Reform UK’s Murky Corporate Structure Raises Legal Red Flags, Experts Warn

Reform UK’s failure to declare who is in control of the companies behind the party raises questions about whether it is following the law, accounting experts have told Byline Times.

Despite claims that Nigel Farage has relinquished control of the party, the structure of Reform UK still concentrates power in a way that may allow its leader to retain significant influence. However, its company filings paint a different picture. 

Reform UK Party Ltd, one of the companies behind the political party, lists another firm, Reform 2025 Ltd, as its ‘Person of Significant Control’ (PSC) — legally required information which all companies must provide to the registrar, Companies House, as to who truly owns the firm. 

In turn, Reform 2025 Ltd claims in its filings that it does not have a person of significant control.

Reform UK is unique among political parties in that it is established both as a limited company and as a registered party

According to Companies House, PSCs are those who hold more than 25% of shares in the company, more than 25% of voting rights in the company, or the right to appoint or remove the majority of the board of directors. 

Reform 2025 Ltd, the main vehicle for the party, is a company limited by guarantee. Typically, that means control is held by the guarantors, who effectively own the majority of the party. Those two are the leader, Farage, and treasurer Zia Yusuf. They are also the sole directors of Reform 2025 Ltd. 

According to the BBC, under the party’s new constitution (where he was supposedly handing over control of the party), Farage still maintains the ability to appoint the majority of Reform’s executive committee.

Companies House will not comment on individual cases so refused to comment, but the regulator’s rules are clear.

So is Reform hiding who truly controls it? 

It has also emerged that Reform UK’s predecessor party, the Brexit Party — led by Richard Tice MP — was subject to a “compulsory strike-off” by Companies House in 2022. This means the company was removed from the register due to non-compliance, failing to file accounts or to respond to communications from Companies House.

The consequences of so-called “strike-off” include the potential for the directors (Tice included) to be disqualified for up to 15 years, and to be held liable for any debts, which may affect future business dealings, including access to credit.

Tice is not a director of Reform UK’s companies. It is not clear whether he has faced any sanction, but could the black mark against his name have played a role? 

Accounting expert Dan Neidle told Byline Times that Reform UK is effectively made up of a chain of UK companies.

“On the face of the company’s incorporation documents, Farage and Yusuf are the PSCs. It’s not clear to me why they’re not listed as such.”

On Tice being a director when the Brexit Party was subject to compulsory strike off, Neidle added: “It’s very common for directors to fail to file accounts/confirmation statements and for the company to be struck off. This is improper/unlawful behaviour, but only rarely is any action taken.”

Fellow accounting expert Professor Richard Murphy added: “I cannot see how this company cannot have at least one PSC — the leader — and probably two PSCs, the leader and Yusuf as a director and guarantor of more than 33% of the capital. 

“I can’t see how it can be claimed otherwise,” Murphy adds an opinion based on the law as it stands. 

However, on Tice, Murphy explained: “Company law is not enforced in the UK so having a penalty makes no difference.” 

Reform UK did not respond to requests for comment.

Subscribers Get More from JOSIAH

Josiah Mortimer also writes the On the Ground column, exclusive to the print edition of Byline Times.

So for more from him…

Subscribe to Byline Times