Tag: protect

  • Are you using protection?

    Are you using protection?

    What happens to your business if you or one of your Directors falls ill or dies? It’s not the most cheery topic, but if the answer is that your business couldn’t function, couldn’t service its debts and couldn’t pay salaries, including yours, then it’s worth taking the time to consider your options.

    If you haven’t comprehensively protected your business, then you’re not alone. Recent research conducted by Legal & General has found that UK businesses currently have a £1.35 trillion shortfall in business protection needs, with the level of underinsurance rising by 18% in four years.

    The research found there had been a reduction in Key Person Protection of just over £21 billion and a significant increase in the Shareholder Protection Gap of over £255 billion. The largest factor to account for the increase in the protection gap was the growth in the number of limited companies and partnerships without cover, which now stands at 1.3 million, up 100,000 from 2008.

    The study also found that 31% of business owners surveyed take assessing and managing business risk very seriously to ensure that they have an appropriate level of insurance cover. Yet 50% say that whilst business risk is important, they don’t always feel the need to be insured for everything, with 30% of business owners saying they didn’t have any insurance cover in place in the event of a key person within the business dying or becoming terminally or critically ill. This was because they either hadn’t considered it, hadn’t got round to it or because they were too busy to even evaluate it.

    Unfortunately, these statistics and the fact that thousands of businesses are in the same position as you is of little comfort if you find your business in the difficult and often highly emotive situation of losing a key person.

    What will protect your business?

    Key Person Protection (KPP) will help safeguard your business against the financial effects of death, terminal illness and critical illness of a key person. It is designed to provide a financial buffer in the event of a key person becoming permanently or temporarily unable to make their normal contribution to the business. Proceeds would typically be used to replace lost profits or to fund finding and hiring a replacement for the key person.

    The sum assured under a key person cover policy should reflect the loss of profits that are expected to occur on the key person’s death. A simple method is to take the key person’s salary and multiply it by a factor of up to ten but this is likely to be imprecise. Other methods are based on multiples of business profits.

    The purpose of key person cover is to ensure that funds are made available to a business on the death or serious illness of the key person. How this protection works will depend on the type of business structure you operate within:

    If you have a Limited Company: For companies, it is the company itself who should be the applicant for the cover, on the life of the key employee or director. The company would own the policy and pay all premiums. A trust is not required. An authorised official of the company, such as the managing director or company secretary, would make the applicant’s declaration.

    If you have a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) or Scottish Partnership: These are legal entities in their own right and can therefore take out policies on the lives of key individuals in the same way as companies.

    If you are part of a Partnership: Under English Law, Partnerships do not have a separate legal entity and cannot effect a life policy. If a Partnership has a key employee, who is not a partner, a Key Person Policy can be taken out jointly by all the partners or, where this is not feasible, by one or two partners authorised to act on behalf of the Partnership. The policy would need to be held under trust for all partners for the time being, to accommodate any future changes in the partnership.

    If you’re a sole trader: Sole Traders may take out a policy on the life of a key employee.

    Whatever type of organisation you are, the cost of Key Person Protection (KPP) is often an important consideration, so don’t forget to find out if you are eligible for tax relief on the premiums.

    Do you qualify for tax relief on KPP premiums?

    If certain criteria are met under the Anderson Rules, it is possible for a business to receive tax relief on premiums under a Key Person Policy.

    The relief is obtained by treating the premiums as an allowable business expense, which means that they can be offset against business profits for corporation tax purposes.

    The taxation treatment of any policy proceeds (i.e. payment of life cover or critical illness benefit) will often depend on whether the premiums were tax deductible. Usually, if tax relief has been allowed on the premiums then any proceeds received are treated as trading receipts and charged to corporation tax.

    Conversely, if premiums are not tax deductible then any proceeds are typically free of tax. If a business is eligible for tax relief on premiums, it cannot elect to waive this right in order to receive tax-free benefits.

    A business should always ask its local Inspector of Taxes to confirm the likely tax treatment of any proposed key person cover before proceeding, as The Anderson Rules are not actually ‘Rules’ at all, but a set of principles that formed part of a statement made in 1944 by Sir John Anderson, Chancellor of the Exchequer. The principles form the basis on which a local Inspector of Taxes will decide whether key person cover premiums qualify as an allowable business expense.

    There are three conditions that have to be met:
    1. The sole relationship between the business and the key person must be that of employer and employee. Relief will not be allowed if the key person has a significant stake in the business.
    2. The life policy is intended to meet loss of profits resulting from the loss of the key person’s services.
    3. The policy is a short-term assurance (although ‘short-term’ is not defined, most tax inspectors will allow relief for terms of up to five years).

    Making a final decision

    If you are struggling with the concept or cost of Key Person Protection, you may want to consider:

    1. Your business is your livelihood, if you don’t protect it no-one else will and you could lose it.
    2. It’s not just you that would be affected by any downturn in your company, it would be your employees, your family and your suppliers too.
    3. What’s the real cost to you of having business protection? Evaluate it properly and do a cost:benefit analysis. Is it worth not having business protection?
    4. There are professionals that can help you make the best decision for you and your company. Find a Chartered Financial Planner that you trust and stat there.

    Key Person Protection shouldn’t be an emotional decision, it should be a pragmatic one. The risks to any business without it are clear.


  • Companies warn Commission not to edge foreign providers out of EU cloud

    A European Commission proposal on AI and Cloud is set to come out in December.

    ADVERTISEMENT

    Tech companies and industry groups fear that upcoming rules for cloud providers might be too restrictive for non-European businesses, according to consultation responses filed on the European Commission’s AI and Cloud Development Act.
    The Commission began gathering feedback after it said in April it plans an AI and Cloud initiative, as part of its so-called AI Continent Action Plan, in a bid to help boost the uptake of artificial intelligence tools by companies. 

    When it comes to cloud and computing infrastructure in Europe, the Commission said there is a gap between available capacity and needs in the bloc, given the rising demands stemming from AI.  Currently, European companies are heavily reliant on US companies such as Microsoft and AWS. 
    The consultation aims to find a solution for “the lack of a competitive EU-based offer of cloud computing services at sufficient scale to serve highly critical use cases with particularly high security needs, as found in various economic sectors and the public sector,” the consultation text said.
    While companies say they support the idea for a stronger European cloud, they question how to define the guidelines for sovereignty. German digital association Bitkom, for example, said the focus should be on freedom of choice, and resilience and diversification. 

    Related

    Incoming tech Commissioner wants EU to become ‘AI continent’EU Commission presents plans to boost AI uptake, protect critical sectors

    Microsoft echoes the comments saying that “rather than imposing restrictive policies or measures […] the EU should focus on diversifying supply chains, […] this will allow governments and customers to rely on an open and competitive market and to choose from a diverse range of cloud service providers, based on their needs and on objective and risk-based criteria such as governance, risk management, security, transparency and performance.”  

    Software trade group BSA, warned that implementing strict requirements could “severely restrict the ability of European customers” to choose the services that meet their needs. 
    “Many European companies currently use non-European cloud providers to have access to technical performance, cost, or service features that are not provided by some European vendors,” it adds. 
    German internet industry group Eco said that measures should be “shaped transparently and proportionally, it should be ensured that international cloud providers are not excluded on geographical aspects alone.”

    European Parliament report

    EU’s AI Plan: A Surreal Surge of Ideas

    What’s the buzz? The European Commission’s read‑the‑room for the AI Continent Action Plan is already buzzing with over 130 proposals. Germans, Spaniards, Belgians, and a handful of curious voices are packing the discussion with fresh angles.

    Countdown to December

    All eyes are on the December launch. Though the consultation closes this Thursday, the clock is already ticking. Good news: a solid proposal is tight on its heels—and is slated to hit the public eye next month. The rest is just the final puzzle pieces, slated for later.

    Beyond the Big Picture

    Other parts of the AI Continent Action Plan—spanning infrastructure, data access, cloud services, skills, and regulations—are still in the drafting room. No rush, just the right balance of ambition and practicality.

    Industry Upgrades on the Horizon

    Commission President Ursula von der Leyen painted the canvas in February in Paris: “We’re turning Europe’s stalwart industries into powerful engines of AI innovation.” Think of factories, healthcare, energy—now expected to sprint along faster tracks, powered by AI magic.

    Tech Sovereignty in the Mix

    The European Parliament is not far behind. Their new report leans heavily toward boosting tech sovereignty and trimming reliance on non‑European tech juggernauts. This could feed fresh insights into the Commission’s upcoming strategies.

    Cloud Concerns Caught in the Spotlight

    When a lawmaker whined about our dependence on US cloud leaders, EU Tech Commissioner Henna Virkkunen quipped: “The upcoming Cloud & AI Development Act will carve out secure, EU‑based capacity for critical needs—backed by a single EU‑wide public sector cloud policy.” A reassuring nod that Europe’s cloud future is getting a solid foundation.

  • Disney and Universal Launch Legal Battle Against Midjourney Over Unbridled Plagiarism

    Disney and Universal Launch Legal Battle Against Midjourney Over Unbridled Plagiarism

    Disney and Universal have filed a landmark lawsuit against AI image generator Midjourney, accusing the San Francisco-based company of large-scale copyright infringement and calling its tools a “bottomless pit of plagiarism”.

    Hollywood’s Big‑Buddie AI Showdown: Stars vs. Midjourney

    Why the Studios Are Bouncing Back

    Midjourney, the AI tool that turns words into high‑quality pictures, is suddenly in hot water. Disney and Universal filed a federal suit in Los Angeles, claiming the platform copied and sold images of iconic characters like Darth Vader, Yoda, Elsa, Shrek, Iron Man, and even the Minions without permission.

    “Piracy Is Piracy” – The Legal Voice

    Disney’s chief legal officer, Horacio Gutierrez, blasted the move in the complaint: “Piracy is piracy,” he said. “If it’s done by an AI company, it’s just as infringing.” NBCUniversal’s Kim Harris echoed the sentiment, stressing that the suit protects the studios’ original work and the artists they love.

    The Backstory – Scraping the Internet

    Midjourney’s training data supposedly pulled millions of images off the internet without explicit permission. Founder David Holz admitted this practice in a 2022 interview. The studios say the company ignored requests to halt the use of their copyrighted material and slammed the missing safeguards.

    What They’re Asking For

    • A preliminary injunction that will stop Midjourney from offering image and video generation services unless it implements tools to block unauthorized copying.
    • Unspecified financial damages for the alleged infringement.

    Midjourney’s Upside Down Reality

    Last year, Midjourney raked in about $300 million from paid subscriptions. Still, it hasn’t weighed in on this lawsuit. A similar case from a group of visual artists is still pending, with a judge ruling last year that the artists’ allegation – that Midjourney stored and reused their works without consent – is “plausible.”

    Broader Fight in Copyright Land

    This isn’t a one‑off. Record labels, publishers, news outlets, and even The New York Times are suing AI firms for training models on protected material without compensation or permission. Some organizations, like The Guardian and Axel Springer, have teamed up to license archives to AI companies instead.

    What It Means for the Future

    The Disney‑Universal case could set a crucial precedent. Will courts draw a solid line protecting copyrighted work in the age of AI, or will companies like Midjourney continue to scrape wide libraries of human‑made art with minimal accountability? Time (and the courtroom) will tell.