Why Toshiba and Johnson & Johnson are the latest corporate behemoths doing the splits
Three is a trend, so the saying goes.
So news of two more big company demergers today, hot on the heels of the three-way break-up of 129-year-old US industrial giant General Electric announced on Wednesday, suggests that “doing the splits” is being looked at anew by company boards.
Toshiba, one of the best known companies in Japan, announced that it is breaking itself up – also splitting itself into three separate businesses.
One division will be focused on Toshiba’s electronics devices
The 146-year old company said one of the them would be focused on infrastructure, including products and services such as water treatment, trains, power turbines and nuclear-plant maintenance.
A second will be focused on electronic devices such as power semiconductors.
The third business, which will retain the Toshiba name, will manage the company’s stake in the flash-memory company Kioxia Holdings and other assets.
The move follows an accounting scandal six years ago – after which activist shareholders urged the company to break itself up.
The measure, however, may not go far enough with those investors that had wanted Toshiba to go private.
It received – and rejected – a takeover proposal in April from CVC, the private equity group, valuing it at $20bn.
General Electric announced a break-up earlier this week
Toshiba’s move attracted a good deal of interest since it has echoes of the GE announcement which, in turn, was at least partly inspired by similar moves two years ago by the German industrial stalwart Siemens.
Hot on the heels of that news came the announcement that Johnson & Johnson, the $429bn healthcare and consumer goods giant that is America’s 12th largest public company, is to split itself in two.
J&J, the world’s biggest healthcare company by both sales and market value, will hive off its consumer health business, the owner of brands such as Band-Aid, Listerine, Tylenol, Neutrogena and the eponymous Johnson’s baby oil, into a separate company.
The core J&J business will retain the company’s existing pharmaceuticals and medical devices businesses.
The consumer health business will be the smaller of the two but will still be a substantial company, with annual sales of $15bn a year, in its own right.
Like Toshiba, J&J has had a difficult few years, becoming embroiled in a costly legal battle with the US state of Oklahoma over its past sale of painkillers.
More recently it has been dogged by allegations – furiously denied – that its talcum powder caused cancer.
But Alex Gorsky, J&J’s chief executive, insisted that the demerger – due to take place during the next 18 to 24 months – was nothing to do with that.
Johnson & Johnson denies allegations about its talcum powder Pic: AP
He told the Wall Street Journal, which broke the story: “The best path forward to ensure sustainable growth over the long term and better meet patient and consumer demands is to have our consumer business operate as a separate healthcare company.”
As with Toshiba and GE, J&J is a stalwart of its country’s business scene.
It dates back some 135 years to when three brothers, Robert Wood Johnson, James Wood Johnson and Edward Mead Johnson, launched a business selling surgical dressings, supposedly after hearing a speech by the British surgeon and pathology and antisceptic pioneer Joseph Lister.
J&J sold the world’s first commercial first aid kits and the world’s first women’s sanitary products.
It moved into pharmaceuticals in 1959 and the more predictable cash flow from its consumer goods businesses helped finance research and development into the more up-and-down, but potentially more lucrative, drugs and medical devices businesses.
More recently, though, some investors have become unhappy at the relatively sluggish performance of the consumer goods arm.
Its sales rose by 1.1% last year while the pharmaceuticals arm grew by 8%.
Shareholders these days prefer to focus on specific sectors.
J&J boss Alex Gorsky said the demerger was the “best path forward to ensure sustainable growth”
An investor in J&J seeking exposure to its pharmaceuticals business will not, necessarily, want exposure to its consumer goods arm.
Activist investors such as Elliott, ThirdPoint, ValueAct and Starboard are now mighty beasts in the investment world, unafraid to take on some of the world’s largest companies.
No chairman or chief executive wants to see them popping up on their shareholder register.
Taking pre-emptive action, for example a demerger, is one way of avoiding costly, draw-out and debilitating battles with such investors.
