Innis & Gunn smashes £1m crowdfunding target in just 72 hours

The brewer smashed its target after launching its crowdfunding scheme​, AdventureCapital, on Tuesday, accruing donations from more than 500 investors.

Innis & Gunn founder Dougal Gunn Sharp previously said: “Hitting our £1million target in 72 hours was an amazing feeling. We're not stopping there - we'll be keeping the crowdfunding platform open so more people can invest. 

"Any additional funds raised will accelerate the expansion of our Beer Kitchens in England and North America."

The brewer has offered 2.03% of its equity for a minimum investment of £10.

Sharp added: "The money raised so far is going to have a massive impact on our business. I'm looking forward to growing our company with our new investors."

Speculation​

However, Innis & Gunn was forced to address speculation that funds raised from AdventureCapital could be used to pay off a £900k + tax bill.

In the campaign’s explanatory notes Innis & Gunn admitted it was currently challenging an inquiry by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) into its use of Growth Securities Ownership Plans​ (GSOP) – which could see the brewer forced to pay £896,802 as penalties and interest.

Potential funders raised questions about the timing of AdventureCapital and suggested funds could have been earmarked to cover footing the bill.

Transparent​

But I&G chairman Tony Hunt said: “The whole GSOP scheme was totally transparent as far as HMRC were concerned, and so we were quite startled when they arrived asking for a different tax treatment. 

“Over 200 companies ran GSOP schemes, and a number of us have formed a 'Shared Litigation Association' to challenge HMRC.

“However with the backlog in hearing tax appeals, we are told it is unlikely that this will reach a first-tier court before Spring 2019, and if it proceeds to the Supreme Court that could take another three years.” 

The company did not believe it would ultimately be required to make any additional payment to HMRC and thus had not made provisions to do so in its accounts, noting it instead as a contingent liability, Hunt said.