Riot-hit retailers granted business rate relief
Prime Minister David Cameron has revealed a series of concrete measures to help riot-hit retailers, including business rates holidays.
The Government will allow local authorities to give business rates relief to those retailers affected by the mayhem this week.
Cameron also told Parliament that businesses badly damaged can defer their tax payments.
Cameron unveiled too a £20m high street support scheme to “help affected businesses get back up and running quickly”.
He added that regulations that slow the installation of protective shutters will be slashed.
Cameron said the Government will meet the cost of any legitimate compensation claims, and that businesses will now have 42 days to claim instead of the normal 14.
Cameron said the Association of British Insurers expects the insurance industry to have to pay out more than £200m.
This morning the BRC revealed it had written to Cameron asking for a temporary suspension of business rates for riot-hit retailers and other measures to support traders disrupted by this week’s disorder.
BRC director general Stephen Robertson said: “Our biggest fear is that otherwise successful retailers are pushed into insolvency by the events of this week. Suspending business rates on wrecked shops, flexibility on VAT collection and reassurance that shortfalls in insurance cover will be made up will all help substantially minimise that risk.”
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment.
Share
Readers' comments (1)
Chandra Noume | 16 August 2011 5:37 am
Government's decision to grant financial aid for the affected community is a generous act. Those who own shops damaged in London riots will have a relief fund, as Prime Minister of the UK David Cameron has promised 20 million pounds to help compensate their damages. The total damage from looting and pillaging of several shops throughout England is said to total more than 100 million pounds.Related article I read: Prime minister pledges relief fund for shops hit by London riots . Damages cost as a net loss is really a burden.
Unsuitable or offensive?