J&J’s move is also in keeping with those of other big pharmaceuticals companies.
The German drugs giant Merck sold its consumer healthcare business, which owned brands including the hay fever remedy Claritin and the sun tan lotion maker Coppertone, to Bayer seven years ago.
Pfizer announced at the end of 2018 that it was merging its consumer healthcare business, the maker of Chapstick lip balm, Centrum multi-vitamins and Advil painkillers, with the consumer healthcare arm of Britain’s GlaxoSmithKline.
GSK emerged in effective control of the business and, in February last year, said it would demerge it.
J&J is going down a path previously trodden by GSK
That move effectively is the road that J&J now plans to go down.
But, as with GSK, it is not without risk.
Without the predictable cash flows of consumer healthcare products, the research and development arms of the stand-alone pharmaceuticals businesses will have to be more disciplined, channelling their resources only into work where a positive outcome can be guaranteed.
It was why Sir Andrew Witty, GSK’s former chief executive, always refused to break up the company.
His successor, Dame Emma Walmsley, decided something more radical was required.
Mr Gorsky, at J&J, has clearly reached the same conclusion.
One thing is clear: with three gigantic and storied companies – GE, Toshiba and J&J – all announcing break-ups within days of each other, demergers are very much back on the business agenda.
Shares in Elon Musk’s Tesla have reversed sharply over renewed concerns about his focus on the company’s recovery as he plots against Donald Trump.
Shares in the electric car firm plunged by more than 7% at the start of trading on Wall Street – taking about $71bn (£52bn) off its market value.
The stock has often come under pressure since Musk started his association with the president, latterly helping bring down federal government costs through a new department known as DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency).
Money latest: Call centre worker’s tips for getting discounts
But it is now suffering as their political relationship has soured.
Musk has publicly opposed the so-called “big, beautiful bill” – Mr Trump’s flagship tax cut and spending plans that received Congressional approval last week – since he left his DOGE role.
Musk wrote in a post on his X platform on 30 June: “It is obvious with the insane spending of this bill, which increases the debt ceiling by a record FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS that we live in a one-party country – the PORKY PIG PARTY!!”
Once the bill was passed, he created a poll on X, asking people if they would want him to launch the America Party.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Musk v Trump: ‘The Big, Beautiful Breakup’
He wrote on 4 July: “Independence Day is the perfect time to ask if you want independence from the two-party (some would say uniparty) system!”
The vote ended with 65.4% in favour of creating the party.
The formation of the America Party was announced the following day.
“By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it! When it comes to bankrupting our country with
waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy.”
“Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom,” Musk posted.
Trump responded on his Truth Social account: “I am saddened to watch Elon Musk go completely ‘off the rails,’ essentially becoming a TRAIN WRECK over the past five weeks.
“He even wants to start a Third Political Party, despite the fact that they have never succeeded in the United States –
The System seems not designed for them.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Trump threatens to ‘put DOGE’ on Musk
Trump has previously threatened to go after Tesla‘s government subsidies and contracts through the DOGE department to save “big” as their relationship deteriorated.
Such threats have also pressured the share price at Tesla.
It has suffered throughout Trump 2.0 and, in fact, has trended lower since last December – shortly after Mr Trump’s election win was confirmed.
Read more:
The Trump-Musk bust-up that everyone knew was coming
Musk hits out at Tesla succession claim
The possibility of tariff hits to the business, followed by actual tariff disruption, along with a consumer and investor backlash against Musk’s previous DOGE role have contributed to a 35% decline on the December peak.
The very absence of Tesla’s CEO dragged on the shares.
Tesla sales suffered globally as the trade war ramped up due to the imposition of tariffs by a government he supported, until the public row between him and the president began in early June.
Musk had only just renewed his 100% focus on Tesla and his other business interests by that time.
Tesla sales were down during the presidential election campaign last year and continued to decline, on a quarterly basis, during the first half of 2025.
