The owner of the London Stock Exchange is plotting a multimillion pound pay rise for its chief executive amid a debate about whether FTSE 100 bosses’ incentive packages are damaging the competitiveness of Britain’s economy.
Sky News has learnt that London Stock Exchange Group (LSEG) is consulting with its major shareholders about a revised pay policy that would give boss David Schwimmer the opportunity to earn almost double his current maximum package of £6.25m.
Last year, Mr Schwimmer was paid just over £4.7m, of which £1m was his base salary, £1.4m his annual bonus and nearly £2m in the form of a long-term incentive award.
Sources said that LSEG was now proposing to increase Mr Schwimmer’s base pay to around £1.25m, while his annual bonus opportunity would increase from 225% of salary to 300%.
In addition, his maximum annual LTIP award would increase from 300% of salary to 550%.
That would mean Mr Schwimmer, who has transformed the company since he took over in 2018, was eligible for a total package of around £11m.
More from Business
Image: LSE CEO David Schwimmer could be in line for a huge pay rise.
One shareholder said they were backing the proposals ahead of LSEG’s annual general meeting in the spring because of concerns about the flow of UK-listed companies heading across the Atlantic to list on US stock markets.
The peer group of companies with which LSEG was competing was not other large FTSE-100 companies, they added, but American technology companies which were able to pay vastly higher remuneration packages.
Advertisement
Julia Hoggett, the LSEG chief executive who runs the London Stock Exchange subsidiary, sparked a debate last year when she warned that lower executive pay was hampering the ability of British companies to draw ‘global talent’ to their ranks.
Mr Schwimmer’s revised pay package has been communicated to nearly 100 investors during private discussions, with the response overwhelmingly positive, according to several sources.
In addition to his bigger pay deal, his minimum shareholding requirement will be increased from four times his salary to six times, according to one shareholder consulted on the plans.
The proposals are significant, partly because LSEG owns the London exchange and Ms Hoggett’s recent comments, but also because the body which represents institutional investors has also signalled a softening approach to large boardroom pay deals.
An LSEG spokeswoman said: “As stated in LSEG’s 2022 annual report, the remuneration committee will present a new policy to shareholders in 2024.
“The committee periodically reviews executive remuneration arrangements, in line with usual corporate governance practices, to ensure they remain fit for purpose and aligned to our ambitious growth strategy.
“The policy will focus on attracting, securing, retaining and rewarding the best talent in a competitive global market.”
Sky News revealed last month that the Investment Association, whose members collectively manage £8.8trn in assets, had drafted a letter to the chairs of FTSE-350 remuneration committees in which it highlighted a significant change in its stance towards bosses’ pay.
The IA said it acknowledged feedback from companies – particularly the largest in the FTSE-100 – that they were finding it increasingly challenging to “attract US executives and compete in the US market” because of the gulf between pay deals for bosses working for London and New York-listed businesses.
The draft also highlighted a growing desire from British companies to introduce so-called hybrid incentive schemes comprising both restricted stock and long-term share awards.
“These global companies are able to use such schemes in the US and other jurisdictions and feel such structures should be used for their executives,” the draft letter says.
The investor body flagged concerns raised by companies that the range of measures – such as malus, clawback and post-employment shareholding requirements – designed to prevent high pay packages being awarded without appropriate long-term evidence of strong financial performance may have gone too far.
“Individually, they are accepted as a means to increase the long-term alignment of executives and shareholders but in aggregate there may be a view that the perceived impact on the value of remuneration received is disproportionate,” it said.
The letter comes amid growing fears for the future of the London stock market following the release of data showing that the declining number of companies listed in the UK has accelerated in recent years, and amid visible signs that the City is losing ground to its biggest global rival.
Last month, Flutter Entertainment, the owner of Paddy Power and Betfair, confirmed that it intended to shift its primary listing to the US, while a growing number of companies have said they plan to float in New York rather than London.
In recent months, a number of prominent public company bosses, including the former chief executives of Barclays, BP and NatWest, have seen tens of millions of pounds of pay awards cancelled and clawed back owing to revelations of misconduct.
The latest intervention from the IA therefore marks a decisive shift from its stance in recent years, which has sought to hold boardroom pay chiefs to account over perceptions of excess in boardroom pay practices.
In 2017, the trade body introduced a public register to draw attention to any public company receiving significant opposition to boardroom pay packages in an attempt to put the brakes on inflated awards.
