UK FDI: A strategic reset to stop leakage and win high‑value investment

Alex Altmann, 16 September 2025

Placeholder image

The UK’s recent decline in foreign direct investment (FDI) is not a short blip, it’s a warning that the country must move beyond passive promotion and adopt a focused, accountable industrial and investor strategy.

FDI projects fell 17% in 2024/25 to 1,375 from 1,654 in 2022/23, and excluding expansions and M&A the drop was 22%. That decline translated into roughly 10,000 fewer jobs created in the most recent year. Reversing this trend requires clarity, speed and political ownership.

What’s driving the fall in FDI

Investors are responding to a combination of factors that increase cost, delay or reduce expected returns. The expanded national security scrutiny and uncertain interaction with regulatory regimes create friction and unpredictability for projects.  Mixed policy signals on pricing, incentives and long‑term support for strategic sectors weaken the UK’s value proposition compared with alternative locations.

Global reshoring and concentrated US incentives have redirected large projects and capital to markets that offer clearer long‑term economics, faster approvals and bigger package deals. These effects raise due diligence costs, delay decisions and reduce the UK’s conversion of interest into landed projects.

Why major investors are withdrawing decisions

Large groups such as Merck have cited a less competitive operating environment when assessing where to place major R&D and manufacturing commitments. Investors prioritise markets that combine predictable regulatory pathways, durable fiscal and pricing frameworks, and sizeable, coherent incentives. Where those elements are absent or uncertain, firms consolidate capital in locations that promise faster returns and scale. High‑profile cancellations amplify investor risk perception, making prompt government action urgent.

A pragmatic, accountable plan to treat FDI seriously

  1. Publish a legislated annual FDI delivery report to Parliament that sets multi‑year targets, discloses progress by sector and region, lists lost opportunities and names responsible ministers.
  2. Rebuild a cross‑departmental rapid‑response investor team empowered to remove blockers across planning, immigration, incentives and regulatory clearances, and publish quarterly outcomes.
  3. Track project quality alongside quantity by separating high‑value R&D, advanced manufacturing and HQ decisions from low‑value service centres.
  4. Commit to predictable regulatory timelines and fast‑track arrangements for strategic sectors while preserving security protections.
  5. Create mandatory parliamentary review hearings when targets are missed, requiring a remediation plan and named deliverables.

These steps convert political intent into institutional accountability, lowering the “policy risk” premium that deters large greenfield projects.

What the UK should borrow from US practice

The US has shifted investor calculus by pairing large, targeted incentives with a coordinated federal‑state delivery model and high‑touch commercial diplomacy. The UK should adopt a similarly strategic toolkit: competitive, well‑scoped subsidies for priority industries; deeper collaboration between national, devolved and local authorities to present site‑ready propositions; and sustained bilateral engagement with priority investor markets, especially the US.

A transparent, predictable screening regime that balances security with clear guidance will reduce uncertainty and speed decisions.

How a strategic approach raises inward investment

A joined‑up strategy increases conversion rates from enquiry to project by removing procedural bottlenecks and improving deal economics. Prioritising R&D and advanced manufacturing boosts wages, skills and productivity through embedded supply chains and knowledge transfer. Successful flagship projects attract follow‑ons, creating clusters that generate permanent competitive advantage and export capacity. The overall fiscal return improves through higher corporate tax receipts, PAYE contributions and indirect supplier growth.

Target areas for deeper US inward investment

  • Life sciences and advanced therapeutics - restore competitive incentives and long‑term pricing certainty to retain and attract pharmaceutical R&D and manufacturing.
  • Semiconductors and high‑value electronics - accelerate site‑readiness, capital grants and skills programmes to convert US interest into fabs and advanced lines.
  • Green energy supply chains - target battery, hydrogen and offshore wind manufacture to secure supply resilience and export growth.
  • Financial services and fintech - preserve regulatory clarity, data‑access frameworks and talent pathways to keep London attractive for US finance firms.

Economic impact of taking FDI more seriously

If the government adopts the measures above and holds itself to those targets, the UK will see faster project conversion, higher‑quality jobs and stronger regional development. Embedded FDI lifts productivity through technology transfer and supplier development, strengthens export competitiveness, and improves fiscal balances. A visible, measurable recovery in high‑value inward investment will restore investor confidence and reduce the risk of further capital flight.

The imperative

The UK still has world‑class universities, skills and entrepreneurial clusters. The difference between potential and delivery today is underperformance in institutional delivery and political focus. A bolder, more proactive and accountable approach to FDI will stop leakage, attract higher‑value projects, and rebuild the UK’s standing as a leading destination for strategic inward investment. The private sector and regional partners are ready to engage; the government must show the equal drive to win.

How can we help

At Lubbock Fine, we support international businesses navigating UK investment decisions. If you’d like to discuss how these changes may affect your business, we’d be happy to talk.

Press coverage: