IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/eucflr/v21y2024i2p234-268n1004.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tax Reforms and the Decline of the London Stock Market: The Untold Story

Author

Listed:
  • Gomtsian Suren

    (Assistant Professor of Law, LSE Law School, LondonUnited Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.)

  • Schuster Edmund

    (Associate Professor of Law, LSE Law School, LondonUnited Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.)

Abstract

234 Various reasons have been put forward for the declining global relevance of the London equity market. Reform proposals and changes already implemented target some of the major problems identified as reasons for the stock market’s decline. Surprisingly, tax related explanations for the current state of the UK stock market are largely absent from the discourse. This paper argues that the preferential tax treatment of the dividend income of UK pension funds and insurance companies introduced in the early 1970s and repealed in the mid 1990s first contributed to the UK stock market’s growth by implicitly subsidising financing via equity and encouraging the flow of the funds of these investors into the market, and subsequently led to the market’s decline as a result of the outflow of the funds of the two major classes of institutional investors: UK pension funds and insurance companies. The key implication of this argument is that omitting tax as a major factor in the decline of the UK stock market risks ending up with reforms that can, at best, do little to change the current situation.

Suggested Citation

  • Gomtsian Suren & Schuster Edmund, 2024. "Tax Reforms and the Decline of the London Stock Market: The Untold Story," European Company and Financial Law Review, De Gruyter, vol. 21(2), pages 234-268.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:eucflr:v:21:y:2024:i:2:p:234-268:n:1004
    DOI: 10.1515/ecfr-2024-0008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/ecfr-2024-0008
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/ecfr-2024-0008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:eucflr:v:21:y:2024:i:2:p:234-268:n:1004. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.