Main News Feed Archives - Page 5 of 240

Impact of new Steel Tarriffs starting 1st July

by Iain McIlwee | 2 Jul, 2026 | Main News Feed

The Government’s new steel trade measure came into force on 1st July. These tarriffs reduce steel import quotas by 51%, with imports above these levels now subject to a 50% tariff. Following concerns raised by industry, the reduction is less than the 60% originally proposed, but the cost of delivering projects is still expected to increase significantly. Price rises of between 14% and 18% are currently being reported on projects, placing even further inflationary pressures on the construction supply chain.

The new UK steel measures have been introduced primarily to protect domestic steel producers from a growing volume of lower-cost imported steel, much of which the Government argues is being diverted into the UK market because of trade restrictions elsewhere (particularly the US and EU). The Government has also linked the measures to national security, resilience of critical infrastructure supply chains, and preserving UK steelmaking capacity.

The Government has confirmed that the quotas will be reviewed every 12 months, but the industry is pushing for this to be reduced to six months, warning that businesses are facing unsustainable financial pressures and there is a high risk of insolvencies. There is a transitional arrangement in place, which means that the new quotas and tariffs will not apply to steel under contract before 14 March 2026 and imported between 1 July and 30 September 2026.

This issue is subject to ongoing discussions between the Construction Leadersship Council and Government with the main concerns being:

Commercial impact: Structural steel prices have risen sharply. Market volatility has significantly increased, reducing the ability to forecast costs accurately and increasing commercial risk on lump-sum contracts.

Project viability: Evidence from the sector indicates that the proposed measures are already affecting scheme viability, with cost increases of 14–18% being reported on live projects and per-unit cost increases of up to £4,000 on residential developments which will further impact on the Government’s house building target.

Carbon impact: High tariffs on imported low-carbon steel may unintentionally force projects to procure more carbon-intensive domestic alternatives, with the potential to undermine project sustainability targets and embodied carbon reduction strategies.

Supply impact: The quota system creates significant risk of supply shortages for steel grades and section sizes where domestic mills are either at full capacity or do not manufacture the required products.

Critical issues for fabrication manufacturers: While the steel strategy is primarily intended to benefit the main producers, there are serious unintended consequences likely for the UK’s fabricated steel sector which employs approximately 60,000 in the UK. Concerns continute in the steel fabrication sector that the omission of fabricated steel products from the new quota and tariff framework leaves UK manufacturers facing higher input costs, whilst overseas competitors can continue importing fabricated steel into the UK without equivalent quota restrictions. The concern here is that clients will be incentivised to move fabrication overseas, putting up to 30,000 UK jobs at risk.

Lead time impact: Uncertainty around quota availability has already triggered “panic buying” behaviour, increasing short-term demand and extending procurement lead times. This volatility makes programme certainty increasingly difficult for contractors and clients.

FIS members purchasing steel are advised to consult carefully with their supplier on lead times/availability and any potentialy impact on future pricing of works and looking at how fluctuation clauses are implemented on projects with longer lead time (advice available via our legal toolkit Q&A and helpline)

Full details available here.

Vital steps to Protect your Financial Information

by Iain McIlwee | 1 Jul, 2026 | Main News Feed

What the 2028 Companies House Changes Mean for SMEs

FIS Members, (particularly small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), should start preparing now for a significant shift in Companies House reporting rules. While much of the focus has been on digitalisation, the more immediate issue for many businesses is how to avoid unintentionally putting sensitive financial information into the public domain.

From April 2028, small companies and micro‑entities will, for the first time, be required to file a profit and loss account with Companies House as part of their annual accounts. At the same time, all companies will have to move to fully digital filing using commercial software, with web and paper submissions withdrawn.

These changes sit within a wider package of reforms under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, intended to improve the quality and usability of financial information on the public register and strengthen the UK’s ability to tackle economic crime.

The key point: your profit and loss account may be exposed unless you act

Although companies will be required to submit their profit and loss account, the government has confirmed an important concession: SMEs will still be able to prevent that information from being made public.

This effectively creates a two‑tier system in which:

Companies House and enforcement bodies receive full financial data, including the profit and loss account,
But the public version of the accounts can exclude that information, if the company chooses to opt out.

