Comment

Dawn McLaughlin knows first-hand that a problem shared is a problem halved. And that is why she is utterly convinced of the positive impact of peer-to-peer networking and collaboration in professional services. Sole practitioners are no different to any other business owner. Shoulders not big enough to carry the weight of the world, they are afraid to show weakness by sharing problems. They make decisions in isolation and hope they get it right each time. They are a jack of all trades, and fire-fighting is a crucial skill developed over the years. Time is limited, and the to-do list grows longer with each passing day. This will undoubtedly strike a familiar chord with many readers. Some years back, our Institute championed the idea of bringing us together by encouraging us to establish local network clusters throughout Ireland. Accountants getting together – well, that was a challenge! The only time we spoke to our competitors was possibly over a coffee at a training session, if at all. I went to a group session in Derry with anticipation, and it was the beginning of a long relationship between like-minded individuals. As a closed group, we learned to trust one another. We shared experiences, knowledge, how-to tips, and valuable connections. Sales leads were passed for services we did not provide ourselves. Those relationships have stood the test of time. There was comfort in knowing that others feel the same and share similar issues daily. Your problem had probably already been solved by another member, and we all benefited from these relationships. Even something as simple as a group moan where we put the world to rights was therapeutic. This cluster approach proved vital during the pandemic when so many found themselves isolated. In our Chamber of Commerce, members join a sector cluster and benefit in a similar fashion. Collaboration, alliances, knowledge transfer, innovation, and synergy abound. The benefits of clusters impact each and every one of us. As a Chamber board, we provide a lead director for each cluster, a direct link with benefits flowing both ways. Accurate, timely, and relevant data flows from each cluster on skills gaps, challenges, and opportunities. As an organisation, this gives us evidence-based data to lobby on their behalf. It provides the Chamber with a stronger voice and is vital in the drive to get relevant support to where it is needed most. The benefit of clusters was evidenced locally when one of our board members identified a significant skills gap in his cluster. Welders were in short supply, and the local engineering companies were suffering. Every effort went into determining the need, getting buy-in from the local companies, and lobbying the educational establishments to develop relevant courses. A course was then created, so we had a win-win for the local college, the employers, and – more importantly – for the young people who signed up and went on to get guaranteed jobs at the end of the course. Over the years, I have witnessed many successes emanating from clusters and shared working, and I am totally convinced of their positive impact. I would encourage organisations and networks of all kinds, shapes, and sizes to develop their own clusters for the benefit of their members. For those Chartered Accountants not already connected, why not start up your own network locally? The impact can be hugely significant, and we all benefit from collaboration and sharing our experiences and knowledge. Dawn McLaughlin is Founder of Dawn McLaughlin & Co. Chartered Accountants  and President of Londonderry Chamber of Commerce.

Capital allocation and investment appraisal is a senior management team’s most fundamental responsibility, but it is easy to overstate prospective rates of return. Cormac Lucey explains. The goal of corporate investment should be to convert inputs – including money, things, ideas, and people – into something more valuable than they would otherwise be. After ten years in the position, a CEO whose company invests 10% of its existing capital stock each year will have been responsible for deploying more than half of all the capital at work in the business. This makes capital allocation and investment appraisal a senior management team’s most fundamental responsibility. In financial terms, that means that investments should generate an after-tax rate of return greater than the company’s cost of capital. Management will generally use Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) analysis to test whether a project is likely to achieve this goal. Two specific DCF measures can be estimated. If a company’s cost of capital is 7%, its investments need to generate a rate of return of at least 7% to adequately compensate investors for the risk they are exposing themselves to by investing in a company of that particular size, operating in that particular country, and in that particular sector. If the investment generates an 8% return, value is created. If the investment generates a 6% return, value is destroyed. By discounting projected future cash flows into their equivalent present values using the corporate cost of capital, net present value (NPV) quantifies the boost to shareholder value that an investment should generate. The other key DCF measure is the Internal Rate of Return (IRR). For any given set of project cash flows, IRR quantifies the cost of capital that would generate a nil NPV. The IRR measures the average annual rate of return that the project expects to generate over its life. If a project’s IRR exceeds the cost of capital, it will be expected to boost shareholder value. But there is an assumption implicit in DCF mathematics, which can lead to IRR significantly overstating a project’s prospective rate of return. The IRR approach assumes that intermediate project cash flows generated by the project (i.e. those generated after the initial investment period and before the project’s end) are themselves reinvested to generate a rate of return equal to the project’s IRR. If a company’s cost of capital is 7% and the project’s rate of return is 14%, this assumption means that surplus cash flows generated mid-project are themselves expected to be reinvested and to generate a 14% rate of return. This assumption is questionable: why should returns on surplus cash be higher just because they were generated by a high-return project? Modified Internal Rate of Return (MIRR) applies exactly the same approach to evaluating a project as IRR, except it assumes that intermediate project cash flows generate a rate of return equal to the cost of capital (rather than the project’s IRR) when reinvested. This will generally be a more realistic assumption than that underpinning IRR. Having already calculated IRR, it is a simple matter to estimate a project’s MIRR using Excel’s ‘=MIRR’ function. The difference in the measured rate of return between IRR and MIRR can be significant. Consider a simple example. Suppose we invest €1,000 today, and it is expected to generate annual after-tax cash flows of €140 for each of the next ten years, after which the project ends and we get our €1,000 investment back. The IRR of this project is 14%. But, if our cost of capital is 7%, the MIRR of the same projected cash flows would only be 11.4%. Bottom line: IRR can systematically overstate prospective project returns with its unrealistic reinvestment rate return assumption. MIRR corrects this. Cormac Lucey is an economic commentator and lecturer at Chartered Accountants Ireland.

Reform of the public sector accounting process to an accruals-based system of accounting is gaining momentum, but don’t expect the transition to be total in the short-term, warns Dr Brian Keegan. Last month, the Institute launched a report by Queen’s University Belfast academics, Prof Ciaran Connolly and Dr Elaine Stewart, into the modernisation of public sector accounting. Ireland has long managed its public finances on what essentially is a cash basis of accounting. Modernisation would migrate the State to an accruals basis for accounting for public spending. The fact of the matter is that government over the years has simply gotten bigger. There are 50,000 more people employed in the Irish public service than in 2011, and annual spending has almost doubled in that time. Despite the constant carping from opposition politicians and the commentariat, we have better education, better transport infrastructure, better regulation and governance, and better health services than we used to. All of this demands even more rigorous financial management. Recent surveys by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accounting and the International Federation of Accountants note that 25% of countries worldwide have already migrated to an accruals-based system of accounting. There is an expectation that this will rise to 65% in the next few years. The UK is already operating an accruals-based system of accounting. The Minister for Finance, Paschal Donohoe TD, announced in 2019 that, in part due to OECD prompting, Ireland would undertake a similar public sector changeover. Nevertheless, as the Connolly and Stewart report notes, even the successful adoption of accruals accounting has its pitfalls. A cash-based system of accounting often suits politicians and civil servants alike. It is more difficult to explain away misspent funds or fudge budgeting processes if everything has to be tied up in neat, unaccrued bundles at the end of each year. In Ireland, these pitfalls may be particularly pronounced because we are not good at multi-year politics. Perhaps the most obvious instance of this is pension reform, where there have been at least as many reports and policy papers as there have been governments in recent times. Multi-year capital investment programmes can also fall by the wayside. The 20-year National Spatial Strategy, devised in 2002, seemed to run out of room. Both attempts to establish rainy day funds this century have yielded empty kitties. Constant change is both the glory and the weakness of the democratic process. Introducing an accruals-based accounting system will undoubtedly result in benefits in expenditure management. However, the multi-year budgeting and planning process is a different matter entirely, inextricably linked as it is with the political cycle. The process of change already underway seems to have considerable momentum, and Ireland will have better public accounting systems within the next few years. Even before the 2019 announcement, there was a process of improvement underway with the introduction of a Budget Oversight Committee and a Parliamentary Budget Office. The latter organisation does excellent work in explaining the shape of the public finances. Yet, the complete transition to the accruals basis will have to be phased in, with a long journey towards total change that will include staff training and the typically painful wrangling of recalcitrant IT systems. Arguably the most important stakeholders in this process are government ministers. They stand to benefit most from improvements in the financial management of their departments. However, great plans for long-term investment or reform too often fall by the wayside when the responsible minister loses their job at the polls. The prospects of re-election frequently depend on immediate policies with immediate spend and immediate results. It will be harder to run a political campaign on accruals accounting principles. Dr Brian Keegan is Director of Advocacy & Voice at Chartered Accountants Ireland.

In the wake of the Davy scandal, Cormac Lucey identifies four urgently required changes for Ireland’s regulatory system. The scientist Max Planck said that science advances funeral by funeral. In his 1950 autobiography, he explained, “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” If science advances funeral by funeral, how fast does corporate governance progress? The implication of Planck’s aphorism is that old leopards don’t change their spots and cannot be taught new tricks: if you don’t like your leopard, you must get rid of it or, if the leopard is protected by employment law, issue it with a P45. In Ireland, corporate governance advances P45 by P45. I am sceptical of the notion that revised organisational guidelines and regular attendance at corporate governance updates achieve much. If you have to regularly teach staff the difference between right and wrong, it begs the question: are you working with the wrong people? There is a lot of common sense in a popular maxim from Charlie Munger, the sprightly 97-year-old who jointly leads Berkshire Hathaway together with the merely 90-year-old Warren Buffett. Munger said: “Show me the incentive, and I’ll show you the outcome”. What are the incentives in Ireland? Consider the recent scandal at stockbrokers, Davy. This concerned a case where 16 key staff members purchased bonds in the then defunct Anglo Irish Bank in 2014 and concealed this fact from the vendor, who had commissioned Davy to get the best price possible for the thinly traded bonds. The bonds were sold by the vendor for 20.25 cent in the euro, realising €5.6 million. If they were held until maturity – when they were repaid in full – they would have generated gross proceeds (before funding and legal expenses) for the Davy insiders of €22 million. The maximum fine the Central Bank may issue for regulatory infractions is just €10 million. And the fine administered in this case was only €4.1 million. This raises serious questions about the design of our regulatory system. That the Davy executives who profited from this deal will have seen the value of their part-ownership of the brokerage firm drop considerably was a merely coincidental side effect of the whole process. It seems to me that several changes are urgently required: The maximum fine for a regulatory infraction should be a multiple (five to ten times) of the gross gains made. Where possible, fines should be levied on individuals rather than on firms. Those who have acted improperly in the past should not continue to be employed in senior roles or hold large ownership positions at financial services companies. We should financially incentivise whistle-blowers, like in the USA. There, a whistle-blower can claim a share of the wrongdoer’s loot. Bradley Birkenfeld, an ex-banker, was paid $104 million by the Internal Revenue Service for exposing his former bosses who had helped US clients hide money in Swiss bank accounts. If we can’t rely on people always being honest (and we can’t), then let’s change their estimate of where their self-interest lies. A low-cost regulatory system focused more on incentives and occasional but vigorous action aimed at wrongdoers can replace today’s expensive system, which is built on detailed rules and extensive box-ticking that largely focuses on the already compliant. Cormac Lucey is an economic commentator and lecturer at Chartered Accountants Ireland.

One of the few silver linings of this pandemic, according to Dawn McLaughlin, is the evolution of leaner businesses that are better positioned to serve their customers.  I am always amazed at the resilience and determination of our business community. History has demonstrated our resolve over the years with businesses trading through all types of adversity. At every turn, we dusted ourselves down and got straight back to serving our customers and community. No matter what we faced, and there were some desperate times, we worked through them. It took a pandemic to stop us in our tracks. It therefore came as no surprise when a recent survey carried out by the Londonderry Chamber of Commerce revealed that 72% of members were optimistic about the future. Despite being in lockdown and having no clarity on the lifting of restrictions, the Chamber’s members see better days ahead. This was further brought to the fore at my recent President’s Lunch when the level of positivity was palpable. While the short-term challenges were acknowledged, the opportunities in healthtech and fintech beginning to bear fruit were noted together with the creation of spinouts from the collaboration between local health and educational establishments. So, what is there to look forward to? And how do we get out of the current situation? It is that entrepreneurial spirit that keeps shining through. Avoid the temptation to wallow in the problem; instead, look for the solution. And we have plenty to build on. There is pent-up demand in the market, surplus funds held by some, and financial assistance in the pipeline to kick-start the high street. For innovative and ambitious businesses, alternative and export-led markets are waiting to be explored. Invest NI is ready and willing to assist businesses with creative ideas and export potential. Traders who survive the pandemic must be poised to take advantage of the opportunities ahead. During the lockdown, owner-managers took a hard look at their business and made necessary changes. The fat has been shed and processes refined. We have leaner businesses that are better positioned to serve their customers in a more streamlined and efficient manner. When we look to the northwest, we see tremendous opportunity for the years ahead. Based on four pillars that span everything from tourism and digital innovation to employability and health and wellbeing, the City Deal will help create a thriving and prosperous region with equality of opportunity for all. It will also further cement the northwest as a top area in the United Kingdom and Ireland to set up a business, acting as a regional hub of enterprise and entrepreneurship that fosters innovation and development. All this, coupled with existing strengths like the high quality of life and low cost of living, makes the northwest more attractive than ever to foreign investors, start-up companies, entrepreneurs, students, and families looking to relocate. The recent government funding to support the vital air route between City of Derry Airport and London Stansted also helps keep our region connected to crucial business hubs across these islands. This, together with the A5/A6 upgrade, are vital factors for companies looking to invest in the northwest. Now is the time to look ahead to the future with confidence – a future that looks increasingly bright. Dawn McLaughlin is Founder of Dawn McLaughlin & Co. Chartered Accountants  and President of Londonderry Chamber of Commerce.

Dr Brian Keegan explains why having political deadlines isn’t always a good idea. Deadlines have always been a feature of commercial life, but the ubiquity of dates by which something must occur is a relatively recent facet of political life. Politics has always had its own cycles, from the duration of a monarch’s reign to recurring intervals by which general elections must be held. Mandatory due dates or precise intervals more often reflect an external rather than a domestic political imperative. In recent decades, commercial concerns over deadlines have spilt over into the political arena as government becomes bigger and more technocratic. Timeframes for decision-making are as much determined by foreign affairs as domestic factors. Having political deadlines isn’t always a good idea. While the obvious effect of imposing a deadline is to ensure the completion of a task, the act of establishing deadlines in itself may have a more subtle effect on the way we think about those tasks. Some years ago, researchers at the Carey Business School at John Hopkins University in the US carried out a study of how workers react to deadlines. They found that longer deadlines can lead people to believe that a particular assignment is harder than it actually is. That, in turn, can result in managers committing more resources to the work needed to meet the deadline. If this finding is correct, it suggests that the shorter the deadline, the less costly it might be to meet. The researchers also found that, when workers are faced with multiple deadlines (and few of us have the luxury to do only one thing at a time), people seem to prioritise less important assignments with immediate deadlines over more important pieces of work with more extended deadlines. There is an apparent human tendency to do what is urgent rather than what is important. While these findings have implications for management practice, they also have implications for the political system. The tendencies described by the researchers have been echoed in the handling by both the British and the European institutions of the Brexit process. The repeated extension of Brexit deadlines through 2019 created an impression that the process was more difficult than it actually was. In 2020, everything to do with the pandemic was urgent, so almost everything else received more political attention than the negotiations. Consequently, both sides allowed themselves extension after extension to negotiate the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, even though it should have been well within the capacity of Brussels and London to deal with both issues in parallel. The result was that we ended up with a barebones trade agreement between the UK and the EU, concluded on Christmas Eve. This outcome has been unnecessarily difficult for businesses to deal with. Customs and quality checks involve routine and paperwork – such processes may be unwelcome, but companies can generally cope with processes. The shortcomings are on the official side. The British Government is now repeating the same mistake by further pushing out deadlines associated with the Northern Ireland protocol and the checking of goods arriving into Great Britain from the EU. Far from relieving pressure on businesses, this will merely perpetuate the difficulties. It also makes the setting up of checks and controls by customs and trade officials and businesses alike appear more difficult. Political processes are rarely amenable to deadlines because the political process is not always about what should be done; it is also about what can be done. One of the lessons of Brexit is that we would be better served if the political process stopped trying to look like a business process.   Dr Brian Keegan is Director, Advocacy & Voice, at Chartered Accountants Ireland.