Dividends from Spain to UK

Dividends from Spain to UK

The Spanish tax deducted from dividends paid by a Spanish Company at the agreement rate of 15 per cent (10 per cent where the recipient is a United Kingdom company controlling, directly or indirectly, at least 10 per cent of the voting power in the Spanish company - but see the final paragraph below) qualifies for credit as a direct tax. A reduction to the above rates is not given where the dividend is effectively connected with  a business carried on by the recipient through a permanent establishment in Spain.

Where the recipient of the dividend is a United Kingdom company controlling, directly or indirectly, at least 10 per cent of the voting power in the Spanish company paying the dividend, relief is also due for the underlying tax.

Although the agreement provides a 10 per cent rate of source state taxation in respect of direct investors, the EC Parent and Subsidiary Directive bars the imposition of withholding taxes on dividends paid by a company resident in one Member State of the Community to a company resident in another Member State, where the company receiving the dividend holds a minimum of 25 per cent of the capital of the company paying the dividend. The level of capital required to obtain the 0% rate is reduced to 20 per cent from 1 January 2005, 15% from 1 January 2007 and 10% from 1 January 2009.

The Directive overrides any provision made for withholding tax in the relevant bilateral treaty

Accrued and capitalised interest

Accrued and capitalised interest

Some news about wealth and asset protection. According to the Savings Directive, "Savings income is also regarded as paid for the purposes of the regulations when a money debt is sold to a paying agent (or a receiving agent) or redeemed by the debtor. Interest added to an account with a bank or building society when the account is closed is interest in the normal way and treated as such under the regulations. However, accrued interest, premiums and discounts paid out at the redemption of securities by the issuer, or included in part of the price paid by a third party purchaser at sale before redemption are also savings income for the purposes of the regulations.

UK market makers who purchase interest–bearing securities from relevant payees or residual entities in prescribed territories or UK agents acting for the seller (e.g. stockbrokers) could therefore be paying agents for the purposes of these regulations. This could be the case even if they are not the paying agent in respect of the coupon payments made to the relevant payee or residual entity selling the securities.

Accrued or capitalised interest normally only arises if:

• a security is sold to the paying agent cum dividend (with an entitlement to the next coupon payment) - in those circumstances the price will include an amount of accrued interest for the period from the last coupon payment date to the date of transfer of the security

• it was a purchased by the seller at a discount, or

• the sale price includes, or takes account of, a premium that is paid on redemption by the issuer.

There is no reportable savings income payment when an interest–bearing security is purchased by a relevant payee or residual entity in a prescribed territory.

If the security is purchased ex dividend (without an entitlement to the next coupon payment), there will not normally be any accrued interest in the selling price and so there may be no reportable savings income. The next coupon payment to the relevant payee or residual entity may, of course, be reportable in the normal way under the regulations by the appropriate paying agent.

('repo') agreements do not give rise to reportable savings income (and manufactured payments which are representative of interest on such debts are also not reportable savings income - see paragraph 89). But a money debt which is acquired by a relevant payee or residual entity under a stock loan or repo agreement may give rise to savings income if the debt is sold, or if interest on the debt is received, by the relevant payee or residual entity during the term of the agreement.

For accrued or capitalised interest you may report either the amount of the savings income or the full amount of the proceeds of the sale or redemption of the securities. You may rely on information from established information vendors in order to determine the savings income realised on sale or redemption."

More about asset protection and wealth on asset protection

“Home country” rule

"Home country" rule

According to the Savings Directive "You may, if you wish, determine whether or not a fund has exceeded a threshold, or the amount of savings income to report in accordance with the "home country" rule. This means that, for a fund established in a prescribed or relevant territory, or one of the five other territories (not prescribed in Appendix 1), this determination is done in accordance with the rules set by the territory in which the fund is established. You may also rely, as provided in paragraph 123, on information provided on this basis by recognized industry sources."

More information about international Lawyers on International Lawyers

Advantage of Cash shells in the Plus Market Exchange in London

Advantage of Cash shells in the Plus Market Exchange in London

Reversing into a cash shell saves management time in accessing capital.

They also often come with established boards, cash resources and good contacts with institutional investors.

For shareholders of the shell company, a reverse is a way to invest in the target before it attracts a premium to its share price for its quote, while the target gains the benefit of a listing and any cash the shell may have in the bank.

