According to the Savings Directive, "If a UK individual changes address to a prescribed territory you will need to report on the basis of the new address. This may mean you need to obtain additional information and/or update your system.
For example, a UK paying agent pays savings income to an individual who lives in the UK. This is not reportable under the scheme. He has a contractual relationship made on or after 1 January 2004 with the individual.
If the payee moves to Spain, they will become reportable and the paying agent will need to update his records to fulfill his obligations under the scheme. Since he has a relationship which began on or after 1 January 2004 with the individual, he will also need to verify the name and address in addition to obtaining and verifying the TIN or the date and place of birth.
Where both the identity and UK address were verified to KYC standards, and the contractual relationship began after 1 January 2004, subsequent changes can be 'self certified' in accordance with paragraph 183.
Guidance Notes vs. 5 - draft vs. 8 - cleaned up version
The Grandfathered bonds.
According to the Savings Directive, "Certain negotiable debt securities are not treated as money debts if they meet certain conditions for the duration of a transitional period which ends on 31 December 2010. These securities ("grandfathered bonds") do not then count as money debts for all purposes of the regulations up to 31 December 2010: interest, premiums and discounts derived from these bonds are not savings income; and investment in these bonds does not count when deciding whether the thresholds which determine whether income from certain collective investment funds is savings income have been passed.
A security will be a grandfathered bond if:
• it was first issued before 1 March 2001 or the prospectus was first approved by the appropriate regulatory authority before that date, and
• no further issue was made on or after 1 March 2002.
If the bond is a government bond (or issued by a related public authority or an international organisation – see the Schedule to the regulations) and a further issue is made on or after 1 March 2002, the whole of the issue (whether made before, on or after 1 March 2002) is not a grandfathered bond. The whole issue of the bond is a money debt. If the bond is issued by another type of issuer (e.g. a commercial company) and a further issue is made on or after 1 March 2002, only the part of the issue made on or after 1 March 2002 is not a grandfathered bond. This part of the bond issue is treated as a money debt; the rest of the issue (made before 1 March 2002) is not a money debt."
In Europe, Basel III will require the credit institutions to have higher core capital in order to absorb the same volume of assets that they have right now, consequently, the return on capital will be lower, with the logical des-incentive for the entry of new investors. On the other hand, in the US, the Volker Rule, is just a new restatement of the old Glass Steagall Act, which protected the financial system by imposing restrictions on the activities carried out by the credit institutions, basically separating the investment banking from the commercial banking activity.
The argument to support this reform is that investment banking exposes the credit institutions to a completely different set of risks compared with commercial banking, with the aggravating factor that these entities are supported by the FDIC or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, so at the end of the day, the excessive risk assumed by the entities through those activities not related to commercial banking may end up being paid with taxpayers' money.
Cash shells can be "clean‟ purpose built with a fresh pool of capital with the aim of finding a project seeking capital to acquire.
Investors in the shell are backing the board to spend their cash wisely and target profitable companies or companies that can achieve capital growth, even though they have not yet secured a deal.
Alternatively, they can be "dirty‟ companies with a stock market quote and some funds whose previous business failed and have undergone a restructuring and a formal arrangement to eliminate all the company‟ old liabilities.
Este es uno de los apartados donde la LEY DE SOCIEDADES DE CAPITAL ha puesto más énfasis en su afán de armonizar las disposiciones hasta ahora aplicables a los diferentes tipos sociales, extendiéndose las normas antes previstas para un solo tipo de sociedad, a todas las clases de sociedades de capital.
Ejemplos de lo anterior podrían ser: (i) la extensión a las sociedades de responsabilidad limitada de las clases de juntas (ordinarias/extraordinarias), (ii) la aplicación para las sociedades anónimas del régimen de convocatoria judicial previsto anteriormente para las sociedades de responsabilidad limitada, (iii) la enumeración sistemática para las sociedades anónimas de los asuntos competencia de la junta general que antes solo estaban previstos para las sociedades de responsabilidad limitada, o (iv) la obligación por parte de los administradores de las sociedades de responsabilidad limitada (antes previsto expresamente solo para las sociedades anónimas) de asistir a las juntas generales.
En materia de impugnación de acuerdos, se autoriza, cuando ello sea posible, que el juez permita a la sociedad demandada subsanar la causa de impugnación5.
La ley de Sociedades de Capital, en cuanto a modificación de estatutos sociales, y más concretamente, al capital de la sociedad, ha optado por soluciones ya contempladas en el caso de sociedades anónimas. ¿De qué se trata exactamente?
Con la nueva ley se han ampliado a las sociedades de responsabilidad limitada los derechos de información de los socios en las modificaciones estatutarias actualmente previstos en sede de sociedades anónimas: con la LEY DE SOCIEDADES DE CAPITAL, los socios tendrán el mismo derecho que los accionistas de una sociedad anónima a pedir la entrega o el envío gratuito de los documentos relativos a las modificaciones estatutarias.
En relación al capital de las sociedades:
·En el ámbito de las operaciones de aumento de capital con cargo a reservas, se pasa a exigir a las sociedades de responsabilidad limitada la verificación por auditor del balance que sirva de base para la operación, tal y como se venía exigiendo para las sociedades anónimas.
·Se suprime el derecho de asunción preferente en aumentos de capital con aportaciones no dinerarias en sociedades de responsabilidad limitada, equiparando así el régimen de asunción preferente al de suscripción preferente en sociedades anónimas tras la modificación operada por la LME.
·Se permiten las reducciones de capital para la constitución o el incremento de la reserva legal o de las reservas voluntarias en sede de sociedades de responsabilidad limitada (con el régimen vigente, únicamente podían reducir capital con dichas finalidades las sociedades anónimas).
·Entre la fecha del balance y la del acuerdo de reducción de capital, en caso de reducción de capital para compensar pérdidas o para dotar la reserva legal, no podrán transcurrir más de 6 meses (este requisito temporal sólo aplicaba a sociedades de responsabilidad limitada).
·Para que una sociedad limitada pueda repartir dividendos una vez reducido el capital, será preciso que la reserva legal alcance el diez por ciento del nuevo capital. Hasta la fecha, esta restricción operaba solamente para sociedades anónimas.
Los temas de Sociedades extranjeras están más detallados en:
Posts
