : Urban Exposure Plans Breakup After Investor Pressure: Sky
- VIV FP : Mediaset Says Vivendi Threatens New Legal Action Against Merger
- VOW3 GY : VW Jury Will Weigh Punitive Damages Over Diesel Cheating

>>> Europe : Brokers Upgrades & Downgrades - 4th of March 2020

>>> Up
* Acciona Raised to Buy at Goldman; PT 140 euros
* Bayer Raised to Buy at Deutsche Bank; PT 85 euros
* BHP Raised to Overweight at JPMorgan
* CMC Markets Raised to Buy at Peel Hunt
* DKSH Raised to Buy at MainFirst; PT 70 Swiss francs
* Edenred Raised to Overweight at JPMorgan; PT 54 euros
* EDP Renovaveis Raised to Buy at Goldman; PT 14.50 euros
* Handelsbanken Raised to Hold at DNB Markets; PT 100 kronor
* HeidelbergCement Raised to Buy at LBBW; PT 60 euros
* Howden Joinery Raised to Add at Peel Hunt
* ICA Gruppen Raised to Hold at Handelsbanken; PT 385 kronor
* Lundbeck Raised to Neutral at JPMorgan; PT 265 kroner
* Munich Re Raised to Hold at Jefferies; PT 215 euros
* PGNiG Raised to Buy at Citi
* Rockwool Raised to Buy at Handelsbanken; PT 1,850 kroner
* Swedbank Raised to Buy at DNB Markets; PT 180 kronor
* Voltabox Raised to Buy at FMR Frankfurt Main; PT 8.80 euros

>>> Down
* Borr Drilling Cut to Hold at SEB Equities; PT 15 kroner
* Qiagen Cut to Hold at Berenberg; PT 39 euros

>>> Initiation
* Addex Therapeutics Rated New Sell at Baader Helvea

>>> Call
* European Banks Face Pressure on Many Fronts, Berenberg Says
* Home-Bound Players Could Boost EU Video Games Stocks: Jefferies
* Howden to Benefit From Better Kitchens Market, U.K. Budget: Peel
* Munich Re Raised at Jefferies With Capital Expectations Exceeded

FT : Overseas buyers of UK property face new surcharge of up to 3%

Overseas buyers of UK property face new surcharge of up to 3%
Budget measure would raise £120m annually to help the homeless but alarms estate agents

Rishi Sunak is preparing to unveil plans in his first Budget as chancellor next week for a new surcharge of up to 3 per cent on overseas buyers of UK property, a move likely to cause alarm across the real estate sector.

At present non-resident homebuyers pay the same rates of stamp duty land tax as those living in the UK — rising from 0 per cent on property purchases of less than £125,000 up to 12 per cent for values over £1.5m. There is already a further 3 per cent charge for people buying a second home.

In the Conservative party’s election manifesto last year, Boris Johnson promised to impose an extra 3 per cent surcharge on foreign buyers, raising an additional £120m a year that would be invested in schemes to tackle homelessness.

Although a final decision on the level of the surcharge has not been made ahead of Mr Sunak’s Budget on March 11, senior Tory figures have confirmed to the Financial Times that the additional stamp duty levy will be introduced.

The figures said the final rate could end up lower than 3 per cent — reflecting concerns from the property industry over the potential impact of the levy. “There are still moving parts,” said one Conservative insider.

Charlie Wells, managing director of buying agency Prime Purchase, said there was “no logic” to the surcharge.

“If this government thinks that penalising the people at the top, particularly foreigners, will revitalise the economy and get things going, then it is very wrong,” he said. “It is hard enough trying to sell a property in this market.”

The government has used stamp duty on residential properties as a handy revenue raiser in recent years — netting £9.3bn in 2017-18 against £3bn in 2008-09 — but ministers are cautious of setting the rate so high that it has a chilling effect on the market.

The idea of the new surcharge was first raised two years ago, with the government repeatedly tweaking the level of the proposed duty before it was left on the drawing board following Theresa May’s resignation as prime minister last year.

Since taking over from Mrs May, Mr Johnson has pushed to revive the surcharge, opting for the more ambitious 3 per cent figure.

The Tories believe that such a move would affect up to 70,000 transactions a year and raise £120m in revenue, which could be channelled towards helping the homeless, the Conservative party said.

Mr Sunak, who was chief secretary to the Treasury at the time, argued the move would give UK residents “a good bite at the apple” at a time when there had been “excessive foreign ownership” of UK real estate.

