Weekly blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Firing the imagination'

I talked last week about the flurry of consultations being launched by government ahead of the summer holidays and, guess what, there have been even more since I wrote those words.  It feels like I have spent every waking hour of the last ten days ploughing through page after page of government documents and preparing questionnaires and summaries to share with our members so they can comment and offer their views.

The latest to hit my inbox was HMRC's consultation document: 'Sharing and publishing data for public benefit', a set of proposals that "form a significant development in HMRC's Open Data Strategy".  Judged by the title, you wouldn't imagine this has much to excite credit professionals but ­ as is so often the case ­ there are nuggets hidden away that are very interesting.  Indeed, I would go far as to say that this one has genuinely excited my imagination. Why is that?

In amongst the detail, the paper suggests the possibilities of releasing of basic non-financial VAT registration data as public data, and sharing more detailed VAT registration data on a more restricted and controlled basis for specific purposes, such as credit referencing.  It also considers whether VAT registration data could provide a foundation for private sector business registers.  It is this last point that lights my fire! I'm old enough to remember the Business Names Register (I think it was called) which allowed a supplier to identify a business.  It ceased to exist years ago and no doubt someone reading this will remember better than me the background as to why, and when.  Since its demise, the ability to identify a business that trades as a sole trader or partnership has been incredibly difficult, and the proportion of businesses on which the credit reference agencies are able to report is incredibly low because of the dearth of data available to them.  I know the VAT threshold is currently £79,000 so the smallest businesses wouldn't be picked up but it would still be a huge step forward.  According to HMRC, around 800,000 VAT registered businesses are not incorporated so making basic information available to credit reference agencies would at least enable a business's existence, location, legal status, and trade classification to be verified.

Of course we'd prefer to have financial information as well but let's keep our feet on the ground; that's not going to happen any time soon.  In the meantime, please let me know what you think (the ICM In-Brief newsletter published on 14 August will have a link to the document but it can also be found here so we can make HM Government aware of our views.

I'm off to Scotland for my summer break shortly and I'm grateful to Charles Mayhew, Sue Chapple, and Sue Kettle who've agreed to do me the honour of writing guest blogs while I'm away.  If you too are heading for some time of relaxation in the coming weeks then make the most of them.  This is the only time in the year when I genuinely turn off emails (despite what I may tell Mrs K at other times!).  I'll look forward to returning refreshed and re-charged.

Weekly Blog by Philip King, CEO of the ICM - 'Late Payment thinking that is back to front'

I spoke at a conference organised by the AFDCC (the French equivalent of the ICM) last Friday in Paris. It was a good event held in a very impressive venue and about 150 delegates assembled to hear about and debate, amongst other things, the new EU Directive on Late Payment. One of the keynote speakers was Barbara Weiler MEP, an architect and key driver of the new Directive. Her passion for the benefits on business of improving payment terms is not in doubt and her energy has clearly been instrumental in getting the Directive adopted.

The recent survey of ICM members conducted by Equifax showed that 65% of respondents believe the Government should do more to protect small businesses from the negative impact of late payments, and there can be no argument that the existing legislation has not worked in the way intended. Businesses, and particularly small ones, are either ignorant of the law, don't know how to use it, or are afraid to do so for fear of losing a customer. There are exceptions of course; I know credit professionals who use it very successfully and mitigate the cost of financing extended credit by so doing, and I know others who generate a late payment 'charges and interest' invoice to accompany the first collection letter very effectively.

Primarily, the real financial benefit comes when legal action is taken and the late payment charges and interest are added to the principal debt and can significantly increase the amount recovered. But that was never the point of legislation - it wasn't intended to make for better recovery at the end of the food chain; the idea was to improve payment behaviour from the start!

Unfortunately, politicians often seem to miss the point of what happens in the real business world and this is no exception. The Directive states that, if payment terms are not agreed in the contract, then the assumed terms shall be 30 days and - if payment terms are set out in the contract - they cannot be 'grossly unfair'. The definition of 'grossly unfair' is unclear but, in any event, how many small companies would be willing or able to take legal action to argue the case and get remedy? The inclusion of a clause allowing a supplier to recover reasonable actual debt recovery costs (in addition to interest) rather than just the current standard late payment charge is positive but is again a back-end benefit, not a front-end incentive to change payment behaviour.

For me, the most encouraging thing in the whole conference was Barbara Weiler saying that the Directive is as much about changing the culture of payment through soft issues as it is about introducing hard legislative measures. The UK has been lauded for its Prompt Payment Code (administered for BIS by the ICM of course) and educational activity like our Managing Cashflow Guides are also recognised as leading the field. As credit professionals we have more opportunity than most - and should use it - to influence that change of culture by adopting credit management best practice. We can and should be more powerful and effective than a Directive and if the Directive gets more attention and visibility for the importance of cash-flow management and the value we add to businesses, then - for that reason alone - I welcome it.

The Prompt Payment Code

Institute of Credit Management Press Releases