KKR partners with Capital Group to launch fund blending public and private equity
The fund will be launched in early 2026 in the U.S., pending approval from regulators. It is structured as an interval fund, which allows investors to exit only during set windows, and will have low minimum investment thresholds.
With high-profile companies remaining private for longer, investment firms are seeking new ways to meet rising demand for exposure to private markets.
The potential for outsized returns from privately held companies has drawn interest from retail investors. These assets are also less sensitive to the economic swings that impact public markets, making them useful for diversification.
"Private market investments can enhance returns and add diversification within a portfolio, yet have historically been out of reach for everyday investors given accreditation requirements and higher investment minimums," said Holly Framsted, head of product group at Capital.
The new fund will deepen the partnership between KKR and Capital, which in April launched two funds focused on a mix of public and private credit.
These funds have pulled in $100 million in flows in the first three months, the companies said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
17 hours ago
- Times
HMRC made a mistake — but won't give us our £15k back
My mother died last year and I have been settling her estate with help from my brother-in-law. It was relatively simple: she had some investments and a mortgage-free house. But it has been time-consuming. Filling in all the paperwork took us an entire day, and we are professionals (he is an accountant and I am a retired judge). Even then we had problems because HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) gave us different information about what tax we should pay. After probate was granted in October, we spoke to two estate agents who estimated that the house was worth £550,000. We told HMRC this was the probate value and we also put it up for sale at that price. Several months later we ended up selling the house for £627,000. We sent a form to HMRC to correct the probate value to the sold price. We then calculated the inheritance tax (IHT) due as roughly £27,800 and immediately paid HMRC to avoid any interest charges. But then HMRC wrote to us to say that we should pay capital gains tax (CGT) instead. We were convinced that this advice was wrong, so we each called HMRC separately, but were both told that we should pay CGT. HMRC then sent a CGT calculation saying we owed £14,965, which we paid. We then asked HMRC to return the IHT payment. Twice we were told that the refund was in progress but that was weeks ago and we still don't have it. After chasing HMRC for a third time we were told that we should have paid IHT after all. It said an IHT calculation would be sent, but we are still waiting for that. We are so confused. We just want to pay the correct tax and get a refund on the other and address supplied I was so sorry to hear how painstaking the probate process had been for your family. It sounded emotionally and practically difficult enough without HMRC adding to your burden by giving you conflicting information. An estate is exempt from IHT on the first £325,000, which increases to £500,000 if the person who has died passes on their main home to children or grandchildren. Married couples and civil partners can leave assets to each other free of tax, and also inherit each other's tax-free allowances. Your father died in March 1990 when the IHT allowance was £118,000. But he had left this amount to you and your sisters on his death, which meant that his tax-free allowance had already been used up and could not be inherited by your mother. The good news is that even though he died before the residence allowance was introduced in 2017, your family could claim this extra £175,000 allowance from his estate because his wife had died after this date (yet another example of how complex the rules are). This meant that up to £675,000 of your mother's estate was free of tax. When her house was sold for £627,000 and combined with other taxable assets in her estate of nearly £117,000, she was put over the tax-free threshold by more than £69,000. IHT is charged at a rate of up to 40 per cent, leaving £27,800 to pay. If a property is sold for a lot more than the estimated value when you inherited it, HMRC might ask questions and expect you to pay extra tax. I spoke to Stefanie Tremain from the accountancy firm Blick Rothenberg who said that HMRC will usually get the district valuer, which is a government service, to review property valuations in an IHT return. • Will my partner pay tax on the property he inherits from me? Tremain said: 'If the value in the IHT return is accepted, a future sale value should not be queried or cause HMRC to revise the probate value.' But you had applied for a correction, essentially changing the estimated valuation to the price that the property was actually sold for. This meant that technically there had been no increase in the value of the property since you inherited it because you had corrected the value that should be used for the IHT calculation. CGT is charged if you make a profit when you sell a property that isn't your main home. When you inherit a property there is no CGT to pay. It is only when you sell the property at a later date, and it has increased in value since you inherited it, that CGT would be owed. When you changed the value of the property, HMRC was under the impression that the property had increased in value by £77,000 between you inheriting and selling it. After the tax-free allowance of £3,000 and other exemptions, such as estate agent and solicitor fees to sell the property, were deducted, CGT was charged at a rate of 24 per cent on the rest of the gain. Tremain said: 'If you have corrected the IHT return to increase the probate value of the house then you have increased the estate's IHT liability. But as a result you have effectively wiped out the CGT liability.' So in other words, CGT didn't apply to you. It sounds as though there was some confusion during those conversations with HMRC that caused it to believe that you needed to pay CGT rather than IHT, which wasn't right. The fact that even HMRC manages to get things like this wrong tells you everything you need to know about how complicated our tax system is. After my involvement HMRC spoke to you to apologise for giving you incorrect advice and has finally refunded the CGT payment of £14,965, plus £63 interest. It also finally sent an IHT calculation showing that you had actually overpaid by £52, which has also been refunded. HMRC said: 'We have apologised and confirmed that CGT was not due.' You said: 'We never thought the problem was a particularly difficult one, but we were getting nowhere and would no doubt still be in limbo without your help.' • How to gift property — your questions answered In March last year my husband and I went on the holiday of a lifetime to Chile. We booked several internal flights through All was going well until we tried to check in for our flight from Patagonia to Santiago. It looked like our flight didn't exist. After logging into the airline's website, we discovered that the flight had been rescheduled and we had been reallocated to a flight for the previous day, so we had unknowingly missed it. There was no way we could have caught that flight as we had been hiking in a remote location. told me that it had sent me an email about the change but I have searched my inbox, including my junk folder, and I can't find any evidence that it contacted me about this. We were incredibly stressed when we found out. We were in a remote part of Chile where transport options are limited, so we felt pretty stranded. also wasn't particularly helpful in finding us alternative arrangements, so we requested a refund of £377.91 for the flight we missed. We managed to book a flight for the next day with a different airline for £583.80. Given that failed to tell us about the flight change, we think it should reimburse us for our more expensive replacement flight. But a year on, we now have a six-week-old baby but still no refund. We have contacted many times over the past year but are repeatedly told that it won't refund us until they receive it from the airline. While we have been told the matter has been escalated, we have seen no evidence of address supplied A year is a long time and much can happen, so much so that you had welcomed a new family member, and yet there was no sign of your refund. has a partnership with the travel agent Gotogate which arranges flights. When I spoke to Gotogate's parent company, Etraveli Group, it claimed it had emailed you on February 20 last year to tell you that your flight was leaving a day earlier than planned. I couldn't get to the bottom of why you didn't get that message. Etraveli Group said: 'While we acknowledge the customer's claim that she did not see this message, and understand the stress and consequences this situation caused, the communication was sent and delivered correctly from our end.' • Cancelled flight fiasco on has cost me £3,600 While it did request a refund from the airline, usually when a customer misses a flight the ticket is seen as 'used'. I suspected this was why a refund from the airline wasn't forthcoming. But thankfully after I explained the situation to the airline, it sent a refund of £346.99 to which it then passed on to you. It was odd that you were missing the remaining £30.92 which you had paid for checked-in bags, and it was only after I chased all three companies that you got this payment. said: 'We can see that the airline made a schedule change which is not uncommon in the aviation industry. Our partner, Etraveli Group, informed the customer of the change and provided options to accept the new flight or request a full refund.' As a gesture of goodwill, has given you £189 travel credit to make up for the extra cost of the replacement flight. While this left a shortfall of nearly £17, you were satisfied with this. • £1,495,607 — the amount Your Money Matters has saved readers so far this year If you have a money problem you would like Katherine Denham to investigate, email yourmoneymatters@ Please include a phone number
Times
17 hours ago
- Times
Trump's ‘biggest deal ever' is no such thing, but I have faith in Europe
European funds and shares jumped for joy when the American president, Donald Trump, announced he had agreed 'the biggest deal ever struck by anybody' with the European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen. Unfortunately, the euphoria proved short-lived, as markets realised that this new deal means most companies in most countries will collectively pay billions more tax to trade in the world's biggest economy. However, slashing tariffs from 30 per cent to 15 per cent on most exports to America represents a substantial improvement on earlier fears. Closer to home, the British prime minister, Keir Starmer, also met Trump at one of his Scottish golf courses to — among other things — tee up American import taxes set at 10 per cent for our cars and zero for aircraft engines, which Starmer hailed as safeguarding our world-class automotive and aerospace industries. Coming down from the clouds of global politics and macroeconomics, this small, long-term DIY investor is glad I ignored many pessimistic predictions elsewhere to keep faith with British and continental funds and shares. This year's stand-out winner so far is a little-known London-listed investment trust, whose share price has soared 60 per cent since March. That's when I paid 53p for Seraphim Space Investment Trust (stock market ticker: SSIT) shares, as reported here at that time. They traded at 85p at close of play on Friday. One stellar attraction of this £239 million space technology fund is its focus on defence companies listed in Europe. These businesses are benefiting from increased demand from continental countries since America warned that everyone must pay more for our own security in future. But Seraphim's chief executive, Mark Boggett, emphasised that extraterrestrial technology can also have more peaceful applications. He told me: 'Satellite-driven weather forecasts are increasingly vital to modern agriculture, providing real-time, precise data that helps farmers make smarter decisions about planting, irrigation, pest control and harvesting. 'By reducing the uncertainty of unpredictable weather, these forecasts improve crop yields, enhance resource efficiency and build resilience. a Seraphim holding, is building its own satellite constellation to derive truly global data, enabling hyperlocal and highly accurate short-term weather forecasts. • A robot surgeon? I'll put my money on that 'These have achieved some impressive savings: 20 per cent less crop loss due to unexpected freezes or hail, and $41 saved per acre in wasted irrigation costs.' Less happily, bad weather in west Africa hit the cocoa harvest, pushing up the price of this commodity and hurting profit margins at the Swiss chocolate-maker Barry Callebaut (BARN). You might never have heard of this wholesaler but you have probably eaten its products, which are sold by better-known retailers such as the Cadbury-owner, Mondelez (MDLZ), and the KitKat-maker, Nestlé (NESN). The world's biggest chocolate-maker provides another example of how it can pay to be sceptical about talk of trade wars and instead believe that commercial relations will continue, despite shocks along the way. Barry Callebaut shares I bought for 766 Swiss francs in April now cost SwFr1,008. This is an increase of 31 per cent in little more than three months, which tastes sweet enough to me. On a sour note, Adidas (ADS), the German sports goods group, said Trump's tariffs would add €200 million to its costs because it makes 30 per cent of its trainers in Vietnam. That tripped up the share price, which plunged 18 per cent last week, causing this stock to fall out of my top ten. Ouch! • FTSE 100 slides as markets retreat on new Trump tariffs Higher taxes are bad for business, whatever opponents of free trade may say, because they transfer wealth from consumers and shareholders to governments. This explains why shares in the Dutch brewer Heineken (HEIO) slipped 7 per cent on Monday, despite it reporting higher than expected profits. Dolf van den Brink, the chief executive of the business, whose brands also include Amstel and Foster's, pointed out that the beer it exports from Mexico to America continues to face 30 per cent tariffs. He said Heineken is considering shifting more production to America, adding: 'We look at all options from continuing with our current set-up, a more hybrid version, or otherwise.' Amid all that anxiety and uncertainty, Heineken looks a bit hungover. But shares I bought for €45 in January 2014 were trading at €60 on Friday, yielding 3.2 per cent dividend income, so I intend to retain a glass half-full view of this global business. Similarly, easily my biggest European shareholding is the Paris-listed Franco-Italian firm EssilorLuxottica (EL), which makes a third of all the optical lenses on this planet. Its best-known retail brands are the American sunglasses makers Oakley and Ray-Ban, which now offer artificial intelligence-enhanced eyewear via a joint venture with the Facebook and Instagram owner, Meta Platforms (META). Sales of more than two million smart glasses since October 2023 suggest EssilorLuxottica is succeeding where earlier attempts at wearable technology failed. Google Glass, internet-enabled specs from the technology giant Alphabet (GOOGL), were largely withdrawn a decade ago and discontinued completely in 2023. • A 20% return in 4 months? I'm riding the investment trust wave But Oakley and Ray-Ban models, such as the classic Wayfarers, spare customers the embarrassment of feeling conspicuous and sales are rising strongly. While I have no wish to see share prices flashed up before my wondering eyes, this baby boomer likes the sound of discreet hearing aids, hidden away in stylish shades or spectacles. Either way, EssilorLuxottica shares I bought for €96 in March 2019 were coming through loud and clear at €259 on Friday and are now my fourth-most valuable