The government has warned ecommerce retailers that fake reviews will soon join a list of prohibited practices, with fresh guidance being finalised in the coming months. 

Businesses will be held accountable for hosting fake star ratings and user testimonies on their sites, as part of a government initiative to improve consumer experiences when buying online.

In the previous year, consumer group Which? brought attention to the extensive issue of fake reviews. Despite repeated interventions by the Competition and Markets Authority, Facebook groups requesting fake reviews on platforms like Amazon, Google, and Trustpilot continued to flourish.

Fighting fake reviews continues

Fake online reviews afflict the web at a vast scale. During 2022, Amazon identified upwards of 23,000 social media groups, boasting over 46 million members and followers, actively involved in orchestrating fake reviews.

In the ongoing fight against fraudulent reviews, Amazon has been using AI to combat AI. The company remains committed to enhancing customer and seller protection on its platform through investments in more advanced and sophisticated tools.

Analysts estimate that approximately one in seven reviews in the UK may be fraudulent, with social media groups often being held accountable for the proliferation of deceptive reviews.

Following the UK government’s announcement today, website owners will be held responsible for the reviews posted on their platforms. However, the government has stopped short of saying it will criminalise hosting fake reviews.

Any penalties for failing to address fake reviews have not yet been communicated, and the government is expected to reveal more details of its plans later this year.

Consumer watchdog leads fight

Which? has lauded the crackdown on fake reviews, but insists that the government should take further action on all forms of false advertising.

Rocio Concha, Director of Policy and Advocacy at Which? advocates the need for criminalising fake reviews’ to ensure greater responsibility on online platforms, and to protect consumers effectively.

“Millions of us use online reviews to help us choose a product or service,” Concha says. “So, it’s particularly disappointing to see ministers stop short of criminalising trading and hosting of fake reviews – a necessary step to deter unscrupulous businesses and make online platforms take greater responsibility. Ministers must look again at these proposals if they are to properly protect consumers.”

In a bid to protect consumers from hidden fees and deceptive pricing strategies, the UK government is set to crack down on drip pricing by implementing new rules under the Digital markets, Competition, and Consumers Bill.

These new regulations aim to eliminate drip pricing. This tactic is believed to cost consumers £2.2bn each year, and it’s particularly prevalent in the entertainment, hospitality, and transport sectors.

The legislation mandates that fees must be clearly stated in the headline price or at the beginning of the shopping process, not hidden at checkout. However, optional fees (such as upsells or upgrades) will not fall under these regulations.

What is drip pricing?

Drip pricing is a deceptive sales strategy where additional fees are revealed later in the checkout process for consumers. 

In effect, drip pricing means that only a part of the overall cost is shown to the consumer when they begin a purchase process.

As individuals proceed through the buying journey, they discover unexpected charges that erode the trust they place in the business. The customer is then forced to either take on the new cost, or cancel the entire process and feel as if they have wasted time. 

The lack of upfront transparency can lead to a negative brand perception, and discourage customers from making future purchases.

From a drip to a downpour

In an official government report, drip pricing has been identified in as much as 56% of the hospitality industry; 72% of the transport and communication sectors, and over half of entertainment providers. 

The most common iteration of the unethical pricing strategy comes in the form of additional “booking fees”, for instance with cinema or train tickets, which can end up adding up to £6.45 more than the originally proposed transaction.

The rail regulator, the Office of Road and Rail (ORR), has taken action by addressing seven online third-party train ticket sellers, including The Trainline, and has expressed that these platforms are not sufficiently transparent regarding booking fees.

Alex Robertson, Chief Executive at the independent watchdog Transport Focus, states: 

“Online retailers must provide passengers with clear, accurate information upfront so they can make an informed choice.” 

Drip pricing need-to-knows

If you’re a business that applies fees at checkout that aren’t clear any earlier in the journey, then the government is effectively calling time on this practice.

Don’t wait until your hand is forced by the threat of a fine – now is the time to clean up this practice. You can choose to highlight processing fees, booking fees or similar costs early in the customer journey, so that a consumer can see the complete price they will pay. Or, consider removing these fees entirely, if your business profits can handle this.

Ultimately this is a matter of building long term trust with your target audience. The price of losing a customer’s goodwill in your brand goes far beyond the couple of pounds booking fee you’re placing at checkout, after all.

Last year, six UK companies reached unicorn status after securing a $1bn valuation. In doing so, they’ve displayed enduring innovation and business determination that defied the challenges posed by a difficult trading climate.

These numbers position Britain as a leader in European unicorn creation, as the next closest contender for the title was Germany, which saw the birth of four unicorns in 2023.

While the numbers have shrunk in comparison to previous years, the UK has continued to create unicorns for the seventh year in a row. Read on to meet the latest startups to join the unicorn ranks.

The UK’s newest unicorns

From a sports apparel brand backed by tennis player Andy Murray to an AI builder that democratises access to software development, these are the startups that reached unicorn valuation in 2023.

Quantexa

Year founded: 2016
Founders: Imam Hoque and Vishal Marria
Current valuation: $1.8bn

Headquartered in London, Quantexa is a big data and enterprise intelligence provider, using technologies including entity resolution, network analysis, and AI to deliver complex services that detect and prevent financial crime. After a $129m Series funding round led by global institutional investor GIC, Quantexa was catapulted to unicorn status. The company has also created buzz in the tech sector thanks to Q Assist, a cutting-edge generative AI assistant.

Synthesia

Year Founded: 2017
Founders: Lourdes Agapito, Matthias Niessner, Steffen Tjerrild and Victor Riperbelli
Current valuation: $1bn

The London-based generative AI company recently secured a $90 million in a Series C funding round, crowning itself as the third unicorn announced in Europe in 2023. Synthesia is leveraging the power of AI to transform video creation, as users can effortlessly generate professional videos by providing a prompt. Their technology then generated photo-realistic human faces and speech that’s indistinguishable from real human footage. Given the Hollywood strikes last year, it is clearly a hot-button issue, but it’s a tech that’s here to stay.

Builder.ai

Year Founded: 2016
Founder: Sachin Dev Duggal
Current valuation: $1bn

Builder.ai advertises itself as an AI-powered composable software platform. Its move to democratise software development encouraged investors to deposit their trust in the AI company, translating into a recent $250 million funding round led by the Qatar Investment Authority. The company already has a number of high-profile clients, including the BBC, NBCUniversal, and Pepsi.

Castore

Year Founded: 2015
Founders: Philip Beahon and Thomas Beahon
Current valuation: $1.2bn

British sportswear trailblazer Castore achieved its unicorn status after landing $150 million in a recent funding round. Strategic partnership with renowned sports stars have raised the profile of the company, which has backing from tennis player Andy Murray. It has also secured a number of lucrative kit deals across the sport industry, boasting associations with prominent entities including Newcastle United, Aston Villa, and the McLaren Formula One team.

Taptap Send

Year founded: 2018
Founder: Michael Faye
Current valuation: $1.2bn

The fintech disruptor facilitates affordable money transfers to Africa, Asia, and Latin America, addressing financial inclusion challenges. Founded by a former United Nations development economist, the business model thrives on leveraging foreign exchange for revenue while ensuring customer-friendly policies – there are no commissions or fees for transfers. Currently valued at $1.2bn, the company is well positioned to continue to benefit underserved communities globally who struggle to access affordable financial services.

Oxa

Year Founded: 2014
Founders: Paul Newman and Ingmar Posner
Current valuation: $1.0bn

Backed by $256.6 million in VC funding to date, Oxa is currently in the pole position of self-driving technology. Founded with the vision of enabling any vehicle to be self-driving, Oxa is part of the Tech Nation Future Fifty and has received other prestigious awards like the Barclays Award for Innovation.

Will we see more unicorns emerge in 2024?

The fact that it’s still producing new unicorns shows that the UK’s tech sector has plenty of energy remaining. It’s the third largest in the world after those in the US and China.

Nonetheless, the statistics point towards a slowdown in funding. In 2022, 20 unicorns were formed, indicating a downwards trend from 2021, when 36 unicorns were created.

According to a report by Tech Nation, the drying up of venture capital (VC) money means fledgling tech companies have seen their valuations scaled back. Last year was marked by rising inflation which pushed interest rates up. These conditions made VC proportionately less attractive compared to investing cash into bonds.

Nevertheless, the future isn’t bleak for the UK tech sector. Recent Dealroom data shows the UK is harbouring 34% of Europe’s future unicorns, also known as futurecorns.

The fight to keep UK startups on home turf

Michelle Donelan, the UK’s Technology Secretary, has launched a scaleup policy sprint to prevent UK companies from leaving home turf to migrate to the US.

Donelan wants VC investors to pump an additional £5bn per year into startups by 2030. In her view, this move would allow Britain to become home to half of Europe’s tech unicorns by the turn of the decade.

To keep tech startups on their home turf, UK investors need to create an environment that can compete with the US. Their American counterparts tend to be less risk-averse, with a go-big-or-go-home attitude.

Fighting the allure of the American Dream will be difficult, as conditions in Britain have been tough for those seeking big investment. The downturn in VC capital saw the number of new funds raised drop from 67 in 2022 to 46 in 2023, according to Dealroom data.

Nevertheless, there is reason to remain optimistic. Measures like the Mansion House reforms will channel capital from British pension funds into UK tech companies, and a new VC fellowship scheme will unleash further investment.

While the economic outlook is still not fully mapped out in the coming year, particularly with a potential political shakeup during this year’s general election, the push to revitalise VC funding in the UK spells good signs for futurecorns.

The prospect of tax cuts has become more tangible, with businesses and consumers watching closely for announcements from the upcoming March Spring Budget. Figures indicate public sector borrowing fell to £7.8bn last December, giving Jeremy Hunt more leeway to offer an incentive to voters who feel keen on a new government.