But if set at 3 per cent, the new charge would leave some foreign buyers at the top end of the UK property market paying as much as 18 per cent in stamp duty.

The top rate is 12 per cent, charged on the portion of the price above £1.5m. But where buyers (including British expatriates resident abroad) already own a property elsewhere, they could now face two further levies: both the existing 3 per cent surcharge on second homes and the new surcharge on foreign buyers.

Neal Hudson, director at housing market research firm Residential Analysts, said that if the government introduced a slightly lower charge it would reflect the need to strike the right balance between the priorities of home ownership and housing supply.

High-density city centre housing developments are often reliant on overseas sales to get going, since developers have to sell a certain proportion of properties before their backers release funds to begin building.

“Unless you’re changing the way the market is financed then overseas buyers are going to be an important part of that,” said Mr Hudson.

FT : UK watchdog admits 7 investment funds breached ‘trash ratio’

UK watchdog admits 7 investment funds breached ‘trash ratio’
Revelation raises pressure on Andrew Bailey ahead of parliamentary grilling

The UK’s financial watchdog has revealed for the first time the extent to which fund managers breached European rules designed to limit the liquidity crunches behind scandals involving high profile fund managers, including Neil Woodford and GAM.

Funds that allow investors to withdraw their capital daily but hold hard-to-sell assets were said to have been “built on a lie” last year by Mark Carney, outgoing governor of the Bank of England. Regulators across Europe have since scrutinised how closely fund managers adhere to so-called Ucits fund rules that limit holdings in unquoted securities to 10 per cent of their portfolio, often referred to as the “trash ratio”.

Responding to a Freedom of Information Act request by the Financial Times, the Financial Conduct Authority disclosed that seven UK funds had breached the 10 per cent limit, a total of eight times — not including breaches made by Mr Woodford’s now defunct Equity Income fund — since June 2017.

The admissions come at a delicate time for Andrew Bailey, head of the FCA who is due to replace Mr Carney at the BoE this month, as he prepares to answer questions on his suitability for his new role from parliament’s Treasury select committee on Wednesday.

Mr Bailey’s record at the FCA has been criticised by the likes of John McDonnell, Labour’s shadow chancellor, and campaigner Gina Miller, over the number of prominent scandals under his watch, including the suspension of funds run by Mr Woodford and GAM, the Swiss group, after they invested heavily in unlisted securities and could not pay back fleeing customers.

The latest figures also revealed that Mr Bailey previously understated the number of breaches in testimony to the committee.

“There needs to be tighter rules on fund illiquidity,” said Stuart Alexander, chief executive of Gemini Investments, a fund services company. “Ucits funds should not be allowed to hold illiquid assets — it does nobody any favours and adds unnecessary risk.”

The FCA initially declined to provide information under the FOI Act, but relented after the FT called for an internal review of the decision. The regulator refused to provide names of the funds that breached.

Half of the breaches in the FCA’s disclosure were defined as passive, meaning they resulted from market moves such as falling public share prices or rising valuations of private companies. But the four other cases were classed as active, where fund managers make investment decisions that tip the portfolio over the 10 per cent threshold.

Fund managers are required to inform the FCA of breaches as soon as they happen and are generally given six months to fix passive breaches. But in one example, the fund manager did not inform the FCA for 10 months.

“If a fund manager makes an active breach it should not take more than six months to fix, it should be done in six hours,” added Mr Alexander.

In previous testimony to the select committee last June, Mr Bailey said just one fund other than Mr Woodford’s flagship vehicle had breached the limit in the previous 12 months, which he described as a “very small fund”. The latest figures provided by the FCA show two funds breached in that period, in July and August 2018.

The FCA did not respond to a request for comment on this point.

Sean Tuffy, head of market and regulatory intelligence at Citigroup’s custody and fund services business, said regulators were taking a greater interest in how managers were using the 10 per cent ratio. “Are they using it as a buffer, which is how it was intended to be used, or are they using it to access asset classes they shouldn’t be investing in? That’s a big question for regulators right now.”

In January, the regulator admitted to the FT it had no central database to keep track of funds that suspend trading, despite carrying out several reviews of the sector’s robustness.

FT : Kirkland & Ellis poaches top Cfius adviser from rival Skadden Arps

Kirkland & Ellis poaches top Cfius adviser from rival Skadden Arps
Ivan Schlager will join law firm amid battle for foreign takeover specialists

The law firm Kirkland & Ellis has poached a leading Washington adviser to companies navigating secretive US foreign investment reviews, in the latest sign of intense demand for such dealmaking specialists.