It also fought to curb windfall gains for executives after the Covid-19 pandemic triggered a plunge in many companies’ share prices, handing them bumper stock awards several years later.
Its revamped approach to executive pay nevertheless has the potential to prove controversial given ongoing concerns about the cost of living and the perspective of campaigners against multimillion pound corporate pay packages.
Britain’s hopes of becoming a critical minerals superpower have been dealt a severe blow after one of its leading companies abandoned its plans to build a rare earths refinery near Hull.
Pensana had pledged to build a £250m refinery on the banks of the Humber, to process rare earths that would have then been used to make magnets for electric cars and wind turbines.
The plant promised to create 126 jobs and was due to receive millions of pounds of government funding.
However, Sky News has learnt that Pensana has decided to scrap the Hull plant and will instead move its refining operations to the US.
Pensana’s chairman, Paul Atherley, said the company had taken the decision after the Trump administration committed to buying rare earths from an American mine, Mountain Pass, at a guaranteed price – something no government in Europe had done.
“That’s repriced the market – and Washington is looking to do more of these deals, moving at an absolute rate of knots,” he said.
“Europe and the UK have been talking about critical minerals for ages. But when the Americans do it, they go big and hard, and make it happen. We don’t; we mostly just talk about it.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
11:18
Can Trump win the mineral war?
The decision comes at a crucial juncture in critical minerals and geopolitics. China produces roughly 90% of all finished rare earth metals – exotic elements essential for the manufacture of many technology, energy and military products.
Pensana had been seen as Britain’s answer to the periodic panics about the availability of rare earths. The site at Saltend Chemicals Park was chosen by the government to launch its critical minerals strategy in 2022.
Visiting for the official groundbreaking, the then business and energy secretary Kwasi Kwarteng said: “This incredible facility will be the only one of its kind in Europe and will help secure the resilience of Britain’s supplies into the future.”
He pledged a government grant to support the scheme. That grant was never received because Pensana never built its plant.
Image: Paul Atherley and Kwasi Kwarteng at a groundbreaking ceremony for the plant in July 2022. Pic: Pensana
Mr Atherley said he is optimistic about another project he’s involved with, to bring lithium refining to Teesside through another company, Tees Valley Lithium.
But, he said, rare earth processing is far more complex, energy-intensive and expensive, making it unviable in the UK, for the time being.
The decision is a further blow for Britain’s chemicals industry, which has faced a series of closures in recent months, including that of Vivergo, a biofuels refiner based in the same chemicals park where Pensana planned to locate its refinery.
Producers warn that Britain’s record energy costs – higher than most other leading economies – are stifling its economy and triggering an outflow of businesses.
The mastermind of a £5bn Chinese investment fraud was found with a device containing £67m of cryptocurrency in a secret pocket of her jogging bottoms when she was arrested after years on the run, a court has heard.
Prosecutors are setting up a compensation scheme after Yadi Zhang, 47, conned around 128,000 Chinese investors into fraudulent wealth schemes between 2014 and 2017.
Zhang, who is also known as Zhimin Qian, admitted money laundering charges after police discovered more than 61,000 Bitcoin, now worth more than £5bn, in digital wallets, in the UK’s biggest ever cryptocurrency seizure.
She arrived in the UK on a false St Kitts and Nevis passport in September 2017 before coming to the attention of police after trying to buy some of London’s most expensive properties.
Image: Zhang rented a £17,000-a-month house in Hampstead, north London. Pic: CPS
Zhang vanished after police raided her £5m six-bedroom rented house near Hampstead Heath in north London in 2018, but was finally arrested in York last year.
In written legal arguments, Martin Evans KC representing the Director of Public Prosecutions Stephen Parkinson, said a ledger and passwords were found in a purpose-made concealed pocket in the jogging bottoms she was wearing.
She revealed the access code for two wallets during interviews in prison, leading investigators to cryptocurrency worth around £67m.
The stash has been added to the £5bn Bitcoin hoard, which has reportedly been earmarked by Chancellor Rachel Reeves to help plug the hole in the public finances.
The fortune is at the centre of a High Court battle between the UK government and thousands of Chinese victims, who want to recover their investment and say it should reflect the huge rise in the value of Bitcoin.
Law firm Fieldfisher, which is representing around 1,000 victims, said some have lost their life savings and many are old and vulnerable.
The court heard the DPP is also setting up a compensation scheme for the victims not represented in court, although no further details have been given.
The judge, Mr Justice Turner, will make orders on the case at a later date.