Neil Wilson, UK investor strategist at Saxo Markets, said of the company’s share price woes: “Investors are worried about two things – one is more Trump ire affecting subsidies and the other more importantly is a distracted Musk.
“Investors had cheered Musk stepping back from frontline politics but are now worried he’s going to sucked back in and take his eye off Tesla.”
Business
Post Office scandal: Victims say government’s control of redress schemes should be taken away
Post Office scandal victims are calling for redress schemes to be taken away from the government completely, ahead of the public inquiry publishing its first findings.
Phase 1, which is due back on Tuesday, will report on the human impact of what happened as well as compensation schemes.
“Take (them) off the government completely,” says Jo Hamilton OBE, a high-profile campaigner and former sub-postmistress, who was convicted of stealing from her branch in 2008.
“It’s like the fox in charge of the hen house,” she adds, “because they were the only shareholders of Post Office“.
“So they’re in it up to their necks… So why should they be in charge of giving us financial redress?”
Nearly a third of Ms Hamilton’s life has been dominated by the scandal
Jo and others are hoping Sir Wyn Williams, chairman of the public statutory inquiry, will make recommendations for an independent body to take control of redress schemes.
The inquiry has been examining the Post Office scandal which saw more than 700 people wrongfully convicted between 1999 and 2015.
Sub-postmasters were forced to pay back false accounting shortfalls because of the faulty IT system, Horizon.
At the moment, the Department for Business and Trade administers most of the redress schemes including the Horizon Conviction Redress Scheme and the Group Litigation Order (GLO) Scheme.
The Post Office is still responsible for the Horizon Shortfall scheme.
Lee Castleton OBE
Lee Castleton OBE, another victim of the scandal, was bankrupted in 2007 when he lost his case in the civil courts representing himself against the Post Office.
The civil judgment against him, however, still stands.
“It’s the oddest thing in the world to be an OBE, fighting for justice, while still having the original case standing against me,” he tells Sky News.
While he has received an interim payment he has not applied to a redress scheme.
“The GLO scheme – that’s there on the table for me to do,” he says, “but I know that they would use my original case, still standing against me, in any form of redress.
“So they would still tell me repeatedly that the court found me to be liable and therefore they only acted on the court’s outcome.”
He agrees with other victims who want the inquiry this week to recommend “taking the bad piece out” of redress schemes.
“The bad piece is the company – Post Office Limited,” he continues, “and the government – they need to be outside.
“When somebody goes to court, even if it’s a case against the Department for Business and Trade (DBT), when they go to court DBT do not decide what the outcome is.
“A judge decides, a third party decides, a right-minded individual a fair individual, that’s what needs to happen.”
Pic: AP
Mr Castleton is also taking legal action against the Post Office and Fujitsu – the first individual victim to sue the organisations for compensation and “vindication” in court.
“I want to hear why it happened, to hear what I believe to be the truth, to hear what they believe to be the truth and let the judge decide.”
Neil Hudgell, a lawyer for victims, said he expects the first inquiry report this week may be “really rather damning” of the redress claim process describing “inconsistencies”, “bureaucracy” and “delays”.
“The over-lawyeringness of it,” he adds, “the minute analysis, micro-analysis of detail, the inability to give people fully the benefit of doubt.
“All those things I think are going to be part and parcel of what Sir Wynn says about compensation.
“And we would hope, not going to say expect because history’s not great, we would hope it’s a springboard to an acceleration, a meaningful acceleration of that process.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
June: Post Office knew about faulty IT system
A Department for Business and Trade spokesperson said they were “grateful” for the inquiry’s work describing “the immeasurable suffering” victims endured.
Their statement continued: “This government has quadrupled the total amount paid to affected postmasters to provide them with full and fair redress, with more than £1bn having now been paid to thousands of claimants.
“We will also continue to work with the Post Office, who have already written to over 24,000 postmasters, to ensure that everyone who may be eligible for redress is given the opportunity to apply for it.”
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike