Month: July 2025

The US Federal Reserve held interest rates steady on Wednesday, resisting intensifying political pressure from President Donald Trump, even as new economic data revealed stronger-than-expected headline growth.
The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) voted to keep its benchmark rate in the range of 4.25 to 4.5 per cent, a level it has maintained since December. While widely expected, the decision drew immediate fire from Trump, who had earlier urged the central bank to cut borrowing costs following a 3% annualised GDP rebound in the second quarter.
Using his favoured nickname for Fed Chair Jerome Powell, Trump posted on social media: “WAY BETTER THAN EXPECTED! ‘Too Late’ MUST NOW LOWER THE RATE. No Inflation! Let people buy, and refinance, their homes!”
The Fed’s post-meeting statement reiterated its data-dependent approach, stating it would adjust monetary policy if necessary to “impede the attainment of the committee’s goals.” It acknowledged moderating growth, persistent inflation concerns, and global developments as key inputs to future decisions.
While the headline GDP figure appeared strong, analysts were quick to note that much of the gain was due to a sharp drop in imports, which flattered the overall number. Measures of consumer spending and business investment, by contrast, slowed significantly. A separate Commerce Department gauge of core domestic demand fell from 1.9% to 1.2%, raising concerns that the economy is losing momentum beneath the surface.
“Beneath the topline figure, the economy is switching to a lower gear but not going in reverse,” said Bernard Yaros, lead US economist at Oxford Economics. “The Fed can afford to wait and see how tariffs play out before moving.”
Still, cracks are beginning to appear in the Fed’s consensus. For the first time since 1993, two members of the FOMC dissented, favouring a 0.25 percentage point cut, a sign that internal pressure to ease is mounting.
Nigel Green, CEO of financial advisory firm deVere Group, said the pause had been expected but was likely a prelude to a rate cut in September.
“The Fed has likely just bought itself eight more weeks before a pivot,” Green said. “The case for cutting isn’t built on fear—it’s built on realism. Growth isn’t reversing, but it is thinning out.”
He noted that while the GDP number looked impressive, it was driven largely by trade distortions, not broad-based expansion. Consumer behaviour, he added, is starting to shift.
“We’re seeing a transition. People aren’t panicking, but they’re hesitating. They’re thinking harder about where and how they spend,” Green said. “Smart investors will adjust early.”
The Fed’s decision to hold steady also came as inflation ticked up for a second consecutive month in June, adding to the bank’s caution. Still, with inflation trends softening overall and global growth moderating, the Fed appears to be edging closer to a policy shift.
Isaac Stell, Investment Manager at Wealth Club, said the Fed was balancing robust data with signs of deceleration.
“Hot on the heels of stronger-than-expected GDP, the Fed held rates steady for a fifth consecutive meeting,” Stell said. “But the fact that two governors broke ranks is significant. It signals the internal debate is heating up.”
Despite Trump’s public lobbying, Powell has so far stuck to the Fed’s independent mandate, resisting calls for immediate monetary easing. With a presidential election on the horizon and trade tensions weighing on sentiment, the stakes are rising.
As central banks in the UK, Canada and Europe have already begun cutting rates in response to falling inflation, the Fed’s next move is under increasing scrutiny. Many analysts now expect the first US rate cut to arrive in September, especially if incoming data continues to show weakening domestic demand and cautious consumer behaviour.
For now, the Fed remains in wait-and-see mode—but the wait may not last much longer.
Read more:
Federal Reserve defies Trump and holds rates steady as signs of economic slowdown emerge

The Lionesses’ historic Euro 2025 victory is set to deliver a significant windfall not just for the players, but also for the UK taxman, with HMRC expected to receive £788,900 from the team’s prize money, according to analysis by tax and advisory firm Blick Rothenberg.
Each player is expected to receive an average bonus of £73,000, which pushes their earnings above the £125,140 threshold where the highest effective marginal tax rate of 47% applies. That means players could be paying around £34,300 each in combined income tax and National Insurance Contributions (NIC), according to Robert Salter, Director at Blick Rothenberg.
“The Lionesses will be delighted with their win at Euro 2025 for what it represents and the hard work that went into it,” Salter said. “But they will have a hefty tax bill to pay to HMRC on their prize money.”
Salter noted that although the Lionesses still earn less than their male counterparts, their tournament bonuses are substantial enough to trigger the UK’s top tax bracket. The 47% figure comprises 45% income tax and 2% employee NIC.
In addition to the tax paid by players, the Football Association (FA) is also expected to face a £255,000 liability in employer NIC on the prize bonuses, further increasing HMRC’s overall take from the team’s success.
And the revenue doesn’t stop there. Many of the Lionesses are expected to earn significantly more in the coming months from sponsorship deals, marketing campaigns, and media appearances, all of which are subject to income tax. Salter said these post-tournament earnings, especially image rights and appearance fees, will continue to drive up the players’ taxable income — and with it, HMRC’s share.
“Their earnings are likely to increase significantly over the coming months, given their success and the ongoing growth in the profile of the Women’s game,” Salter added. “HMRC will be getting even more tax ‘wins’ in the future.”
While the Lionesses’ on-pitch victory has been widely celebrated across the country, their financial success off the pitch is proving to be a win for the Treasury as well — a reminder that even sporting triumphs come with a tax bill.
Read more:
HMRC scores tax windfall from Lionesses’ Euro 2025 prize money

Adidas has confirmed it will raise prices for customers in the United States after warning that new tariffs imposed by the Trump administration will add an additional €200 million (£173 million) to its costs this year.
The German sportswear giant said nearly half its products are manufactured in Vietnam and Indonesia, which were both recently targeted in new trade agreements that impose 20% and 19% tariffs respectively on goods shipped to the US. The company warned that these tariffs will directly increase the cost of Adidas products in the American market.
“The tariffs will directly increase the cost of our products for the US with up to €200 million during the rest of the year,” said Bjorn Gulden, chief executive of Adidas. “We still don’t know what the demand impact will be if these tariffs cause major inflation.”
The impact of tariffs is already being felt by Adidas, which joins a growing list of global companies forced to pass higher supply chain costs onto consumers. Nike, one of Adidas’s key rivals, raised prices in June and warned the tariffs could add $1 billion (£730 million) to its own costs.
Adidas, known for popular trainer lines like the Gazelle and Samba, has said it is unable to produce most of its products in the US, making it particularly vulnerable to Washington’s shift toward protectionist trade policies. The company’s reliance on Asian supply chains—27% of Adidas products are made in Vietnam and 19% in Indonesia—has left it heavily exposed to the new levies.
Despite the tariff pressures, Adidas reported a strong first half, with sales rising 7.3% to €12.1 billion and pre-tax profits nearly doubling from €549 million to €1 billion. Footwear sales increased by 9%, while clothing revenue surged 17% in the second quarter.
The trade backdrop has grown more tense in recent weeks, with President Trump sealing a 15% tariff deal with the European Union, covering all imports, including cars. The agreement, which will take effect on August 1, is seen as a step back from Trump’s earlier threats of 30% tariffs on EU goods, but has still drawn criticism from European leaders.
Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz has warned that the deal could cause “considerable damage” to Germany’s economy and ultimately harm the US as well.
This week, German carmakers Mercedes-Benz and Porsche outlined the financial toll of Trump’s trade measures. Mercedes said it expects €420 million in tariff-related costs this year, contributing to a 70% drop in second-quarter profits, while Porsche said it had raised prices by up to 3.6% to absorb the added expense.
Aston Martin and Stellantis have also cited US tariffs as significant headwinds. Stellantis, which owns brands including Vauxhall, Jeep and Peugeot, estimated that tariffs have already cost the group €300 million.
With Adidas now raising prices and more companies expected to follow, the broader impact of US trade policy is becoming increasingly visible—not just for businesses managing squeezed margins, but for consumers facing rising costs on everything from trainers to luxury vehicles.
Read more:
Adidas to raise prices as US tariffs add €200 million to costs

BT has refunded or credited £18 million to customers following enforcement action by Ofcom, after the telecoms giant was found to have breached rules requiring it to provide clear and simple contract information before customers signed up to new deals.
The refunds follow a £2.8 million fine issued by the regulator last year, which concluded that BT had failed to meet its obligations for customers across its EE and Plusnet brands.
Under Ofcom rules introduced in 2022, telecoms providers are required to give customers key information about their contract—including price, length, and early exit fees—before they agree to sign up. The measures are designed to ensure greater transparency and protect consumers from unexpected charges or terms.
BT said it had since taken steps to address the issue and ensure compliance with the regulations going forward. Ofcom confirmed the £18 million in refunds covered customers affected by the breach, either through direct reimbursement or account credit.
Read more:
BT refunds £18m to customers after failing to provide contract information

Bank of England governor Andrew Bailey has blocked Chancellor Rachel Reeves from holding a proposed meeting with financial technology giant Revolut, in a move that underscores growing tensions between the Treasury and Britain’s financial regulators.
The meeting, which would have brought together Revolut, the Treasury, and the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA)—the Bank of England division responsible for licensing banks—was intended to discuss Revolut’s long-delayed plans to launch full banking operations in the UK. However, it was cancelled at Bailey’s request, over concerns that it could be seen as political interference in the Bank’s independent supervisory role.
The intervention, first reported by the Financial Times, is the latest sign of friction between the new Labour government’s pro-growth agenda and the cautious stance of regulators.
Reeves has made loosening regulatory constraints a central part of her strategy to stimulate the UK economy. In a high-profile speech at the Mansion House earlier this month, she claimed that in many areas, regulation “acts as a boot on the neck of businesses,” and urged regulators to adopt a more enabling approach to encourage investment and innovation.
Bailey has publicly pushed back. Asked about Reeves’s remarks during a session of the Commons Treasury Committee, the governor said: “I don’t use those terms, let me say that,” and warned: “We cannot compromise on basic financial stability.”
A Treasury source downplayed the episode, saying: “Revolut are a really important global bank based in the UK. But that is a process being led by the PRA at a working level.” In an official statement, the Treasury added that “the chancellor and the governor have a strong and productive relationship and the government fully supports the operational independence of the Bank of England.”
Revolut, one of the most prominent names in UK fintech, was founded in 2015 as a foreign exchange startup and has since grown into a wide-ranging digital financial platform offering services from crypto trading to stock brokerage. The London-based company employs over 10,000 staff and reported £1.1 billion in pre-tax profits last year. It was recently valued at $45 billion, making it one of the most valuable private tech companies in the UK.
Despite this success, Revolut’s ambition to secure a UK banking licence has been mired in delays. It applied for authorisation in early 2021, but concerns raised by its auditor BDO over £477 million of its 2021 revenue led to questions from regulators and slowed the process significantly.
Although those issues have since been resolved and Revolut was granted restricted authorisation a year ago, it has still not received full approval to begin banking operations in the UK. In contrast, it already provides banking services in the EU via a licence obtained in Lithuania.
Bailey’s intervention to block the meeting adds to growing scrutiny of how Revolut is being treated by regulators, and whether political pressure is appropriate in a sector where regulatory independence is paramount.
For the Chancellor, the episode highlights the limits of her ability to fast-track innovation through top-down reform, particularly when it comes to a Bank of England increasingly assertive in defending its remit. For Bailey, it reinforces the Bank’s insistence that while fostering innovation is welcome, financial stability cannot be compromised—even in pursuit of growth.
Read more:
Andrew Bailey blocks Rachel Reeves’s meeting with Revolut amid concerns over political interference

Shareholders of Wise have approved a controversial plan to shift the UK fintech’s primary listing from London to New York, while also granting co-founder and CEO Kristo Kaarmann another decade of enhanced voting rights—cementing his control of the £11 billion payments business despite owning just 18 per cent of its shares.
The dual-class structure extension, which was opposed by Wise’s former chairman and co-founder Taavet Hinrikus, passed on Monday with 91 per cent of class A and 85 per cent of class B shares voting in favour. A suite of related resolutions underpinning the move and governance structure changes received similarly strong backing.
The result gives Kaarmann, who holds a 55 per cent voting majority, a renewed mandate to direct the company through its US expansion, even as critics accuse Wise of betraying its founding principles of transparency and shareholder democracy.
Hinrikus, who still owns a 5.1 per cent stake, had fiercely opposed the proposal. He accused the company of “burying” the extension of Kaarmann’s power in the fine print of the plan to move the listing, arguing the measures should have been presented as separate votes. In comments ahead of the vote, he warned the board had broken with the “spirit” and “core values” that Wise was founded on.
“It was entirely inappropriate and unfair that the dual-class share extension and the listing move were bundled together,” Hinrikus said.
When Wise floated in London in 2021, shareholders were explicitly told that the dual-class structure would expire by July 2026. The extension to 2036 was not mentioned in the public announcement of the listing change, but appeared in a 94-page shareholder circular—a detail Hinrikus used to reinforce his claims of a lack of transparency.
Chairman David Wells, speaking after the vote, said the board was pleased with the outcome and that the company now had a “strong mandate to proceed”. He defended the extension of voting rights, describing Wise as “a company that thinks in decades” and adding that the proposal had been “set out clearly … and received positively.”
The AGM proceeded without questions or comments from shareholders.
Proxy voting agencies including Glass Lewis and Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) initially recommended backing the plan but updated their guidance following Hinrikus’s intervention to raise concerns about the concentration of voting power. Wise was also forced to retract a claim that the proxy firm Pirc supported the proposal.
Wise, originally known as TransferWise, was founded in 2011 by Kaarmann and Hinrikus, two Estonian entrepreneurs who built the company into one of Europe’s most prominent fintechs, used by millions for cross-border payments. The business has made billionaires of both founders and was once viewed as a key success story in the UK’s tech scene.
However, the decision to leave London for New York is a further blow to the City, which has seen several high-profile firms defect to the US in search of deeper capital pools and higher valuations. Wise’s move comes amid sluggish UK market performance and wider concerns over the attractiveness of London as a destination for growth companies.
While the company denies any attempt to obscure the governance changes, and argues that dual-class structures often produce superior long-term returns, the episode has fuelled wider debate about corporate governance, transparency, and investor rights in the UK’s tech sector.
With the vote now concluded, Kaarmann’s grip on Wise is stronger than ever — but the discontent from one of its founding figures is likely to leave a lasting mark.
Read more:
Wise shareholders vote to move primary listing to US and extend co-founder’s voting control

The rapid rise of padel in the UK is fuelling a wave of planning activity, with new figures showing a 113 per cent increase in court applications in 2024 alone.
The sport’s continued surge in popularity has unlocked nearly 17,000 potential development sites across the country, according to new data released by land and planning insight platform Searchland.
Padel — a fast-paced racquet sport that combines elements of tennis and squash — has become one of the UK’s fastest-growing sports. Figures from the Lawn Tennis Association show that the number of people playing the sport has jumped from just 89,000 in 2021 to more than 400,000 by the end of 2024. This unprecedented growth, coupled with relatively low setup costs and compact court dimensions, has made padel a prime opportunity for investors, developers, and local authorities.
Searchland’s data reveals that the number of padel-related planning applications has risen sharply in recent years. In 2021, only 53 applications were submitted. This increased to 82 in 2022, then nearly doubled to 163 in 2023, before jumping to 348 last year — a 113 per cent annual rise. Already in 2025, 295 applications have been submitted, and the company projects this will rise to 544 by the end of the year, marking a further 56 per cent year-on-year increase.
The platform has also identified a broad and largely untapped pipeline of sites that are well-suited for padel development. It estimates there are currently 16,851 “existing destination opportunities” — sports venues such as golf courses, racquet clubs, and football facilities that have unused land suitable for padel. These sites are typically located in or near urban areas where demand for leisure activities is high. London alone accounts for 1,086 of these opportunities, with 47 of them already having submitted planning applications. Other cities showing strong development potential include Bristol, with 206 sites, followed by Edinburgh, Leeds, and Manchester.
Beyond sports venues, Searchland has pinpointed 15,742 commercial properties across the UK that are appropriate for padel conversion. These include underutilised buildings or sites that can accommodate padel courts and are positioned in areas with a likely captive audience. London again tops this category, with 929 such sites, followed by Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, Bradford, and Sheffield.
In addition to permanent sites, Searchland has also identified 674 “short-term padel investment opportunities”. These are large-scale development areas — such as housing estates with long construction schedules — where padel courts could be temporarily installed to generate revenue before full development begins. In many cases, these courts could either be dismantled when required or retained as a feature of the final project. London is home to 151 of these short-term opportunities, while Bristol and Birmingham also offer potential.
Speaking on the findings, Hugh Gibbs, co-founder of Searchland, said the rise in padel’s popularity is more than a cultural moment — it’s a clear market signal.
“Padel’s extraordinary rise in popularity isn’t just a trend,” he said. “It’s a powerful signal to landowners, developers, and local authorities. The combination of surging participation, relatively low setup costs, and strong ROI potential makes padel an ideal addition to both temporary and permanent development plans.”
With almost 17,000 locations already identified as prime opportunities, the potential for growth is immense. As interest continues to grow and demand outpaces supply in many areas, padel is quickly becoming one of the UK’s most attractive sporting investments — offering developers a unique chance to meet the country’s appetite for active, community-driven spaces.
Read more:
UK padel boom triggers surge in planning applications as nearly 17,000 development sites identified

Taxpayers have been warned to settle their tax bills by 31st July or risk incurring late payment interest at 8.25%, as HMRC intensifies its crackdown on unpaid liabilities.
The alert comes from Blick Rothenberg, a leading audit, tax and business advisory firm, which says taxpayers who have yet to pay their second payment on account for the 2024/25 tax year must act quickly to avoid financial penalties.
“From May 2022, HMRC increased late payment interest from 3.5% to 8.25% as part of their agenda to crack down on people that owe tax,” said Tom Goddard, Senior Associate at Blick Rothenberg. “People who owe money for the 2024/25 tax year must pay their bill as soon as possible.”
What are payments on account?
Payments on account are advance payments made towards the next year’s income tax bill, calculated based on a taxpayer’s previous year’s liability. They are paid in two instalments — one by 31st January, and the second by 31st July.
For example, someone with a £10,000 second payment on account who delays payment until 31st December 2025 would face nearly £350 in interest charges, Goddard explained.
“This is also an incentive to get your tax return submitted early,” he added. “By doing so, you ensure your July payment is accurate — rather than risk overpaying and waiting for a refund.”
Can payments be reduced?
Yes — if a taxpayer reasonably expects that their income for 2024/25 will be lower than in 2023/24, they may reduce their payments on account. However, Goddard warned that over-reducing the figure could lead to interest charges and potential penalties if the estimate proves too low.
“Now that the 2024/25 tax year has ended, those who have already made a claim to reduce their payments on account should check whether this was appropriate based on their final income levels and, if necessary, adjust their payments,” he said.
Who needs to pay?
Payments on account generally apply to those with self-employment income, rental profits, or investment income, where tax isn’t deducted at source.
Taxpayers do not need to make payments on account if:
• Their 2023/24 tax liability was under £1,000, or
• More than 80% of their tax was collected through PAYE.
Capital Gains Tax (CGT) is also excluded from payments on account.
What if you can’t pay?
Goddard urged those struggling financially to contact HMRC directly as soon as possible.
“HMRC may offer a payment plan to help alleviate some of the financial burden, allowing payments to take place over a more manageable timeframe,” he said.
With just days left before the 31st July deadline, taxpayers are advised to check their status, file their returns if possible, and take action — or risk costly charges and escalating interest in the months ahead.
Read more:
Taxpayers who haven’t settled their bill with HMRC must pay by 31st July or face fines and interest

Sales of prestige lip products in the UK have surged by 16 per cent year-on-year to £80.4 million in the six months to June, as cash-strapped consumers turn to small luxuries to lift their mood — a classic example of the so-called “lipstick effect.”
The term, coined by Leonard Lauder, former chairman of Estée Lauder, describes how sales of cosmetics and affordable indulgences tend to rise during economic downturns as consumers forgo big-ticket items but still seek moments of emotional reward.
New data from market research firm Circana suggests the trend is alive and well in 2025. Lip product sales grew at nearly double the rate of the broader make-up category, and more than three times the pace of eye make-up sales, highlighting the growing demand for portable, feel-good beauty items.
“While 2025 has been a challenging year and many consumers have become selective in their spending, they are still splashing out on affordable luxuries like lipstick and beauty buys to boost their mood,” said June Jensen, vice-president of Circana’s UK prestige beauty division.
It’s not just about colour anymore. Consumers are increasingly gravitating towards multi-functional products, particularly lip items that combine colour with skincare benefits. Sales of hydrating balms and lip oils surged by 21 per cent year-on-year, with shoppers seeking out formulas that moisturise, tint, and protect, often with added SPF or anti-ageing ingredients.
“These are moments of private indulgence and pleasure that offer refuge from a chaotic world,” Jensen added.
The trend has also been amplified by social media and influencer marketing, with platforms like TikTok and Instagram driving interest in new textures and hybrid formulations. Products like overnight lip masks, tinted balms, and skincare-infused glosses have seen a particular rise.
One standout brand is Laneige, whose products gained popularity through singer Charli XCX’s online endorsements and ambassador work, tapping into a younger demographic eager for accessible but aspirational beauty buys.
While lip products are leading the charge, Circana suggests the lipstick effect is expanding into other categories as consumers look for multi-purpose, mood-boosting beauty staples. Items such as tinted moisturisers, concealers, setting sprays, and powders with skincare benefits are showing early signs of similar growth.
“The lipstick effect is likely to continue flourishing in this economic climate,” said Jensen. “But it’s not just about lipstick anymore — it’s about affordable confidence in all forms.”
In an era of economic caution, the success of prestige beauty suggests that emotional uplift remains a priority — and that even a swipe of balm can offer a powerful form of escapism.
Read more:
Lip balm sales rise as Britons seek affordable luxuries in cost-of-living squeeze