According to Financial Times News, Lord Stephen Carter has moved his residency from the UK to the UAE and retired from the House of Lords to run Informa from one of its fastest-growing regions. The FTSE 100 data and events company has relocated up to half a dozen executives overseas in the past year, including chief operating officer Patrick Martell to New York and TechTarget unit head Gary Nugent to Boston. Informa generates just under 5% of revenues in the UK compared to 43% in North America and 36% in India, the Middle East and Asia, with its Saudi joint venture Tahaluf generating over $250 million growing at 20% annually. Carter’s relocation follows his March retirement from the Lords, where members must be UK residents for tax purposes, amid speculation about potential tax savings and broader concerns about UK-listed companies shifting operations abroad. This executive migration represents a significant strategic shift for one of Britain’s premier listed companies.
Table of Contents
Beyond Tax: The Strategic Realignment
While the Financial Times article focuses on residency changes and potential tax implications, the deeper story involves fundamental corporate restructuring. Informa isn’t merely relocating executives for personal tax benefits—it’s physically moving its operational brainpower to match its revenue geography. When a company derives only 5% of revenue from its home market while maintaining a primary listing on the FTSE 100 Index, the structural misalignment becomes unsustainable. This represents a quiet but profound shift in how global companies manage their leadership teams in a post-pandemic world where physical presence matters less than strategic positioning.
The London Listing Crisis Deepens
Informa’s executive migration adds another layer to the ongoing crisis facing London’s public markets. The speculation about Informa joining other companies considering moves to New York isn’t coincidental—it’s symptomatic of a broader valuation gap and regulatory burden affecting UK-listed multinationals. When senior leadership physically distances themselves from their home market’s financial center, it creates both practical and symbolic distance that often precedes more formal corporate actions like secondary listings or full relocations. The fact that multiple executives are making these moves simultaneously suggests coordinated corporate strategy rather than individual decisions.
The Middle East Calculation
Carter’s choice of the UAE deserves particular attention beyond tax considerations. Informa’s Tahaluf joint venture represents precisely the type of high-growth, government-partnered opportunity that Western companies increasingly prioritize. With projected revenues approaching $1 billion in the region, having top leadership on the ground provides competitive advantages in relationship-building, market intelligence, and strategic positioning that remote management cannot match. This isn’t just about cost savings—it’s about securing Informa’s position in markets where personal relationships and physical presence still drive business development in ways that Zoom calls cannot replicate.
The Political Dimension
The timing of these moves following Labour’s abolition of non-dom status and other wealth-targeting policies cannot be ignored. While Informa officially cites business priorities, the concentration of executive relocations to low-tax jurisdictions immediately after significant UK tax changes creates undeniable optics. For a company with deep political connections—Carter served as chief of strategy to former prime minister Gordon Brown—these decisions carry additional weight as potential indicators of corporate sentiment toward current government policies. The message being sent to policymakers in Westminster is subtle but significant.
Setting a Corporate Precedent
Informa’s moves establish a dangerous precedent for other UK-listed multinationals. If a company with Informa’s stature and longevity can successfully decentralize its leadership across multiple jurisdictions, it provides a roadmap for others facing similar geographic revenue disparities. The two-year timeframe for some executives suggests this may be an experiment in distributed leadership that, if successful, could become permanent. For the UK’s corporate landscape, this represents a potential tipping point where the physical connection between listed companies and their home markets becomes increasingly tenuous, raising fundamental questions about what constitutes a “British” company in the globalized economy.