It is important to note, however, that this protection will not be automatic.

The detail that should concern SMEs is that the opt‑out process itself has not yet been defined. Companies House has confirmed that the option will exist, but not how it will operate in practice.

Why you should consider opting out

For many SMEs, profit and loss accounts contain some of the most commercially sensitive information in the business that could allow interogation of margins, cost structures, and performance trends that could materially affect relationships with competitors, clients and suppliers.

Historically, smaller companies have been able to limit what they disclose publicly. These reforms change that balance by requiring full submission of the data, even if publication can be controlled.

The move to mandatory digital filing (iXBRL through commercial software) reinforces the likelihood that the opt‑out will be embedded somewhere in the submission process, potentially as a selection, declaration or tagging choice within the software itself.

That means the responsibility for protecting sensitive information is likely to sit not just with the company in principle, but with whoever is actually preparing and submitting the accounts in practice.

The practical implication: doing nothing may mean disclosure

While full procedural detail is still to come, the direction of travel is clear enough for SMEs to act now.

It would be unsafe to assume that:

Non‑publication will be the default, or
The opt‑out will be applied automatically by software or advisers

Instead, the prudent assumption is that opting out will require a conscious, positive step at the point of filing.

If that step is missed, whether through misunderstanding, process gaps or simple oversight, the profit and loss account could be published, with limited scope to reverse the situation once the information is in the public domain.

What SMEs should do now

Even without final guidance, there are some immediate, practical steps businesses can take to protect themselves.

First, SMEs should ensure that whoever is responsible for preparing and filing their accounts—whether an external accountant or an internal finance function, is fully aware that protecting the profit and loss account will require active management under the new regime.

Second, this issue should be built into normal financial processes. It should not be left as an ad hoc decision at filing stage, but treated as a standard instruction and checklist item within the year‑end accounts process.

Finally, businesses should keep a close eye on further announcements. The detail of the opt‑out mechanism is still awaited, and will ultimately determine exactly how the risk needs to be managed in practice. FIS will continue to work closely with Institute of Chartered Accountants England and Wales (ICAEW) on this and will provide further guidance as soon as this becomes clear.

Key Takeaway

For SMEs, the immediate takeaway is:

From 2028, you will have to file more financial information than before, but whether that information becomes public will depend on whether you (or your agent) take the right action at the right moment.

Getting that step right will be essential to protecting commercially sensitive financial data in the new reporting landscape.

FIS is grateful to ICAEW for their support on this issue. Further information can be found here, “Companies House: accounts changes confirmed for April 2028”, June 2026.

MHCLG Consultation Signals Major Reset for Built Environment Workforce

by Iain McIlwee | 22 Jun, 2026 | Main News Feed

FIS joined today a Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government briefing setting out the Government’s new call for evidence on professions, trades and occupations across the built environment, part of its wider response to the Grenfell Inquiry.

The exercise, which runs until 12 August 2026, will inform a new long-term strategy due in Spring 2027. While still at an early stage, the tone of the session was clear: this is not about marginal change, but about fundamentally reshaping how the system works.

A Shift to Whole-System Thinking

MHCLG framed the strategy around three core themes: skills and competence, behaviour and culture, and accountability. It was noted that these are not being treated in isolation, but as interdependent parts of a wider system that together determine outcomes.

The ambition is to move beyond fragmented reforms and create a more coherent framework with the potential to be underpinned by a single construction regulator, that better aligns people, products and buildings.

Officials were clear that the starting point is the Grenfell Inquiry’s finding that failures were systemic, not attributable to any one profession, stage, or decision point.

What the Consultation Is Asking

At this stage, MHCLG is not consulting on specific policy proposals but gathering evidence on how the system operates in practice.

The consultation spans the entire building lifecycle, from pre-design through to occupation, and seeks input from across the supply chain. Importantly, contributors are encouraged to focus on their areas of expertise rather than responding to everything, recognising the diversity of roles in the sector.

The emphasis throughout the webinar was on practical insight: how decisions are made, what drives behaviour, and where barriers sit.

Key Messages from the Discussion

The Q&A session provided a useful reality check, with several recurring themes that will resonate strongly with FIS members.