According to data released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), December’s borrowing was £8.4bn less than a year earlier, making it the lowest figure for the month since 2019.

This figure is substantially lower than the predicted £14bn by the Office for Budget Responsibility, thanks to lower inflation-related debt interest costs.

As interest rates are expected to continue trending downwards, analysts believe the Chancellor might have a fiscal wiggle room of about £20bn in the March Budget, allowing him to unveil measures that may include a 1p cut to income tax.

Will tax cuts improve the economy?

Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week, Chancellor Jeremy Hunt mentioned that countries with lower taxes have more dynamic, faster growing economies.

While tax cuts are theoretically well-intentioned, analysts have pointed towards other issues they could provoke.

Government borrowing overall has increased sharply in recent years. Its debt currently sits at £2.67 trillion as of the end of December, which is equivalent to 97.7% of the size of the UK economy, as measured by GDP.

The rise in debt in recent years is owed to initiatives to support the economy during the COVID-19 pandemic and energy bill subsidies.

Tax cuts would only be expected to provide temporary relief, as an exclusive report by Bloomberg unveiled that UK treasury officials told Rishi Sunak in 2022 that tax cuts would have a ‘low impact’ on growth.

This view is at odds with the Chancellor’s promise of a 1980s style boom sparked by giveaways planned for the Spring Budget announcement.

A political lever?

The additional fiscal windfall could give the Tories an opportunity to turn around political opinion ahead of the general election later this year. According to voting intention polls, 44.3% of UK voters are expected to vote Labour, as opposed to 24.9% that would back the Conservatives.

Tax cuts could help sway the business community in favour of the Tories. According to exclusive survey results from the Startups 100 Index, as things currently stand, 57% of businesses voiced that a change in government would lead to a positive impact on the economy.

But, some 54% of businesses admitted their vote would be affected by business incentives. This could indeed include a reduction in corporate tax rates, as well as subsidies for workforce skills training, and grants supporting sustainable practices.

While voter intent ahead of the election will be swayed by a number of other policy factors, tax cuts could get some more stakeholders in the Tory corner as the incumbent government battles against unfavourable public opinion numbers.

Office for National Statistics (ONS) data released today reveals that UK men are spending fewer hours at work, creating space in the workforce for their female colleagues, who have increased their average working hours.

According to the figures, between 1998 and 2022, average working hours for men have fallen by 3.3 hours per week. Women, meanwhile, now work an extra 1.4 hours per week, with full-time workers seeing the biggest uplift in timesheets.

Experts ascribe the change to the rising popularity of flexible working, which has helped many working mothers – typically the main care provider in UK households – to better balance work and family commitments.

Remote work revolution

ONS analysis in today’s labour report describes how more women workers are now present in the workforce, compared to previous years. This has been one of the main contributing factors towards the change in average hours worked per week in the UK.

The biggest change was triggered by the start of the COVID pandemic in 2019 and the adoption of remote or hybrid working practices by UK businesses.

Since then, the proportion of female workers working full time has increased, with average weekly hours worked by women being half an hour higher in 2022 than in 2019.

It’s not just women who have benefited from the shift towards flexible working. In total, average weekly hours in the labour market have fallen by 1.3 hours, representing a huge shift in modern work patterns as employees prioritise greater work-life balance.

However, with female workers taking on more hours, it seems as though it’s their male colleagues most enjoying this boost, thanks to the reduction in their average work hours.

Employees switch up priorities

Kim Allcott is Partner at Allcott Commercial, a chartered surveyor. Allcott says employees are more commonly favouring flexible hours over remuneration packages.

“We’ve seen a sharp increase in flexible work requests since the pandemic, when people re-evaluated their lifestyles and placed more value on time outside of work”, she comments.

Men embracing flexible work options may contribute to a more balanced division of domestic labour in heterosexual partnerships. This frees up time for women to pursue their career goals, expanding the talent pool for new hires and helping to retain experienced employees who might otherwise leave the workforce.

“We have also seen an increase in men taking time off to care for dependents, suggesting that the gender balance [at home] is improving,” Allcott adds.

Childcare crisis halts work gains

Progress could still stall due to the childcare crisis. Demand for nursery places and surging childminder costs have made it a near impossible task for parents to find suitable childcare, forcing many women to choose between their career or spending more time doing childcare themselves.

ONS data released last year shows that the average employment rate for mothers between the ages of 16 and 49 stands at only 67%. That’s a clear discrepancy compared to the 74% employment rate among women without dependents.

On top of the exorbitant costs of childcare in the UK, another root cause of this issue is poor flexibility from employers around work availability. According to a report by global nursery provider Bright Horizons, 67% of working parents have had to resort to using their holiday entitlement to cover childcare.

With some employers asking staff back to the office, experts have warned that losing this employee benefit could undo the positive change in female economic activity.

On average, the ONS report shows that men still work 5.4 hours more per week than women. This suggests that, for many women, high childcare costs still make part-time work more cost-effective than paying nursery fees and doing full-time hours.

Brits seeking to earn a bit of extra money this year be warned: a new scam is targeting side hustlers using bogus job adverts.

The con has recently gained attention in Australia and is conducted over messaging apps. Fraudsters contact individuals to offer them a remote job, which then turns out to be fake.

Employment scams have been on the rise in recent years, driven by the growth of the gig economy and non-traditional work arrangements. We highlight the red flags to watch out for.

How does the side hustle scam work?

This latest business scam sees individuals pose as recruitment agents or business owners hiring for open positions for side gigs such as a job to ‘boost’ product ratings or reviews on a website.

By accessing CVs previously posted on job boards, these bad actors then leverage messaging applications like WhatsApp, social media, or email to schedule interviews.

If you are contacted by this method, you will likely be asked to share sensitive personal information or even send application fees to your ‘interviewer’.

In the most egregious cases, applicants might be asked for bank account details under the guise of setting up salary payments, allowing them to pilfer funds from victims’ accounts.

How do I spot a side hustle scam?

Side hustles have grown in popularity in recent years, as more of us seek out ways to boost our income during the cost of living crisis. In some cases, they can even earn you over the living wage.

However, with new platforms and business models emerging regularly, discerning between real and fake job postings has become more difficult.

JobsAware is an online service that provides free help and advice to UK workers who have fallen for jobs fraud or experienced unfair working practices.

The organisation says it has noted an increase in fake job offers being made via messaging apps. To reduce your risk of being swindled, check:

• Did you apply for the job? If you have received an email or text message for a job you did not apply for, do not click on any links. They could be phishing scams
• Are the salary and perks too good to be true? Scam ads are designed to entice you in with a huge pay package, plus sought-after perks like flexible working
• Do they want money? No professional agency would request money from you to start a job, or ask for your bank details
• Are they keen to avoid paperwork? Fraudsters will be eager to avoid any recorded contact as it could make it easier for you to contact the police
• Are they who they say they are? Often, fraudsters will use a recognisable brand name to manipulate you into thinking they are a reputable source

If you do fall for an employment scam, JobsAware advises you to contact your bank immediately to stop any unauthorised transactions immediately.

Stop all communication with the ‘agency’ and report the scam to JobsAware. If you know it, contact the site where your CV information was stolen from to let them know that scammers have been stealing personal data.

Challenges with accessing support from HMRC pose hurdles for growing businesses. That’s according to entrepreneur Sahar Hashemi, who says the service’s slow response time has left many companies struggling to access important tax breaks.

In comments published by the BBC, Hashemi, who leads the female-focused network Buy Women Built, said entrepreneurs were “missing out on key government incentives aimed at boosting new businesses and innovation”.

HMRC’s helpdesk has faced persistent criticism for its complexity and lack of clarity. As a result, our own recent business survey identified tax as the most difficult topic for entrepreneurs to source accurate information on.

Tax claims confused by HMRC delays

Describing the process of contacting HMRC as “very difficult,” Hashemi singled out two tax relief schemes: Research and Development (R&D) and the Enterprise Investment Scheme (EIS), both of which allow company owners to claim a tax relief on company investments.

Each year, HMRC receives 1.1 million claims for tax relief from employees on their expenses. Currently, businesses that have made a claim for repayment must wait for HMRC to verify it by opening a compliance check or ‘enquiry’.

For cash-poor startups, delays to the approval process can be critical. Early-stage firms tend to have smaller cash reserves to fall back on between the time a purchase is made and the claim is approved – especially in today’s economy.

Gender gap

Hashemi particularly highlighted the plight of women founders. Currently, the group receives only 2% of venture capital in the UK, with many owners having to rely on niche business grants for women to fund their growth.

Startups’ research on the gender funding gap revealed that male founders received 6.2x more early-stage investment than female last year.

Now Hashemi, who co-founded High Street chain Coffee Republic, called for an “urgent review to take place on the rules around funding, to ensure that all HMRC staff are aware of the legitimacy of these claims.”

Taxing times for SMEs

Successive governments have promised to reduce business red tape when it comes to tax claims. Today’s SMEs are bogged down by information, making it difficult for them to focus on core business activities.

In a survey of 564 businesses, conducted by Startups.co.uk, 15% said tax is the most difficult topic to access information on.

The government last week announced a new, online service aimed at employees. It said the service, due to go live this year, would simplify tax relief claims on expenses in one place.

Entrepreneurs have a right to feel sceptical towards these pledges. Last month, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) warned that businesses were footing the bill for Making Tax Digital (MTD), another program aimed at making it easier for people to get their tax right.

According to the PAC, business taxpayers would have to pay more than £1.9bn to comply with new arrangements over the first five years.

Hulu’s Emmy-award winning culinary drama, The Bear, has captivated audiences with its gritty portrayal of life in the food and drink industry.

Set in “The Original Beef of Chicagoland,” the show centres on Carmy, a young and talented chef who inherits his late brother Mikey’s sandwich bar, complete with a found family of screaming chefs and straining t-shirts.

But beneath the chaotic surface lies a fascinating, if fictional, business. For all the food lovers and finance nerds out there, we at Startups decided to dig deeper and produce a real-life cash flow forecast for The Beef.

Read on for a complete cost breakdown of Chicago’s most famous kitchen, and find out if Carmy would even make it out of the first episode.

How much would it cost to run The Beef?

Let’s begin with The Beef’s operating expenses. These are the costs a business incurs during its regular day-to-day operations. They are essential for keeping a company running and generating revenue, and cover everything from salaries to water bills.

Salaries

Easily the least believable aspect of The Bear is its long cast list. For what is supposed to be a lowly sandwich shop, Mikey employs enough staff members to finish a ream of payroll.

Episode one introduces us to a Head Chef, a manager, a sous-chef, two line cooks, one runner, and two dishwashers. There’s even an in-house bread baker; a premium that few cheap eateries entertain and the show itself acknowledges is weird.

Of course, it’s unclear if Carmy even takes a salary. Many business owners choose not to pay themselves so as not to eat into their company’s profits.

Assuming that every worker is being paid no more than the Chicago minimum wage of $15 (£11.82) per hour, and that they all work a lower estimate of 40 hours per week, Carmy would still be spending around $5,400 (£4,255.60) per week just to pay his employees.

Rent

Now the good news. There’s likely not much in the way of outstanding debt here. Mikey had bought the Original Beef building, so he would not owe anything to a landlord or building provider. US businesses also escape the UK’s expensive business rate charges.

Jimmy mentions that the lot is worth about $2 million, suggesting Mikey had a good amount of equity. There is the matter of Jimmy’s $300,000 loan to Mikey, as revealed later in the season, but let’s keep this article spoiler-free.

With no mention of a mortgage, Carmy catches a lucky break here for what can often be a brick-and-mortar business’ biggest expense.

Marketing

We can ignore this one, as The Beef almost entirely markets itself through local advertising methods like word-of-mouth.

This is a great way to build strong relationships and we can see it does a lot to turn its patrons into eager customer advocates – although it can make it more difficult to expand or diversify products. As Syd points out, few people are buying a sandwich for dinner.

Utilities

Gas, water, and electricity bills are a huge expense for restaurants. Kitchen equipment like ovens, freezers, and dishwashers are extortionate to run (another reason why The Beef should have fired its pot washers).

On average, a restaurant can spend anywhere from $4,000 to $20,000 per month on energy costs. That’s a lot of steak sandwiches.

Luckily The Original Beef is a small space. Judging by the interior decor and fluorescent lighting, Mikey also didn’t bother wasting money much on heating and maintenance fees (it’s never particularly clear if Fak gets paid for his upkeep efforts).

We’ll put The Beef’s utility bills at $3,000 per week – smack in the middle of the range.

Cost of Goods sold

Cost of goods sold (COGS) are the direct costs associated with production, such as materials and labour. Unlike operating costs, restaurants need to pay these regardless of whether any products or services are sold.

The Beef is service-based, so its COGS should be lower than its operating expenses. But the shop’s pricing strategy is also non-existent. Beneath cheap and cheerful branding, it invests heavily in high-quality sirloin steaks, marking its costs up considerably.

Full-service restaurants tend to spend roughly 30% of a meal’s display price on its ingredients. The Beef sells its steak sarnies for an astonishingly low $8 (£6.31), so we’ll be exceedingly generous and assume it costs $2.40 (£1.90) to make one roll.

Reportedly, Mr. Beef, the restaurant that The Beef was based on, sold 300 sandwiches per day. That means before the much-vaunted menu change, Carmy would be spending around $6,048 (£4,776) per week on ingredients, accounting for an average of 20% food waste.

• The Beef total expenses = $14,448 (£11,385) per week

The Beef’s Bottom Line

Now it’s time to work out how much The Beef would have made in terms of revenue and profits.

Restaurants typically don’t generate income beyond sales of food and beverages. There are some potential alternative income streams they can explore, such as merchandise sales or loyalty programs, but Mikey didn’t bother with these.

As a result, The Beef’s only income appears to be through the sale of its sandwiches. The soda fridge looks fully stocked throughout every episode, and it’s unclear whether Marcus ever manages to sell his freshly-baked cakes.

Assuming The Beef only sells 300 rolls per day again for $8 each, that would mean the shop generates $16,800 (£13,272) in sales revenue per week from its sandwiches.

Profit margin

To work out The Beef’s take home pay, we need to figure out its profit margin. In simple terms, this is the money a company keeps as profit after accounting for all its expenses.

We know that The Beef’s total sales are $16,800 per week. Take away its $14,448 operating expenses and COGS, and you’re left with a gross profit of $2,352 (£1,853) a week.

Net profit

Finally, we come to The Beef’s ultimate bottom line: net profit. This figure takes into account all costs, including taxes, to reveal the final percentage of revenue kept as profit.

Every organisation based across the pond, regardless of size, is taxed at the US corporation tax rate of 21%, rather than the UK’s 25%. That would give The Beef a net profit of $1,858 (£1,464) after tax.

So, based on our calculations, and taking into account operating expenses, cost of goods sold, and revenue figures, Carmy inherits a business making just under $2k per week.

But what does this mean in terms of business performance? To explain, we need to look at The Beef’s net profit margin. This is a ratio that measures the percentage of profit a company generates from its total revenue. It’s calculated like this:

• (Revenue – Expenses) / Revenue x 100 = Net Profit Margin

Using this formula, The Beef scores a net profit margin of 11%, which essentially means for every $1 of profit it generates, the company takes $0.11 of profit.

An NYU report on US margins revealed the average net profit margin is 7.71% across different industries. The Beef’s balance sheets are clearly doing better than a lot of hospitality firms in the current climate.

Could The Beef have stayed in business?

At first glance, it may look as though The Beef could have kept its doors open (even while employing half of Chicago in its kitchen). But that’s before we dive a bit deeper into the city’s specific tax laws.

Chicago has the second highest meal tax rate in the US after Minneapolis. The total sales tax for restaurants in the city is currently 10.75% (inclusive of the 6.25% tax on all food sales, as well as state and municipal Retailers’ Occupation Taxes), all of which swallow a significant chunk of sandwich sales revenue.

In fact, Carmy’s cursed inheritance felt doomed to fail as a sandwich shop. As we see on the show, a disaster is never more than an episode away, whether that’s the power cutting out, an expensive appliance needing replacing, or the discovery of black mould in the ceiling.

Any of these would require deep pockets from a rainy day fund, and that’s where a thin profit margin comes back to haunt.

In today’s cost of living crisis, hospitality firms are struggling to survive decreased consumer spending. One off-day where no sandwiches were sold would have been enough to scuttle The Beef’s sinking ship – even if it had raised its prices.

Leaving the land of TV, however, there’s good news for the real-life Carmy. The owner of Mr. Beef has since revealed he’s now selling 800 sandwiches a day thanks to the popularity of the show. Now that’s some tasty returns.

The business world loves a good legal bust-up, especially when it comes to copyright laws. Today, trademark infringements are a common occurrence as firms struggle to safeguard their creations in the information age.

Shein is one the biggest offenders. The fast-fashion firm has faced numerous infringement suits. Its latest opponent is Uniqlo, which alleges the brand stole its viral ‘banana’ bag. The Japanese retailer has demanded Shein cease sales of all “imitation products” and pay reparations for lost sales.

Below, we run through some of the best-known Intellectual Property (IP) infringement cases of the past decade, and explain how you can protect your brand materials from theft.

1. Shein vs H&M

Uniqlo’s latest suit isn’t the first time Shein has found itself in hot water over alleged plagiarism. Last summer, H&M filed a lawsuit against the fast fashion retailer for copyright infringement, according to court documents filed in Hong Kong.

Bloomberg reported that the filing included photos of H&M items, such as swimwear and sweaters, as “evidence” that Shein had stolen its designs. Shein, which produces roughly 500 pieces of clothing per worker per day, declined to comment on the accusations.

Another court filing against Shein, this time from a host of independent designers, claimed the clothing giant was using a “secretive algorithm” to identify trending art and reproduce the designs for speedy upload and sale on the brand’s global marketplace.

2. Vanilla Ice vs David Bowie & Queen

We’ve all experienced it. You hear the distinctive opening bass line and start to sing “Under Pressure” by Queen and David Bowie, only to find that you’re actually listening to Vanilla Ice’s “Ice Ice Baby.”

Apart from wrong-footing thousands of listeners every year, Vanilla Ice also committed an actual crime with this creation: he forgot to ask both parties for permission to use the riff.

Vanilla Ice’s weak defence that he had changed the final chord to make it unique quickly melted. Under pressure from Queen’s legal team, this time financial, the singer was forced to pay up. The case was settled out of court for an undisclosed amount.

3. Apple vs Microsoft

Tech enthusiasts may remember the saga of the Apple vs Microsoft trademark suit. Two of the biggest tech companies in the world collided in the late 80s when a teenaged Apple went up against its greatest rival.

According to Apple, Bill Gates’ brainchild had stolen the graphical user interface (GUI) of their newly-released Macintosh OS, without having permission or a licence to do so.

But what appeared to be an open and shut case was then muddied by the revelation that Apple had permitted Microsoft to use design elements of the Macintosh GUI in Windows. Its legal department just hadn’t been told. Cue the court ruling against Apple in 1992.

4. Starbucks vs Obsidian Group

You’ve heard of the ‘Frappuccino’, but what about ‘Freddoccino’? We’re guessing not. But these two near identically-named drinks created a subpoenaed spillage when Starbucks took legal action against Obsidian Group, the firm behind the Coffee Culture chain, in 2016.

Arguing that Coffee Culture was passing off the Freddoccino as its own creamy concoctions, the global coffeehouse came down hard, arguing that the latter had caused ‘irreparable damage’ to Starbucks and its 35,771 stores.

Despite renaming its drink ‘The Freddo’ in a bid to appease Starbucks’ legal team, the coffee giant persisted with legal action. The outcome of the lawsuit remains undetermined.

5. M&S vs Aldi

Most Brits will recall the infamous case of Colin the Copyrighted Caterpillar. For decades, Marks & Spencer’s insect-shaped chocolate roulade has been a staple at many children’s parties and office treat tables. Conveniently, budget rival Aldi then rolled out its own version of the cake, Cuthbert.

In what became known as the supermarket cake wars, M&S sued Aldi in 2021, complaining that Cuthbert was now being invited to more appearances at picnics than Colin.

The court case was eventually settled in 2022, with Cuthbert returning to shelves with a slightly tweaked appearance last spring. Since then, various copycats have joined the army, including Tesco’s Curly, Asda’s Clyde, and Waitrose’s Cecil.

6. James Dyson vs Hoover

Some of the most bitterly fought court cases relate to patents. Patents are an exclusive right granted on inventions. They tend to be filed by tech companies, and can be very costly applications to complete.

In 2000, the innovative appliance brand Dyson sued Hoover for infringing its patent on the bagless Dyson vacuum (cue lots of puns from news outlets about being taken to the cleaners).

So what was the outcome? As you might expect from the vacuum cleaner brand, Dyson cleaned up. Hoover was instructed by a judge to pay £4m in damages; the highest ever court award in a UK patent case at the time.

What is copyright infringement?

Copyright infringement occurs when someone takes your IP and tries passing it off as their own. This can include things like copying your work, distributing it, publicly displaying it, or creating derivative works from it.

How do I register for copyright?

There isn’t a register of copyright works in the UK. Instead, your work is automatically copyrighted as soon as it is created and shared, such as by writing it down or recording it.

However, most brands, when they register their business, will also register a trademark for their company name or branding. This adds another layer of protection to key brand materials such as words, logos, or slogans.

Trademarks are especially smart in today’s world. Even AI business name generators have caused concern that the internet content they ‘scrape’ to come up with their suggestions might make use of copyrighted materials.

Even if an AI-generated name is not identical to your trademark, it could still be guilty of trademark dilution, which means it could cause confusion among consumers.

Workers based in London are most likely to lose their jobs this year, as official redundancy data suggests the capital has the worst attrition rate in the UK.

Personal financial experts, Wealth of Geeks, analysed data from the Office for National Statistics. According to their results, London experienced 52,173 potential redundancies between January and October 2023, equating to 0.5% of all workers based in the city.

As employees increasingly prioritise job security, the results throw cold water on the long-held belief that the UK capital is the best place to find a job this year.

How likely are you to lose your job this year?

Wealth of Geeks also conducted a regional breakdown of its findings. The results show that, after London, employees in Yorkshire and The Humber are the second most at risk of redundancy.

In this region, there were 25,227 potential redundancies from January to October 2023, equating to 0.46% of all workers in the area.

The South West is the safest region to be employed in. This time last year, 0.2% of employees were let go, the lowest attrition rate of any region.

Tech layoffs

Another reason for London’s sky-high redundancy rate is its status as tech capital of the world. Also known as London’s own Silicon Valley, Old Street roundabout, is home to one of the UK’s largest clusters of tech companies.

Tech layoffs have been a persistent presence in news headlines as companies like X, Google, and Meta fired thousands of employees to save money.

After making hundreds of global sales staff redundant earlier this week, Google CEO Sundar Pichai reportedly wrote in an internal memo that there’ll be more “role eliminations” in 2024.

Remote jobs most secure overall

The Wealth of Geeks research also found that next month could see the biggest wave of layoffs so far this year. February 2023 was the most common month for redundancies with 12,706 HR1 forms being handed out during this period.

For those looking for a way to avoid a sacking in the weeks ahead, moving into a role with flexible working might prove the best option.

Startups’ recent survey of small businesses revealed a stark difference in layoff rates. 38% of fully in-office firms cut jobs last year, compared to 16% of remote teams. This suggests that remote work provides greater job security.

London is one of the most expensive regions for renting. Even cheap coworking spaces can introduce a significant overhead. Startups’ findings suggest that the money saved from ditching the office altogether will provide the all-important wriggle room for staffing costs.

Barclays CEO C.S. Venkatakrishnan said he feels “very optimistic” about the outlook for the UK economy, despite the rising cost of living.

Speaking to CNBC at the World Economic Forum, Venkatakrishnan told a crowd of investors and financial experts: “I think the UK consumer is in very decent shape.”

His comments follow a report by Startups.co.uk, which found that more than 9 out of 10 small business owners in the UK feel positively about 2024.

In a survey of 546 UK small businesses, 92% of respondents said they feel optimistic about their growth prospects for 2024, with 59% reporting high levels of optimism.

Is 2024 the start of the roaring twenties?

2023 was a year to forget for small businesses. Record high energy bills, a painful hiring crisis and skyrocketing inflation combined to sound a death knell for businesses across every industry.

As a result, Startups’ survey found that SMEs still standing at the end of 2023 are more likely to say they survived (51%) rather than thrived (42%) last year.

Speaking at the Davos conference, Venkatakrishnan acknowledged the difficulties, “these pent-up savings have been getting eroded”.

However, he remained bullish about the likelihood of economic recovery his year, adding that energy prices have “calmed down” and predicting that mortgage rates would follow due to market adjustment – both areas that would encourage more consumer spending.

“Two things that have hit the pocket book are coming down, and I will say I’m very optimistic about the UK,” he added.

Some sectors happier than others

The business outlook for 2024 differs depending on the sector, however. Startups’ survey showed that, while 68% of firms in finance and tech are highly optimistic, 20% of those in leisure, hospitality, and retail are pessimistic.

Labour shortages and decreased consumer spending helped to worsen an already catastrophic hospitality crisis last year.

Retail, Hospitality, and Leisure (RHL) relief, a discount scheme for shop, bar, and restaurant business rates, was recently extended in the Autumn Statement.

Many will cling to this meagre life ring in 2024. Startups recently reported that 19% of hospitality companies are unable to raise pay this year. Big-name employers, such as Brewdog, have already faced criticism for not raising wages to the new Real Living Wage bracket.

New startups most confident

In further good news for the UK’s economic outlook, the businesses that were most likely to express positive sentiments about the future were those founded in the past two years.

74% of those founded in the past year are optimistic about 2024, versus just 47% of companies that launched in 2019, a year marred by the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

It’s easy to think of a downturn as all doom-and-gloom. But often, scarcity can breed clarity. Plenty of successful companies have been founded during a recession including unicorns Airbnb and Uber.

That nearly three out of four startups feel ready for scale-up this year is a good omen for the UK’s economic recovery in 2024.

Research from leading card payments provider takepayments has uncovered a startling reality: two-thirds of sole traders in the UK are in the dark about the impending self-assessment tax return deadline, according to a recent survey. 

Only 3 in 10 (31%) sole traders were aware that the deadline for submitting their self-assessment form is when the clock hits midnight on the 31 January.

Overall, the survey found that:

• 75% of business owners do not know at what earnings threshold they’ll have to start paying a higher tax rate of 40% (it currently stands at £50,271)
• 73% were unaware that sole traders are not obligated to pay corporation tax
• Nearly 1 in 5 (18%) of sole traders admitted to not contributing to a pension scheme
• 21% of respondents did not have a three-month salary safety net saved up

Industry disparities in financial knowledge

The survey was taken by a variety of different sectors, and these findings were the most notable:

• Retailers scored lowest, with a mere 13% possessing the accurate information. 
• Real estate agents performed below average, with only 23% providing the correct answer. 
• Law professionals, while the most informed among the groups surveyed, still didn’t reach a high standard, with only 42% answering correctly.

Sole traders more aware of penalties than tax thresholds

While the general requirements are hazy in the minds of most sole traders, one thing they do have a good understanding of is the potential penalties:  

• 98% of sole traders understood there would be some form of penalty for non-payment
• 91% were aware of the specific consequences if they failed to pay their self-assessment tax bill (involving penalties, interest charges and debt collection procedures). 
• Only 2% thought nothing would happen at all.

The misconception about corporation tax

A significant 73% of respondents were under the impression that they needed to pay corporation tax, highlighting a widespread misconception. 

Unlike limited companies, sole traders are exempt from paying corporation tax. 

Saving habits and vulnerabilities

London-based and Welsh traders were most likely to pay into a pension scheme, with 92% saying they paid contributions. The least likely was the East of England, where only 55% of traders had a pension scheme.

While Welsh traders boasted the highest pension contributions, they were the worst UK region when it came to saving: 1 in 3 (36%) did not have at least 3 months’ salary saved.

Worryingly, 21% of all respondents admitted that they did not currently have at least three months’ salary saved as a safety net, leaving them vulnerable.

takepayments’ solution: their all-new tax calculator

In response to the research findings, takepayments has launched a Business Tax and National Insurance Calculator that is now available to use for free on their website. 

Jodie Wilkinson, Head of Strategic Partnerships at takepayments, emphasises the tool’s value, stating: 

“It’s not surprising that many small business owners are unsure of the legal obligations they have regarding things like tax and VAT. The rules can be quite difficult to understand, especially if you just want to focus on growing your business. 

The calculator should help take some of the guesswork out of paying tax. It’s a free tool that anyone can use, whether you’re an established business or a budding entrepreneur yet to register.” 

For sole traders seeking clarity on their tax obligations, you can try the takepayments tax calculator here.