Marketlend Academy: Government, SMEs, and a business comparison rate

Government getting too heavily involved in business isn’t always a good idea, as it risks eroding the free market’s power to innovate. However, there is a place for regulation that gives all business the best chance to succeed.

 

When it comes to small business lending, Marketplace CEO Leo Tyndall says one simple change would make a huge difference to Australian SMEs, the requirement of a small business comparison rate. Watch the video or read the transcript below to learn how government can unlock the potential of small business.

 

 

Video Transcript:

 

I’m never a big fan of pushing government to do a lot of things because the the more involvement government has on business the danger it is that it actually doesn’t operate in a capitalistic environment. But what I do say the government need to do is ensure that there is a level playing field. To ensure that the SME’s able to make the right decisions.

 

What I mean by that is the SME itself should be able to within a very short period of time look at all the finance options and then go, “Yes. This is the price. This is the real price of my funds.” And to do that at this present moment, there isn’t a framework for every SME to be able to give a comparative rate.

 

So if we look in the mortgage market, you go and look at the advertising in mortgage market, you can say, “Well what’s the comparison rate?” and you can match them all and put ’em in a line and then say, “This guy’s got the cheapest rate ’cause this is his comparison rate and it’s the lowest.” We don’t have that in the SME market. And that’s what’s needed.

 

The SME market needs the requirement. What the government needs to do is say to SME lenders, “You must give a comparison rate. You must tell them what is the real cost of funds.” [The] very immediate time that [SMEs] touch base with you you should say, “This is what your cost of funds will be”, and so therefore the SME can quickly make a decision whether it is the cheapest or more expensive. Now you can say that you’re more expensive than the others and say these are the reasons why you’ve got all these other benefits. But you do need to give a true, clear price.

 

And that’s unfortunately not available at this time. So this is where I think the government really does need to step in and it’s only an extension of the Trade Practices Act or the the consumer laws. So it’s not like there’s a lot that they need to do there.

 

Marketlend Academy: The Problem With Australia’s R&D Tax Incentive

Small and medium sized business don’t get a lot of tax incentives in Australia, both compared to larger firms and overseas competitors. One of the few SMEs can claim is the Australian Reasearch & Development tax incentive. But Marketlend CEO Leo Tyndall says the R&D tax incentive needs to be improved for SMEs. Watch the video or read the transcript below to find out how.

 

 

Video Transcript:

 

One of the issues than an SME has when they start up for the first one to, say, five years is that the only tax breaks that are available to get is if they’re determined to be an R&D company or something similar. Now ironically, if you’re an R&D company in Australia, unless you can prove that your R&D is out of Australia, and for a lot of these, especially in even our space where the technology’s not here, it’s offshore, you can’t get the benefit. You can’t get a tax break. So if you look at other countries where, you know, SMEs or people have actually started up some type of new business that is a new concept, they’ve been able to get that break and that enables them to grow.

 

I mean, the Googles of the world and all of these type of guys. You know, this is something that the government should really have a better look at and say, “Okay. We’ve got these incentives, these grants, and R&Ds, but if the R&D grant is only working for if the R&D’s done here, how can I do that when the R&D doesn’t come from here?” What you want to say is, “Okay. Are they taking R&D from offshore and then putting it in here so that then they can develop their own R&D here?”

 

Financial System Reform – Recommendation 18- facilitate crowdfunding for debt – SME finance – Marketlend well poised for the future.

Financial System Review – click for the full report

Government should continue its current process to graduate the fundraising regime to facilitate securities-based crowdfunding. This would enable entities to make public offers of securities to a potentially large number of people (the ‘crowd’). The risks associated with crowdfunding investments would require some adjustments to consumer protections, including capping individuals’ investments and clearly communicating the risks.

Government should then use the policy settings for securities as a basis to assess wider fundraising and lending regulation to ensure it facilitates other forms of crowdfunding, including peer-to-peer lending.

A range of crowdfunding models are emerging globally. Crowdfunding facilitates the funding of projects or businesses, where small amounts of money are raised from the ‘crowd’ via an online facilitator (or platform).⁶⁸ Financial crowdfunding models include:

• Securities-based crowdfunding, where the ‘crowd’ invests in an issuer in exchange for securities — either equity (crowd-sourced equity funding, CSEF) or debt.⁶⁹
• Peer-to-peer lending, where an online intermediary facilitates lending between individuals, often in the form of unsecured personal loans, potentially to fund a business.⁷⁰

Objectives

• Graduate fundraising regulation to facilitate innovations in fundraising emerging from new technologies and ensure policy settings are consistent across funding methods.
• Provide firms, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), with additional funding options.

 

Financial Reform Recommendations for allowing the development of crowdfunding options for business to access

Article by Neil Slonim – Financial Reform Report released on 7 December 2014

If adopted, the financial reform recommendations made by the team headed up by businessman David Murray could usher in some of the biggest changes to Australia’s banking system in recent history.

The recommendations are broad, but the key ones impacting small business are those calling for super funds to drop their prices and the government to relax rules around governing crowdfunded equity.

The big banks will be required to hold much more common equity capital against their mortgage business if the inquiry’s recommendations are adopted, while financial planners would need to hold a relevant tertiary degree and be able to prove their competence in managing superannuation.

The inquiry has recommended a ban on self-managed super funds borrowing to buy assets and says the corporate regulator, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, should be granted more power to crack down on white collar crime.

Numerous professional bodies expressed their support for the recommendations yesterday, including CPA Australia, whose chief executive Alex Malley said in a statement that the report “addresses some of the fundamental issues facing Australia’s financial system and signposts some of the critical work that needs to be done”.

“Recommendations for allowing the development of crowdfunding options for businesses to access, the establishment of a new ‘innovation collaboration’ and an emphasis on removing unnecessary regulatory impediments to innovation all have the potential to help business prosper,” said Malley.

However, SME banking expert Neil Slonim says that the 2.1 million small Australian businesses have missed out.

Slonim, who heads up advisory firm ‘The Banking Doctor’ told SmartCompany the report’s lack of specific recommendations relating to the SME banking sector is “disappointing”.

“There was really nothing specific in the 44 recommendations that related to SMEs and startups, other than a generic statement that the inquiry wants to encourage the development of crowdfunding and peer-to-peer lending, which would potentially give SMEs more funding options than they currently have,” says Slonim.

“But other than that, there is really very little if anything else in the inquiry that would give SMEs hope they would get better access to funding.”

Slonim says the two key banking issues facing SMEs are a lack of access to finance and the need for greater competition between the big four banks.

“The inquiry makes some recommendations that would level the playing field between the big four banks and smaller providers of mortgage finance, which will help the consumer sector, there is nothing similar for SMEs,” he says.

“There is a lack of genuine competition between the big four banks, which control more than 80% of the marketplace, in an environment in which it is very difficult for smaller players to compete for SME business.”

And while the Murray report recommends that the government extend protections from unfair contracts for SME loans, Slonim says that “assumes” small businesses are able to sign a contract with a lender in the first place.

Slonim believes it is likely the government will adopt most of the recommendations contained in the Murray report, but says there will be another period of consultation with Treasury before the government officially responds at the end of March 2015.

“Joe Hockey will now be lobbied by all and sundry, particularly the banks” he says.