holding. It all goes to show why it can pay to look through short-term fears and instead invest in long-term hopes that international trade will eventually return to something nearer business as usual. Even world-leading European healthcare companies cannot guarantee that shareholders will always enjoy healthy returns. Novo Nordisk (NOVO), the Danish pharmaceutical firm that was first to obtain authorisation for weight-loss wonder drugs, suffered a 25 per cent share price shrinkage last week. A profits warning wiped €60 billion off what had been Europe's most valuable company. Sad to say, there may be worse to come as Novo struggles with American tariffs, copycat drugs and the risk that it could become collateral damage in Trump's improbable bid to take over Greenland, which is a protectorate of Denmark. Yes, really. Mr Market is a manic depressive at the best of times, lurching from excessive exuberance to the depths of despair, and the drugs don't help. Despite the widespread popularity of Ozempic and Wegovy flab jabs, Novo has lost 66 per cent of its stock market value over the past year. What a downer! Fortunately, I first invested more than four years ago, when few Brits had heard of this business, paying 254 Danish krone per share in June 2021, allowing for a subsequent stock split. Then I sold a five-figure parcel at DK926 last August, as also reported here at those times. They fetched just DK309 on Friday. This raises the important point that it is never too soon to take a profit. If nothing else, we need to turn paper gains into real ones to compensate for losses elsewhere. Another Danish pharma firm, Bavarian Nordic Research Institute (BAVA), where I paid DK258 last August, had slumped to DK123 before it recommended a takeover bid at DK233 on Monday. We can't win them all. Full disclosure: Ian Cowie's shareholdings
Daily Mail
19 hours ago
- Daily Mail
STRATEGIC EQUITY CAPITAL: Giving small UK firms the muscle to take on the big boys
Investment trust Strategic Equity Capital has a bold approach. It takes big stakes in companies it likes in the expectation that its judgment will be proved right, then rewards its shareholders with attractive returns. Although the strategy is not foolproof, the current manager is making a mighty good fist of it. Since taking the reins in September 2020, Gresham House's Ken Wotton has delivered shareholder returns in excess of 100 per cent, outperforming both the average for the trust's peer group and its benchmark index, the FTSE Small Cap (excluding investment companies). Wotton's modus operandi at Strategic is to seek out opportunities in the smaller companies section of the UK stock market – a sector Gresham knows intimately as a result of running numerous other funds focused on it. 'I look for companies with market capitalisations between £100 million and £300 million,' he says, 'and provided the quality and valuation are right, become one of the biggest shareholders.' This approach, he says, gives the trust 'muscle' to 'actively engage' with the companies it buys. He adds: 'At one end of the scale, engagement may be rather benign and just a question of supporting a company's management plans. 'But at the other, it may be helping a company find a non-executive board member or pointing them in the direction of a merger and acquisitions boutique if they become the target of interest from a potential private equity buyer.' The fruits of this strategy can be rewarding. For example, one of the fund's top-ten holdings is Inspired, which advises companies on optimising their procurement and usage of energy. Wotton had been a backer of the company before he took over the helm at Strategic, and made it one of his first new holdings for the trust. He then kept tickling up the stake, participating in the company's raising of new capital late last year to reduce borrowings. Inspired was then subject to a hostile takeover by Regent, an owner of gas and infrastructure companies. Strategic said it would not back the deal and put adviser Evercore in touch with Inspired. The result was the discovery of 'white knight' HGGC, a US private equity firm, which trumped Regent's 68.5p a share deal by offering 81p a share. The new offer is likely to be accepted in the coming weeks, providing the trust with a tidy profit. The £168 million trust has 18 holdings – a concentrated portfolio, especially given the top-ten stakes account for nearly 80 per cent of assets. Wotton describes the other eight positions as 'toe-hold positions,' the trust's 'pipeline'. Some of these, he says, could benefit from the cash received from the sale of Inspired. Wooton says mistakes are part of being a fund manager. 'If you don't make them, you're not taking enough risk,' But he adds: 'Risk can be mitigated by engaging with company management – which Strategic does as a matter of course – selling out, or ensuring you have an appropriate-sized holding.' The manager believes the trust's prospects are 'really attractive' over the next three to five years, although he admits the FTSE AIM market – where a majority of the trust's holdings are listed – has been undermined by Labour's decision to reduce the inheritance tax attractions of holding AIM shares. 'There has been a lot of forced selling of shares,' he says, 'and some have been derated.' Annual trust charges are 1.2 per cent, the fund's stock market ticker is SEC, and identification code B0BDCB2.