Moreover a readymade shareholder base can assist creating liquidity in the company‟s shares and can provide an excellent source of future funding.

Not all are attractive

Not all cash shells appear to offer attractive prospects.

The money in shells often appears insufficient; others may have liabilities, financial or otherwise.

More about International Lawyers on Abogados Internacionales

The big questions for many managers: Should you get off the plane?

In some cases, these risks can impact the subsidiary organization's directors, officers and managers. In others, executives from the home territory may be at risk: Some have even been known to question if they should get off the plane in countries in which their  company's subsidiary may be involved in a legal tangle, she says. To avoid potential problems, Colwell tells executives to consider D&O coverage for offshore subsidiaries placed by the corporate headquarters, or as local laws require, placed in the subsidiary's country. An important consideration for buyers is to make sure the company's D&O broker has access to partner brokers abroad. "We need insurance policies and programs that can adapt to various indemnification scenarios, so that individuals are protected in all jurisdictions." Hartmut Mai, the Global Head of Financial Lines at Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty, a major provider of D&O insurance, says policies used to have global reach but are now increasingly subject to local regulations. He recommends one-stop shopping for D&O coverage at larger insurance providers that can meet needs in all territories and advise on peculiarities. Mai also advises that managers who are trying to steer their company's D&O program insist on close contact with insurers to foster a mutual understanding of risk exposure. "Keeping in constant communication is not just good for underwriters, it's also good for the client because the client begins to understand how the underwriter thinks and what he is looking for in the risk assessment process," says Mai. David Walters, who manages the commercial D&O business of Chartis Insurance in the UK and Ireland, a part of the former AIG and one of the world's largest D&O insurers, also recommends that companies communicate frequently with their insurance brokers and insurers about business developments that could potentially change a company's risk profile.

According to Walters, companies should treat their D&O providers just like one of their stockholders—and for good reason: "At the point of crisis, if the communication has been two-way and open, a solid relationship would be in place to back up the claims process."

More about International Tax

NEW ADMISSIONS IN THE PLUS MARKET (LONDON)

  Imperial Music and Media Plc
 
was floated on the PLUS quoted market on the 9th June 2010 and intends to make "investments in new musical talent within the UK music industry, predominantly in the areas of rock, jazz and easy listening". The directors "anticipated that investment will be by way of investing capital into and the management and development of new talent, or acquiring and managing the rights and revenues to existing artists catalogues and/or managing existing recorded artists."

Imperial Music and Media Plc has cash of circa £200,000 and has the largest market cap of £3.44m.

 

  Japanese Turnaround Capital Plc was floated on the PLUS quoted market on the 9th April 2010 and intends to "take advantage of opportunities in connection with distressed financial assets in Japan, primarily in relation to portfolios of distressed Japanese consumer loans."
Japanese Turnaround Capital Plc has cash of £448,000 and net assets of £194,000.

 
more information on:

http://international-tax-lawyer.blogspot.com/

http://foreign-tax.blogspot.com/

Cash shells in the Plus Markets Exchange in London

The PLUS Markets is a London based stock exchange aimed at small and mid-cap companies looking to raise capital and gain international exposure with a flexible regulatory environment compared to the traditional capital markets.

PLUS offers the same advantages of AIM such as the ability to raise funds, increase company profile and tax advantages for investors but with the added benefits of lower costs and a more flexible regulatory regime.

 

Cash shells are companies with a stock market quote, board of directors and money in the bank but no active business.

Generally set up as an „investment vehicle‟, the entrepreneurs and shareholders of a cash shell are looking for a business to fund.

Rather than going through the traditional Initial Public Offering (IPO), a company looking for capital is „acquired‟ by a cash shell, known as a „reverse takeover‟. A reverse takeover can be a quicker and more certain route to a public quotation compared to a standard IPO with the added benefit of a known quantity of available capital.

you can find more information about the Plus Markets Exchange on:

http://www.Braxton-co.com

Private Foundation in Guarnsey

Background

Much of Guernsey's economic success over past decades
has been largely due to its adaptability and flexibility to react
to changing market situations and conditions. This
adaptability is no better illustrated than by the Island's
willingness to amend and review legislation to ensure that it
retains its position within the increasingly competitive
market place of international finance and over recent years
there have been many examples of this.

