Government negotiates on terms of AstraZeneca takeover

 
AstraZeneca sign

For better or worse, AstraZeneca's days as an independent British company seem to me to be numbered (and see my note of yesterday).

How so.

Well the government is intervening in the proposed takeover of AstraZeneca by the US giant, Pfizer. But not to block the deal.

Rather the chancellor, who is in the lead for the government on all this, wants to make sure that if it happens, the UK's valuable medical and scientific research base is not imperilled.

Or at least that is what very well-placed government and City sources tell me.

Detailed negotiations with Pfizer on all this are being led for the government by the cabinet secretary, Jeremy Heywood, a former Morgan Stanley banker, and John Kingman, a former Rothschild banker.

They are working on a mandate from the chancellor and prime minister that views the proposed deal as a potentially "huge inward investment" in the UK, according to a government official.

"This is a massive vote of confidence in the UK's tax regime, in the openness of our economy and in our science base" said the official. "But obviously we want to make sure that Pfizer does make binding commitments not to shift important research out of the UK".

What this unambiguously implies is that there is a side deal to be done between Pfizer and the government which would clear the way for the takeover of AstraZeneca - which would then simply become a negotiation between Pfizer and AstraZeneca's shareholders, intermediated by AstraZeneca's board, on the price of the takeover.

If talks progress in the way Pfizer would like, then the US giant would announce the terms of its offer next Tuesday, I am told, the day after its results.

It would be the biggest ever takeover by a foreign company of a UK one, and arguably the most controversial, given the importance of AstraZeneca to the UK's industrial and scientific base.

Pfizer has said that the legal home or domicile of the combined group would be in the UK, to take advantage of tax rules here seen as advantageous.

But its shares would be listed in the US, much of its management would be in the US, and it would be widely seen as a US company.

 
Robert Peston Article written by Robert Peston Robert Peston Economics editor

How Scotland can avoid a credit crunch

Bankers tell me that George Osborne, Mark Carney and Alex Salmond can ward off a serious credit crunch in Scotland if Scots vote for independence

Read full article

More on This Story

More from Robert

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 77.

    @75 SJH "Is it any wonder our export figures suck and are at record lows?"

    Exports of goods in 2013 were higher than any previous year except 2006, in real terms as well as in current prices. Imports were also high (although not so high as in 2006), so the deficit was high, but not so high as in each of the five years from 2004 to 2008.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 76.

    @49. stanilic
    "We can all remember Cadbury being taken over by Kraft...The Americans will only pay for what they want. Otherwise they invade or abuse."

    If the situation were reversed and it were a UK company taking over a foreign one, would you view it as being equally repugnant or something that could benefit the UK economy and employment?

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 75.

    As these mergers continue in ever decreasing circles the combined new company is invariably smaller than the sum of the parts of the two constituent elements as Number 15 has observed.

    ...but hey don`t worry the "experts" financiers have made another pile gutting another one of our few remaining decent industrial concerns.

    Is it any wonder our export figures suck and are at record lows?

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 74.

    I see the so called promises by Pfizer are derisory, five years long, pathetic.Even then only if everything is and remains as they like it. In a mere five years time at most they could take the lot back to the USA. We need better security than that.Permanent residence, with no excuses get out clauses.

    Sadly politicians love sleazy deal making, so will probably claim five years is forever to them.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 73.

    Does this news mean Hedge Funds are losing control of our Planet?
    Or does someone else stand to make much more money?

 

Comments 5 of 77

 

Features

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.