Zhang pleaded guilty to charges of possessing criminal property and transferring criminal property on or before the 23 April 2024 last month and is in custody awaiting sentencing in November.
Her trial heard that Wen, who previously worked in a Chinese takeaway, was not involved in the alleged fraud but acted as a “front person” to help disguise the source of the money.
The court heard how the two women travelled the world, spending tens of thousands of pounds on designer clothes, jewellery and shoes.
Seng Hok Ling, 47, is said to have replaced Wen as Zhang’s “butler”, organising helpers and booking Airbnbs, including in Scotland, for the fugitive while she was on the run.
Image: Seng Hok Ling. Pic: Met Police
Police found Zhang after carrying out surveillance of Ling and seized assets including encrypted devices, cash, gold and cryptocurrency.
Ling, a Malaysian national from Matlock in Derbyshire, pleaded guilty at Southwark Crown Court to entering into a money laundering arrangement with Zhang on or before 23 April 2024 and will be sentenced alongside her.
Prosecutors said Zhang masterminded a scam in China, before converting the money into cryptocurrency to get it out of the country.
The Government has vowed to pursue a company linked to Baroness Michelle Mone for millions of pounds paid for defective PPE at the height of the COVID pandemic after a High Court deadline passed without repayment.
Earlier this month, the High Court ruled that PPE Medpro, a company founded by Baroness Mone’s husband Doug Barrowman and promoted in government by the Tory peer, was in breach of contract and gave it two weeks to repay the £122m plus interest of £23m.
In a statement, the Health Secretary Wes Streeting said: “At a time of national crisis, PPE Medpro sold the previous government substandard kit and pocketed taxpayers’ hard-earned cash.
“PPE Medpro has failed to meet the deadline to pay – they still owe us over £145m, with interest now accruing daily.”
It is understood that is being charged at a rate of 8%.
More from Money
“We will pursue PPE Medpro with everything we’ve got to get these funds back where they belong – in our NHS,” Mr Streeting concluded.
Earlier a spokesman for Mr Barrowman and the consortium behind the company said the government had not responded to an offer from PPE Medpro to discuss a settlement.
“Very disappointingly, the government has made no effort to respond or seek to enter into discussions,” he said.
During the trial PPE Medpro offered to pay £23m to settle the case but was rejected by the Department of Health and Social Care.
While Mr Barrowman has described himself as the “ultimate beneficial owner” of PPE Medpro, and says £29m of profit from the deal was paid into a trust benefitting his family including Baroness Mone and her children, he was never a director and the couple are not personally liable for the money.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:40
£122m bill that may never be paid
PPE Medpro filed for insolvency the day before Mrs Justice Cockerill’s finding of breach of contract was published, and the company’s most recent accounts show assets of just £666,000.
Court-appointed administrators will now be responsible for recovering as much money as possible on behalf of creditors, principally the DHSC.
With PPE Medpro in administration and potentially limited avenues to recover funds, there is a risk that the government may recover nothing while incurring further legal expenses.
In June 2020, PPE Medpro won contracts worth a total of £203m to provide 210m masks and 25m surgical gowns after Baroness Mone contacted ministers including Michael Gove on the company’s behalf.
While the £81m mask contract was fulfilled the gowns were rejected for failing sterility standards, and in 2022 the DHSC sued. Earlier this month Mrs Justice Cockerill ruled that PPE Medpro was in breach of contract and liable to repay the full amount.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:06
Baroness Mone ‘should resign’
Mr Barrowman has previously named several other companies as part of the gown supply including two registered in the UK, and last week his spokesman said there was a “strong case” for the administrator to pursue them for the money.
One of the companies named has denied any connection to PPE Medpro and two others have not responded to requests for comment.
Insolvency experts say that administrators and creditors, in this case the government, may have some recourse to pursue individuals and entities beyond the liable company, but any process is likely to be lengthy and expensive.
Julie Palmer, a partner at Begbies Traynor, told Sky News: “The administrators will want to look at what’s happened to what look like significant profits made on these contracts.
“If I was looking at this I would want to establish the exact timeline, at what point were the profits taken out.
“They may also want to consider whether there is a claim for wrongful trading, because that effectively pierces the corporate veil of protection of a limited company, and can allow proceedings against company officers personally.
“The net of a director can also be expanded to shadow directors, people sitting in the background quite clearly with a degree of control of the management of the company, in which case some claims may rest against them.”
A spokesman for Forvis Mazars, one of the joint administrators of PPE Medpro, did not comment other than to confirm the firm’s appointment.