When I turned 60 years old, 35 years into my run as president and CEO of Stockwell Elastomerics, I started thinking seriously about the future of the company that had been in my family since my great grandfather founded it in 1919.

We had built a successful business in Philadelphia, growing to three buildings and employing more than 100 workers throughout the city, and providing custom silicone gaskets to customers near and far. Over the years, I fended off inquiries from just about everyone—larger competitors, suppliers, private equity firms, and strategic corporations. One competitor even put a signed check on a table and asked me to fill in the number. I declined.

But by 2014, it became clear I wouldn’t be able to lead Stockwell forever and needed to find a solution that honored the hard work and contributions of the men and women on the production floor who made us successful. I thought about what would happen to my employees if I sold to a strategic buyer or private equity firm for top dollar and they moved the factory and stranded the employees who made that very sale possible. It happens all the time. I have known several former business owners who did that and came to regret the decision. I wasn’t going to be one of those owners who held out for the top dollar while putting my people at risk.

The ESOP option

As I started looking into options, I heard of something called an employee stock ownership plan, or ESOP, a qualified retirement plan that allows companies to share ownership with its workers. I was introduced to Ken Baker, who owned and ran New Age Industries, a model ESOP company in the area. We had lunch and I was intrigued. I went to a few ESOP conferences, eager to learn as much as I could. I met the CEO of Harpoon Brewery, who used an ESOP to leverage a deal buying out a partner, and it all just began to make more sense to me.

I put my toe in the water in 2017 and transitioned the company to a 30% ESOP to start. The idea was to eventually get to 100%, but I wanted to make sure that as I ceded control of the company, I did everything I could to make sure it would stay in Philadelphia and remain employee owned in perpetuity. I know forever is a big word. How can you really predict what’s going to happen decades down the road? My goal was to set the company up to succeed for as long as possible.

I talked to a lot of experts and finally was convinced we had a model in place that would make it almost impossible for the company to be sold to a third party. We went to 45% employee owned in 2021 and then, last year, to 100%.

Employees take ownership

When I first told the employees I was planning to retire and sell them the company, it took a while for it to sink in for them. “Bill’s selling the business to us? What’s going on?” There was a bit of mystery about it. They had never heard of an ESOP. There was some excitement, but it took time, and repeated communication, to get everyone to understand what it meant for them. 

I made the ESOP decision for employees like Mike Sisco, a production engineering specialist who ensures our production processes are correctly followed. He’s got a focus on detail born from nearly four decades at Stockwell. It’s people like Mike, and others, who have been with the company for 30 years or more, who made this company successful and that I thought of as I pondered Stockwell’s future. 

For me, it ended up being an easy decision. I had become so involved on the production floor with our people and felt that if I could provide opportunity for them, it was a no-brainer. As business owners, we don’t need the last nickel. We should be open to sharing some of the wealth.

I have a firm belief that the regularity of good work, at a good wage, is a foundation to a good life. At Stockwell, we are proud to hire from the Philadelphia neighborhoods and make a difference in their lives. And by transitioning to 100% employee owned, we expect to be here, making a difference, for decades to come.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

Read more:

• I was sleeping in a Walmart parking lot. Now I own a company
• Shared company ownership may be the missing path to the American dream

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

The U.K.’s overhauling of a divisive tax regime that allowed international millionaires to live in the country while paying lower taxes is triggering an exodus of the rich. 

A new system replacing the lucrative “non-domicile” tax status took effect on Apr. 6, requiring those with a permanent home abroad but living in the U.K., to pay the same tax as everyone else.

A case in point: Frederic de Mevius, one of the heirs of the founding families behind the world’s biggest brewer, AB InBev. He purchased property in the affluent Kensington and Chelsea area and ran an investment platform based in Luxembourg and London. De Mevius was also involved with various cultural institutions in the British capital. 

But, according to registry filings cited by Bloomberg, de Mevius recently moved his residency back to Belgium. While it’s unclear exactly what prompted the move, changes in the non-dom structure could have played a role

De Mevius is far from alone. Henley & Partners, a London-based citizenship and residency advisory firm, estimated that nearly 10,800 millionaires fled the U.K. last year, second only to China. 

U.K. Government estimates from 2022-2023 suggest that 74,000 people claimed non-dom status, accounting for £8.9 billion in tax revenues. 

In lieu of the non-dom regime, the new system will be based on residence and allows preferential tax rules to apply only for the first four years of overseas income, compared to 15 years in the previous tax structure. 

London slipped from fifth to sixth place among cities attracting millionaires, according to a new ranking released Tuesday by the firm. It’s one of only two cities in the ranking with a net loss of millionaires over the last decade, the other being Russia’s capital of Moscow. 

Changes to the non-dom status and sky-high inheritance taxes are making the U.K. less attractive for wealthy long-term settlers, according to the report.

“Any foreign national in the UK for more than 10 years would then be caught by that [the 40% inheritance tax], and as all structures to avoid this, such as trusts, have been caught as well, then the only solution is to leave,” Peter Ferrigno, director of tax services at Henley & Partners, told Fortune.

“If you are an international business person with assets in many countries, having the U.K. take 40% of your worldwide assets in the event of your demise seems to breach some basic principle of ‘fairness.’”

Some of the factors influencing the changing policies in the U.K. have been at play for several years, including the diminishing importance of the London Stock Exchange compared to its global counterparts and a less attractive investment environment for tech and entrepreneurship. 

Critics of the non-dom structure argue that it gives wealthy people more leeway with taxation rules while staying in the U.K. for a long time. Others highlight how millionaires can help create wealth in the country by employing people at their businesses and investing in the economy.  

The Adam Smith Institute (ASI) characterized the departure of millionaires as a “vote of no confidence in our current economic structures and foundations.”

“It is not just for the millionaire’s benefit that a change in culture would be beneficial – a country which embraces and strives for entrepreneurialism, wealth creation, and a ‘go-get-it’ attitude would do much to engender a wealthier society,” ASI said in a report. 

The avenues for the wealthy to stay in the U.K. seem to be dwindling. For instance, an Investor Visa allowing people to invest £2 million or more in the U.K. to settle there was scrapped three years ago in order to prevent misuse. 

The tea leaves suggest a more dire forecast for the U.K. in the next few years: It’ll lose some 500,000 millionaires by 2028, according to a UBS report last year. 

However, a rapidly changing geopolitical climate across the pond has stoked the desire of some immigrants—particularly Americans—to consider pursuing British citizenship. 

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

Source link

Source link