Ivan Schlager will join Kirkland as a partner from US rival Skadden Arps later this year, leaving the firm where he has worked since 1999.

Mr Schlager is widely seen among US dealmakers as one of a handful of top advisers who regularly help companies on deals that must gain clearance from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or Cfius.

The secretive group made up of representatives from across the executive branch of the federal government vets whether deals will harm US national security and has the ability to block them in the extreme.

“Ivan is among the top lawyers in the country for Cfius and national security-related issues, which are prevalent in more transactions today than ever before,” said Jon Ballis, chairman of Kirkland’s global management executive committee.

Law firms try to leverage their expertise in navigating Cfius reviews as a source of differentiation to win new client work. Last year, for instance, the UK law firm Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer hired Aimen Mir, the former Treasury department official who co-ordinated Cfius reviews.

Cfius has become even more important to dealmaking during the administration of Donald Trump, which has passed legislation to broaden the body’s reach as part of an effort to limit the ability of Chinese companies to acquire or invest in their US counterparts.

Mr Schlager’s hire marks the latest high-profile legal appointment by Kirkland, which has been aggressively poaching top talent from rivals in London and New York by paying top of the market salaries.

Kirkland’s hires in recent years include top private equity lawyers David Higgins and Adrian Maguire in London from Freshfields. In New York, the firm’s hires have included Eric Schiele and Jonathan Davis from Cravath Swaine & Moore. More recently it lured away Daniel Klein from law firm Paul Weiss.

The tactic has contributed to catapulting the Chicago-headquartered law firm into the upper echelon of corporate law globally.

Kirkland became the highest-grossing law firm in the world at the end of 2018, with revenues of $3.7bn, up almost 20 per cent on the previous year. Kirkland’s 430 equity partners — who split the firm’s profits — took home more than $5m on average in 2018.

For Skadden, Mr Schlager’s departure comes months after another Cfius expert at the law firm left to go in-house at Sequoia Capital, the venture capital firm.

FT : H&M opens up global supply chain to rivals in green push

H&M opens up global supply chain to rivals in green push
Swedish group is launching a new service to allow smaller retailers to use its supply chain

Hennes & Mauritz is opening up its global supply chain to other clothing brands as the world’s second-largest fashion retailer tries to push more sustainable ways of making garments.

The Swedish group is launching a new service to allow smaller brands to use it and its suppliers in everything from product development and sourcing to production and logistics.

“We are not concerned or afraid of opening up the supply chain. Individual brands can only make it so far. To take it further in the industry we need to open it up to collaboration,” said Gustaf Asp, head of the new venture known as Treadler.

The plans, which are beginning with a pilot scheme involving several unnamed brands, are one of the first initiatives of new H&M chief executive Helena Helmersson, a longtime sustainability executive at the retailer.

Ms Helmersson said that “it’s no secret that we are part of an industry that’s been commercially successful but not sustainable enough.

“To future proof our industry, we have focused on transforming and improving our supply chain. We’ve realised that the output of our efforts can be valuable for others too,” she added.

H&M is known for its cheap clothes and fast fashion, leading to accusations that it fuels overconsumption as well as criticism of its approach to workers’ rights. But the Swedish retailer has long worked on its sustainability strategy and is aiming to become carbon neutral by 2030, using more renewable energy and more recycled materials in its production.

H&M, like most players in the fashion industry, does not own any of its own factories but works with suppliers around the world.

Mr Asp said the group could help other brands design a supplier network to help them avoid the effects of a trade war or try to minimise the impact from the coronavirus.

He declined to comment on how big the business could be for H&M, saying that it would start small but he added that the market was “sizeable”.

Companies across industries have opened up their research processes to others including academics and even competitors in what has become known as open innovation. But few have offered their production network to rival brands.

Mr Asp said the initiative would be open to any maker of garments or textiles and that H&M was starting a pilot with several midsized and large brands in what he described as “quite a disorganised sector”.

Asked whether H&M was merely increasing emissions by producing more clothes, he responded: “Demand for affordable fashion will increase. We believe it’s better that it grows in a sustainable supply chain than a less sustainable one. But it doesn’t solve the problem of overconsumption.”

FT : Can I increase divorce payments from my ex-husband?

Can I increase divorce payments from my ex-husband?
I am approaching retirement age with very little pension to live on

I divorced my husband 20 years ago and was awarded a small amount to purchase a house for myself and our two young children — such a small sum that I had to take out a mortgage and work part time. The children are now adults, but I have a court order for life for a regular payment until I remarry or die — neither of which I intend doing any time soon.

My ex-husband, who is wealthy, took me to court seven years ago to stop my monthly payment of £836, but he dropped the case after the judge asked him to value his considerable assets. I am now in rented accommodation. Do I have a case to go back to court and ask for full and final settlement now I am approaching retirement age with very little pension to live on?

Sarah Balfour, a family law partner at Irwin Mitchell, says that whenever you have a question about a court order, the first thing to do is to go back to the order in question and re-read it.

The family courts generally deal with three types of claims — those relating to income (known as maintenance), those relating to capital (including lump sums and property transfers) and pension claims. Does your order dismiss your capital and pension claims? If not, the court may consider an application if you can show that you are in need.

From what you say in your letter, your claims for spousal maintenance are open. You appear to have a “joint lives” maintenance order. This means your ex-husband has to pay you a fixed sum (£836 per month) until one of you dies, you remarry, or the court makes an alternative order.

An order for maintenance is always variable. Either you or your ex can apply to bring it to an early end, as he attempted to do seven years ago, or either of you can apply to vary the monthly amount.

If you can show that you have behaved reasonably and maximised your own resources, but that the monthly sum paid to you is not enough to meet your needs then you may be able to increase it. The court will also consider whether your ex-husband can afford to pay you more.

If your capital and pension claims have been dismissed, you are not entitled to a “second bite of the cherry”, but you may be able to capitalise your claims. For example, you might be able to swap your ongoing entitlement to maintenance for a one-off payment.

You should always think carefully before returning a matter to court — the law in this area is discretionary, and there is a risk you will be unsuccessful and end up worse off. With these sorts of cases the court can make costs orders against the unsuccessful party. It’s also important to consider out-of-court settlement — will your ex agree to go to mediation?

Deciding whether or not you should vary or capitalise maintenance can be a tricky question. You will need to weigh up the pros and cons and you will need careful legal and financial advice.

Toby Yerburgh, partner and head of family law at Collyer Bristow, says you are the “lucky” recipient of a joint lives spousal order which entitles you to maintenance until you remarry, die, your ex-husband dies or there is a further order.

These are increasingly rare these days, as courts look to put a term on spousal maintenance orders. This aligns us closer to the position in most European countries and Scotland, where spousal maintenance tends to be limited to a couple of years at most.

That said, spousal maintenance is always variable on the application of either party. On a variation application, a court will look to achieve a “clean break” if possible, to bring the spousal maintenance to an end upon payment of an appropriate lump sum.

This is a two-stage process. The court will look to vary the maintenance figure up or down depending upon the circumstances. This will principally be based on your own and your ex-husband’s needs and financial resources. Once the court has settled on a figure it will look to see if this can be capitalised. This will depend upon there being free capital available to your ex-husband that the court considers can be used for this purpose.

The starting point for capitalisation in a case where there is a joint lives order will be the Duxbury tables, a set of actuarial tables used by family lawyers to work out the lump sum payable to replace a specific net income from spousal maintenance for a recipient of a specific age.

Among other things, these assume: constant drawdown; a 3 per cent income yield; capital growth at 3.75 per cent; a 3 per cent rate of inflation; and that you will use all of the income and capital and survive for precisely as long as the average for your contemporaries. For example, if a court decided to increase your maintenance to £15,000 a year to take account of inflation over the past 20 years and you were aged 65 at the time of the hearing, the Duxbury tables suggest you would need a lump sum of £128,000.

That said, if you could not persuade the court to increase the spousal maintenance figure from £10,000 a year, the starting point for the lump sum would only be £52,000. However, the court uses the Duxbury tables as a tool rather than a rule and is ultimately looking to achieve fairness. This could lead to an increase or a decrease in the lump sum payable depending on the circumstances.

Ultimately, though, you can see from the Duxbury figures that there would be a significant risk to you in making an application for a variation: lump sums at this sort of level will not generate anything like the £10,000 a year you are currently receiving.

The opinions in this column are intended for general information purposes only and should not be used as a substitute for professional advice. The Financial Times Ltd and the authors are not responsible for any direct or indirect result arising from any reliance placed on replies, including any loss, and exclude liability to the full extent.