Too Much Complexity, Not Enough Clarity

There was broad agreement that, while there has been significant effort to improve competence frameworks and standards, the system has become overly complex and fragmented.

Rather than creating consistency, the proliferation of overlapping frameworks has made it harder, particularly for SMEs, to understand what is required. MHCLG acknowledged this concern and emphasised the need to simplify and rationalise, rather than add further layers.

The System Doesn’t Operate in Silos

A number of contributors challenged the lifecycle-based structure of the consultation, highlighting how activities like manufacturing and product supply cut across traditional boundaries.

This underlined a central issue: we continue to organise policy around silos, while delivery depends on integration. Whether it is product performance, design intent or installation quality, outcomes depend on how different parts of the system connect and often they don’t.

Commercial Drivers Are Shaping Outcomes

One of the strongest themes, and a point FIS raised directly, was the role of procurement and contracting in shaping behaviour.

There is growing recognition that many of the problems the industry faces are not down to a lack of technical competence, but to how projects are set up commercially.

Concerns highlighted included:

Risk being routinely pushed down the supply chain
Extensive amendment of standard contracts, reducing clarity
Increasing contractual complexity
Limited understanding of contractual obligations across the workforce

In this context, contractual competence is emerging as a critical issue. If those involved in delivery lack the ability or confidence to interpret and manage contracts, it becomes far harder to make sound decisions or challenge poor practice.

The FIS asserted that thiss was about competence, but also information management suggesting that contracts should be treated as part of the “golden thread”, reflecting their central role in defining responsibilities and managing risk.

The clear implication is that improving technical skills alone will not be enough if commercial structures continue to work against good outcomes. The Civils Servants assured that consideration of procurement and contracts was under scrutiny here.

Culture and Leadership Matter

The conversation also moved beyond individuals to the role of organisations. Even the most competent professionals can be constrained by:

Commercial pressures
Misaligned incentives
Lack of support to challenge decisions

This reinforces the need for reform to address organisational culture and leadership, not just individual capability.

Bridging the Gap Between Design and Delivery

Another practical issue raised was the disconnect between technical information and its use on site. Drawings, specifications and standards are not always translated into clear, actionable instructions for those carrying out the work.

If requirements are not understood at the point of use, then compliance becomes unreliable—highlighting the need for clearer communication and more accessible information across the supply chain.

What Happens Next

MHCLG will use responses to the consultation to develop policy options later this year, ahead of publishing a full strategy in Spring 2027. Officials stressed that this will be the start of an ongoing reform process, not a one-off intervention.

This consultation is designed to gather information about the key factors that influence how people work across all stages of the building lifecycle and covers all building types. The consultation will inform development of this new strategy for the built environment professions, trades and occupations.

FIS Response

This is a significant opportunity to address some of the long-standing structural issues that continue to hold the industry back. FIS is preparing a response.

For FIS members, the consultation is an important chance to ensure that:

The role of SMEs and specialist contractors is properly reflected
The impact of procurement and contractual practices is fully understood
Reform focuses on what actually happens on site, not just on paper

We strongly encourage members to engage and share practical examples, particularly where current systems make it harder, not easier, to deliver safe, high-quality work. There will be an opportunity to do this through upcoming Working Groups or directly via iainmcilwee@thefis.org.

The call for evidence opened 20 May 2026 and will close on 12 August 2026: Call for evidence: Strategy for the built environment professions, trades and occupations – GOV.UK.

Commercial Payments Bill: Momentum builds as Lords back sweeping payment reforms

by Clair Mooney | 19 Jun, 2026 | Main News Feed

Over the last 10 days FIS has briefed several Lords, attended separate meetings with the Small Business Commissioner (SBC), the Small Business Minister and Department of Business all looking to support the progress of the Commercial Payments Bill. The Bill has taken a significant step forward completing its Second Reading in the House of Lords on 9 June. The Bill is a landmark intervention to tackle late payment culture (across the UK). At its core, the Bill brings together three strands of reform:

Capped payment terms (60 days, or 30 days for certain public bodies)
A fundamental reset of construction payment practices, including a ban on retentions
A major expansion of the Small Business Commissioner’s powers

The good news is at the second reading debate, Peers in the Lords were clear – construction is one of the sectors most affected by late payment and poor practice, and reform here is a priority. An area generating particular interest is the ability to exempt certain contracts from maximum payment terms. At present FIS is not too concerned by the exemptions as, whilst adding a tier of complexity, they should not impact the core issue of power imbalance. Proposed exemptions are limited to :

where the purchaser is the smaller party,
where both parties are large undertakings, or
where categories are defined in future regulations (this is likely to be addressing particular sectoral issues that exist in industries such as publishing).

To manage exemptions, contracts must be in writing and explicitly state the exemption being relied on. The proposed ban on retentions received broad support in principle, but with a clear message that implementation will be critical. Debate in the Lords suggests scrutiny is likely to focus on:

how the transition period operates in practice
what replaces retentions as a risk management tool
whether any unintended consequences emerge in contracting behaviour

Whilst principle is widely backed, but the mechanics are far from settled and there is more work to be done here. Again we are reassured by discussions with the Minister and Civil Servants that Government is intent on preserving the core values that this Bill is intended to uphold, ending the abuse of retention and the practice of starving the supply chain of vital cash (termed in discussion as “unapproved credit”.

The Bill also transforms the role of the Small Business Commissioner (SBC) into a more active market regulator and in the meeting with the SBC we heard more about how fines for “persistent late payers” could be implemented. It was particularly interesting to get early sight of new research into how different systems have been adopted across the globe. The Minister again reassured that the intent it to ensure SMEs in Britain are working in a culture that encourages investment and growth and are not providing a line of “unapproved credit” to large corporations. As it stands, the SBC will step up to:

Provide advice, training and guidance across all sectors
investigate persistent late payers and enforce reporting requirements
use stronger enforcement powers, including sanctions

Importantly for construction:

The intent is that fines for persistent late payers will be administered through the SBC
Adjudication powers for the SBC will not apply to construction contracts, given the existing statutory regime
However, they will apply to non-construction contracts involving construction businesses

This reflects a deliberate attempt to strengthen enforcement without duplicating the existing adjudication framework. There is recognition that changes will be required to the Construction Act to carry this into law and consultation will be required for this. The Second Reading debate confirmed broad cross-party support for the Bill’s objectives and a clear recognition that late payment is a systemic issue requiring intervention. But it also highlighted where attention will now turn:

How exemptions are defined and controlled
How the retentions ban is implemented in practice
How the expanded SBC powers are deployed and resourced

With Committee Stage next, the Bill will now undergo line-by-line scrutiny, where many of these issues are likely to be tested and refined. FIS are continuing to hold the line that late payment and retentions are more than commercial irritants, they impact decision-making, the transfer of risk and undermine investment in training, supervision, innovation and safety. When cash flow becomes uncertain, behaviours deteriorate.

We will continue to track developments closely as the Bill progresses and provide further updates over the coming months. In the meantime, please do get in touch with any queries or feedback.

You can see the full transcript of the Lords Debate here.

Construction Leadership Council publishes Mental Health Joint Code of Practice

by Clair Mooney | 19 Jun, 2026 | Health and Safety, Main News Feed

The Construction Leadership Council (CLC) has published its Mental Health Joint Code of Practice (JCOP), providing leaders and businesses across the sector with a framework to create an environment that fosters better mental health for their workforce.

The sector continues to lose too many people to suicide, and in today’s world, with the plethora of existing support services, this is unacceptable. The health, safety and wellbeing of our workforce must be of paramount importance.

Whilst we recognise there is great work taking place across the construction sector in the mental health space, for too long those efforts have focused mainly on intervention, once people are already struggling. As a new approach, the JCOP is designed through the lens of prevention, enabling businesses to support employees before it reaches that stage.

Our evidence from a representative sample of our core demographic – men in mid to later working life, also shows that workers face multiple barriers to speaking up on these issues England’s first Men’s Health Strategy aims to improve the health and wellbeing of all men and boys in England, recognising that men’s health outcomes are significantly shaped by work and working conditions. It also considers how to prevent and tackle the biggest health problems affecting men of all ages, which include mental health and suicide prevention. The cross-government Suicide Prevention Strategy for England, published in 2023, sets the ambition for employers, especially those in high-risk occupations, to have appropriate mental health and wellbeing support in place for their staff. The new cross-government mental health strategy, to be published later this year, will look beyond the NHS and consider the role of workplaces, schools, the voluntary sector and local government to respond more proportionately to needs and promote positive mental health.

Today’s publication is supported by the Department of Health and Social Care.

The JCOP fundamentally changes the narrative in this space, bringing together key stakeholders across the sector and beyond to take a system thinking based approach, through the lens of prevention.

It will be trialled at 33 Piccadilly and 10 Piccadilly in London – two of The Crown Estate’s new developments in the heart of the capital – working alongside their partners at Kier Construction.

The CLC has worked with its programme partners (New Hospital Programme, Marsh and BCLP), supported by key influential organisations (e.g. Mindflow, Lighthouse Charity, and British Standards Institute) and a cross section of the UK’s leading influential contractors to develop the JCOP, which is endorsed by Government, informed by industry and underpinned by academic evidence.

Affected on the ground workers (through a series of regional focus groups) and industry (through our 3000 consultation responses) told us that the core primary causes impacting the workforce’s mental health are:

Working Patterns (e.g. long hours and excessive travel)
People Factors and Work Environment (Welfare, Dignity and Respect)
Operational Factors (e.g. commercial pressures)
Barriers to Mental Health support (stigma and low mental health literacy stop people getting help)
Financial Factors (Late payment and financial insecurity)

The Code is designed as a catalyst and living framework to address these five key hazards: a credible baseline now, which will be strengthened over time through shared learning, data and realworld case studies.

It is evidence-led, moving businesses from response to prevention. It provides- through an improved understanding of those five primary psychosocial hazards in construction- practical workplace solutions to help clients, employers and the supply chain to prevent harm earlier, driving down the incidence of ill health throughout all levels of the industry.

It recognises a simple truth that has come through repeatedly in our evidence gathering: mental ill health is not an inevitable feature of construction, and it is not a problem to be managed solely through individual resilience or support after the fact. It is, to a significant extent, shaped upstream by how work is commissioned, designed, procured, planned, sequenced and led.

This is about prevention first, not prevention only. The JCOP does not replace crisis support which remains essential. The JCOP shifts the focus earlier, helping the industry prevent work-related pressures from becoming crises in the first place.

The invitation is simple to leaders and business: adopt it, use it, improve it — and help the sector move forward together, in step, towards work that is healthier by design.

This is a joint code, written by the sector, for the sector. It reflects the reality that no single organisation can deliver change in isolation. The only way that we will be able to improve mental health in UK construction, is if the industry moves together collectively, and works in partnership.

Baroness Merron, Minister for Mental Health, said:
“It is really encouraging to see the construction industry taking this crucial step to ensure the wellbeing of its workforce, and I hope it sets a strong example for other sectors to follow.

“This government believes mental health is just as important as physical health, which is why we are investing record amounts in mental health services and recruiting more mental health professionals than ever before.

“Mental health is shaped not just by healthcare services, but at work, at home, in schools and in our communities. That’s why this initiative is so important and why our new, cross-government mental health strategy will drive the shift from crisis intervention to preventative care.”

This work was spearheaded for the CLC by The Department for Business and Trade, Heathrow, The Crown Estate, BAM UK and Ireland, Mates In Mind and The University of Warwick and supported by their partners Marsh, BCLP and the New Hospital Programme.

Download your copy of the Mental Health Code of Practice here

FIS CEO responds to major Project Bank Account judgment

by Clair Mooney | 19 Jun, 2026 | Main News Feed, Payments

FIS Chief Executive Iain McIlwee has been quoted in a recent Construction News report examining a significant court ruling that could allow administrators to recover fees from funds held in a project bank account. The case raises important questions about the protection of ringfenced payments and the effectiveness of Project Bank Accounts in safeguarding supply chain funds following insolvency events.

The article continues the industry’s ongoing debate around payment security and insolvency reform, with FIS remaining at the forefront of discussions on protecting specialist contractors and suppliers.

Read the full article in Construction News here.