Following the revision of the Guernsey Trust Law - which
was approved by the Guernsey parliament in July this year
and now awaits approval by Privy Counsel - the Island is
now planning to introduce legislation to allow the
establishment of Foundations. This innovation will add a
useful new tool to the Island's current financial product mix
and will help ensure that Guernsey remains able to offer a
highly flexible spectrum of financial services to its global
client base.

The Foundation

Foundations have been created under the laws of other
jurisdictions from as early as 1926 (Liechtenstein). More
recently Panama introduced legislation in 1995, Netherlands
Antilles in 1998 and the Bahamas in 2004. Foundations over
this period have become increasingly popular across the
globe but particularly in civil law jurisdictions where the
concept of the Anglo-Saxon Trust is less well known and not
always wholly understood. In certain situations Foundations
can offer a viable alternative to the trust for commercial
structures, estate planning and for charitable purposes.
Whilst there is no single definition of a Foundation, there are
a number of common features and some interesting
comparisons to be made with trusts and companies alike.

Unlike a trust, a Foundation is a distinct legal entity and has
its own legal personality. It can hold assets, sue (or be sued)
in its own name, may enter into agreements with third
parties but unlike a company it has no shareholders. Since
some Foundations are established for charitable purposes,
they may or may not have beneficiaries.

A Foundation is formed by a Founder (either an individual or
corporate body) who provides the assets to be administered
by the Foundation under contractual rather than fiduciary
principles – giving a degree of comfort to those clients
unfamiliar with equitable principles. Beneficiaries of a
Foundation therefore have contractual rights rather than
proprietary rights in its assets. A key attraction is the ability
for the Foundation to reserve powers to its Founder. A
Founder may retain more control than is usual with a Settlor
of a trust. Commonly reserved powers include those relating
to such issues as investment strategy, the appointment and
removal of beneficiaries or even the power to revoke the
Foundation.

The Potential Guernsey Foundation

It is proposed that a Guernsey Foundation would be
established by Charter and run by a Council responsible for
fulfilling the Foundation's purpose as defined in the Charter
– which would also include the Foundation's name, details
of all Council members its registered office (which would be
in Guernsey) and the Foundation's purpose.
tself may be quite generic - for example "estate planning", or
may be something quite specific. It is envisaged that at least
one member of the Council will be a corporate body. The
Foundation would be entered on the public register however
details of the beneficiaries (if any) would remain confidential
as with a Trust subject only to the pre-existing rules
regarding disclosure in proper cases.

The provision of Council members or administrative services
to Foundations will be, a regulated activity as are trustee
services at present ensuring that the interests of clients and
the reputation of the Bailiwick is upheld.

Over and above the Charter, there will normally be a set of
Rules governing the mode of operation for the Council -
whose members would be subject to duties similar to those
of company directors. Unlike the Charter the Rules would be
a private document and not on the public registry.

It is not proposed that a Guernsey Foundation will be
restricted in terms of the type of assets it can hold. Therefore
whilst it is not envisaged that they will be used for purely
commercial purposes, they will potentially be able to hold
shares in a company carrying on commercial activities.
Filing requirements are likely to be limited to changes in
registered office and Council members and changes to the
Charter all of which would need to be registered immediately
the changes occur. If this is the case it's unlikely that an
annual return be required. The filing of audited financial
statements would be subject to the same exemptions
applicable to Guernsey companies meaning many of them
would fall outside the audit requirement. This will ensure that
pricing can remain competitive.

It is also proposed that the tax treatment of Foundations be
similar to that of Trusts with Guernsey trustees.
A Foundation can also have an Adviser whose role would be
set out in the Foundation Charter and Rules. This is largely
similar to the role of Protector within a Trust structure both
having powers such as to appoint or remove Council
members and beneficiaries, or the Adviser's consent may be
required before the Council carries out certain acts.
It should also be possible for a Guernsey Foundation to
migrate to another jurisdiction if so required and equally for
a Foundation established elsewhere to migrate into the
Island, a long as it fulfils requirements under the Guernsey
legislative framework.

An interesting possibility is to establish structures using both
Foundations and Trusts. Private Trust Companies ("PTCs")
are very much in vogue. These are companies established
for the sole purpose of acting as trustee for one trust or, say,
one family. One issue that often concerns advisers is as to
the identity of those who will own the PTC. Often a purpose
trust is established to hold the shares in the PTC but as
Foundations need not have any beneficiaries it is possible
that they will be used as trustees themselves; a Private Trust
Foundation?

Conclusion
The introduction of Guernsey Foundations will offer the
Island's clients an excellent alternative structure assisting
with wealth management and will provide further choice and
flexibility to the Island's fiduciary sector.
The Foundation combines the flexibility of a trust with the
greater degree of transparency of a company. Given the
ability of a Founder to retain a certain amount of control and
the existing market demand for the Foundation structure
from civil law jurisdictions in particular, the Foundation can
only enhance the Island's competitive position in the market
place.


http://banksit.blogspot.com
http://internationaltax1.blogspot.com
http://assetprotection.wordpress.com
http://proteccionactivos.wordpress.com
http://proteccionbienes.blogspot.com

Hybrid entities and reverse hybrid entities

International tax planners often refer to "hybrid entities" and "reverse hybrid entities." 

From a U.S. tax perspective, a hybrid entity is an entity that is "fiscally transparent" for U.S. tax purposes but not fiscally transparent for foreign tax purposes.  In general, an entity is fiscally transparent if the entity's current year profits are currently taxable to the owners of the entity, regardless of whether the entity made any distributions to its owners during that year. 

 Partnerships are typically fiscally transparent entities.  Corporations are typically not fiscally transparent entities.  Limited liability companies and various types of foreign entities may or may not be fiscally transparent.

 Flexibility in international tax planning may be accomplished by the use of a foreign entity that is a corporation in its country of origin, but has the ability to check the box and elect its classification under Federal tax rules. This article presents a primer on establishing and planning for the use of such "hybrid" entities.

Final entity classification regulations--the "check-the-box" (CTB) rules issued in December 1996(1)--allow taxpayers to elect to treat most business entities (including foreign business entities) for Federal tax purposes as corporations, partnerships or (if the entity has one member) disregarded entities. While specified foreign business entities are excluded from the elective system and are treated per se as corporations, they are generally limited to publicly traded-type entities (e.g., U.K. PLCs, German AGs and French SAs; a list is contained in Regs. Sec. 301.7701-2(b)(8)). Despite the apparent restrictions imposed by the per se list, typically, at least one entity in any given country is viewed as a corporation under local law, but is eligible to check the box (e.g., the U.K. Limited Company, German GmbH and French SARL). Further, Regs. Sec. 301.7701-2(d)(1) grandfathered certain business entities on the per se list in existence on May 8, 1996, allowing them to retain their previous partnership or branch status. The CTB elective regime replaced the former four-factor approach under Regs. Sec. 301.7701-2 for classifying entities, which was cumbersome to apply and sometimes generated uncertainties, particularly for foreign entities.

The final CTB regulations ushered in a new era of flexibility in international tax planning for U.S. persons. However, IRS actions since the issuance of the final CTB regulations have eroded some of the rules' flexibility. This article will discuss establishing a foreign hybrid under the new CTB regime and planning opportunities.

For Federal tax purposes, taxpayers may elect to treat a foreign business entity as either a corporation or as a flowthrough entity, regardless of the foreign country's classification, if the entity type is not on the per se list. (An entity type on the list is automatically treated as a corporation for Federal tax purposes). Thus, a foreign entity taxable as a corporation in its country of incorporation can choose to be treated as a partnership or a branch for Federal tax purposes; such an entity is generally known as a "hybrid" Conversely, an entity classified as a partnership (or other type of flowthrough entity) in its country of formation or residence can choose to be treated as a corporation for Federal tax purposes; such an entity is generally known as a "reverse hybrid."

 A reverse hybrid entity is the "reverse" of a hybrid entity in that the entity is fiscally transparent for foreign tax purposes but not fiscally transparent for U.S. tax purposes.  Entities that are treated the same for U.S. and foreign tax purposes are not "hybrid" entities.

 The use of domestic reverse hybrids in cross-border financing continues despite the issuance by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) of regulations designed to shut down abuses in the area. These devices, if structured correctly, may enable taxpayers to enjoy double-dip tax benefits with respect to interest expense and reduced withholding under US income tax treaties.

 

More articles about International Tax on

http://international-tax-lawyer.blogspot.com/