Legal
UK's Burnham Proposes Non-Compete Clampdown – Draws Questions, Criticism

A number of governments have considered whether to limit or even ban non-compete contracts, an issue of particular concern to the UK's financial services sector, including wealth management. The Prime Minister likens the current situation to the time before 1995 when footballers had limited ability to change clubs.
A national UK ban or severe limit on non-competes will damage
rather than benefit sectors such as alternative investments and
the wider financial industry, a trade group warns.
UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham has said his government will curb
the use of NCs as a way of encouraging innovation in
sectors such as technology.
In response to Burnham’s speech late last week, which was
reported by the BBC and other outlets, the Alternative
Investment Management Association deputy CEO and global head of
Jiri Krol said the measure could hurt particular sectors.
“The UK government risks throwing the baby out with the bathwater
in its efforts to support the tech sector. For alternative
investment managers, non-competes play a vital role in protecting
highly sensitive investment strategies, intellectual capital,
client relationships and market-sensitive information,” Krol said
in a statement yesterday.
As reported and discussed here by
WealthBriefing earlier in 2026, some policymakers
think non-competes curb innovation and labour market
flexibility. Defenders say NCs are necessary if firms want to
guard intellectual property and the human capital they invest
in.
Reports said Burnham believes that the use of non-compete
clauses in employment contracts had "gone too far" and was
holding innovative UK companies back. The government has cited
research saying that as many as five million jobs are covered by
NCs.
Burnham referenced a landmark 1995 court ruling that is credited
with shaking up Europe’s football transfer
market, claiming that limiting NCs will be the
equivalent of the "Bosman ruling for the innovation sector."
Reports said that Burnham did not specify details. The prior
Conservative government examined NCs and ruled out a total
ban.
NCs are familiar in professions such as banking and wealth
management.
“A blanket ban risks solving one problem by creating a much
bigger one elsewhere. It would replace a framework that allows
firms to negotiate proportionate restrictions with a
one-size-fits-all approach that fails to reflect the realities of
working in financial services,” Krol said.
A government working paper, which was published in November 2025,
said: “Despite the UK having one of the most flexible labour
markets among advanced economies, persistent low job mobility,
weak competition in certain sectors, and low innovation are
constraining productivity and economic growth. Non-compete
clauses play a part in restricting employee movement, limiting
knowledge spillovers, and can undermine incentives for
innovation.”
"We surveyed our employer clients on their use of non-competes
and their views on reform, and the results suggested this kind of
change would be unwelcome for most businesses. The most common
preference was for the government to maintain the status quo,"
Jennifer Millins, partner at Mischon de Reya,
told this news service in an emailed comment when asked about
Burnham's comments.
"There was very little appetite for an outright ban, which respondents considered unnecessary and harmful to business, particularly for SMEs and early-stage companies, and there were concerns that restricting non-competes could redirect investment away from the UK," she continued. "Proposals to vary restrictions by employer size or employee salary were similarly unpopular, seen as blunt tools that overlook the nuanced reasons [why] employers rely on non-competes. The most popular option among those put forward was a statutory duration cap, with respondents favouring limits of six or 12 months."
"In practical terms, employers that rely on non-competes should start preparing now by reviewing their existing clauses, including duration, scope and the roles to which they apply, to understand their potential exposure once restrictions are introduced; considering whether key protections, such as safeguarding confidential information, client connections and team stability, can be achieved through other means like non-solicitation or non-dealing clauses, garden leave or incentive structures; watching closely for the detailed legislative proposals, since it is hoped any cap or ban will distinguish between existing and future arrangements, meaning the timing of recruitment, promotions and contract renewals may matter; and engaging in any further consultation, directly or through trade bodies, if they have concerns about the impact on their business or sector," Millins added.
The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority has become increasingly interested in non-competes. It has advocated banning NCs below a certain salary threshold and a statutory limit on an NC duration above a salary threshold.
Foreign cases can prompt calls for the UK to follow suit with
restrictions. As an example, in 2024 the US Federal Trade
Commission issued a final rule banning NCs nationwide,
“protecting the fundamental freedom of workers to change jobs,
increasing innovation, and fostering new business formation,” as
it put it. (However, the FTC was subsequently overruled.)
"My initial view is that this is now the fourth time in
10 years the Government has looked at non-competes so it
seems set to happen, at least on some level – there is still
very little detail on what this will look like but I think we can
expect some change," Catriona Watt, partner, Fox & Partners, a
London law firm, told WealthBriefing. "We will likely
know more around the time of the Budget later this month.
Historical proposals have included a statutory duration cap, an
outright ban and salary-based threshholds to protect lower paid
workers who are not in a position to challenge restraints."
"Consultations and proposed reforms have done little to outline the evidence relied on to demonstrate how non-competes impact perceived low job mobility and innovation, which is said to constrain productivity and appear to be a driver behind proposed reforms. Clients in a number of industries, such as financial services, the fintech sector and the insurance sector (which are not known to complain of lack of innovation), use non-competes and are unlikely to favour a ban," she added.