Offshore financial structures
The bedrock of most offshore financial centre is the
formation of offshore structures – typically:
·
offshore company
·
offshore partnership
·
offshore trust
·
private foundation
Offshore structures are formed for a
variety of reasons.
Legitimate reasons
include:
Asset holding
vehicles. Many corporate
conglomerates utilize a large number of holding companies, and often high-risk
assets are parked in split companies to prevent legal risk accruing to the main
group (i.e. where the assets relate to asbestos, see the English case of Adams
v Cape Industries). Similarly, it is quite common for fleets of ships to be
separately owned by separate offshore companies to try to circumvent laws
relating to group liability under certain environmental legislation.
Asset protection.
Wealthy individuals who live in
politically unstable countries utilize offshore companies to hold family wealth
to avoid potential expropriation or exchange control limitations in the country
in which they live. These structures work best when the wealth is
foreign-earned, or has been expatriated over a significant period of time
Avoidance of forced
heirship provisions. Many countries from France to Saudi Arabia (and the
U.S. State of Louisiana) continue to employ forced heirship provisions in their
succession law, limiting the testator's freedom to distribute assets upon
death. By placing assets into an offshore company, and then having probate for
the shares in the offshore determined by the laws of the offshore jurisdiction
(usually in accordance with a specific will or codicil sworn for that purpose),
the testator can sometimes avoid such strictures.
Collective Investment
Vehicles. Mutual funds, Hedge funds, Unit Trusts and SICAVs are formed
offshore to facilitate international distribution. By being domiciled in a low
tax jurisdiction investors only have to consider the tax implications of their
own domicile or residency.
Derivatives trading.
Wealthy individuals often form offshore vehicles to engage in risky
investments, such as derivatives trading, which are extremely difficult to
engage in directly due to cumbersome financial markets regulation.
Exchange control
trading vehicles. In countries where there is either exchange control or is
perceived to be increased political risk with the repatriation of funds, major
exporters often form trading vehicles in offshore companies so that the sales
from exports can be "parked" in the offshore vehicle until needed for
further investment. Trading vehicles of this nature have been criticised in a
number of shareholder lawsuits which allege that by manipulating the ownership
of the trading vehicle, majority shareholders can illegally avoid paying minority
shareholders their fair share of trading profits.
Joint venture
vehicles. Offshore jurisdictions are frequently used to set up joint
venture companies, either as a compromise neutral jurisdiction (see for
example, TNK-BP) and/or because the jurisdiction where the joint venture has
its commercial centre has insufficiently sophisticated corporate and commercial
laws.
Stock market listing
vehicles. Successful companies who are unable to obtain a stock market
listing because of the underdevelopment of the corporate law in their home
country often transfer shares into an offshore vehicle, and list the offshore
vehicle. Offshore vehicles are listed on the NASDAQ, Alternative Investment
Market, the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and the Singapore Stock Exchange. It is
estimated that over 90% of the companies listed on Hong Kong's Hang Seng are
incorporated in offshore jurisdictions. 35% of companies listed on AIM during
2006 were from OFCs.
Trade finance
vehicles. Large corporate groups often form offshore companies, sometimes
under an orphan structure to enable them to obtain financing (either from bond
issues or by way of a syndicated loan) and to treat the financing as
"off-balance-sheet" under applicable accounting procedures. In
relation to bond issues, offshore special purpose vehicles are often used in
relation to asset-backed securities transactions (particularly
securitisations).
Illegitimate purposes include:
Creditor avoidance.
Highly indebted persons may seek to escape the effect of bankruptcy by transferring
cash and assets into an anonymous offshore company.
Market manipulation.
The Enron and Parmalat scandals demonstrated how companies could form offshore
vehicles to manipulate financial results.
Tax evasion.
Although numbers are difficult to ascertain, it is widely believed that
individuals in wealthy nations unlawfully evade tax through not declaring gains
made by offshore vehicles that they own. Multinationals including
GlaxoSmithKline and Sony have been accused of transferring profits from the higher-tax
jurisdictions in which they are made to zero-tax offshore centres
Ship and aircraft
registrations
Many offshore financial
centres also provide registrations for ships (notably Bahamas and Panama) or
aircraft (notably Aruba, Bermuda and the Cayman Islands).
Aircraft are frequently registered in offshore jurisdictions
where they are leased or purchased by carriers in emerging markets but financed
by banks in major onshore financial centres. The financing institution is
reluctant to allow the aircraft to be registered in the carrier's home country
(either because it does not have sufficient regulation governing civil
aviation, or because it feels the courts in that country would not cooperate
fully if it needed to enforce any security interest over the aircraft), and the
carrier is reluctant to have the aircraft registered in the financier's
jurisdiction (often the United States or the United Kingdom) either because of
personal or political reasons, or because they fear spurious lawsuits and potential
arrest of the aircraft.
E.g., in 2003, state carrier Pakistan International Airlines
re-registered its entire fleet in the Cayman Islands as part of the financing
of its purchase of eight new Boeing 777s; the U.S. bank refused to allow the
aircraft to remain registered in Pakistan, and the airline refused to have the
aircraft registered in the U.S.
Insurance,A
number of offshore jurisdictions promote the incorporation of captive insurance
companies within the jurisdiction to allow the sponsor to manage risk. In more
sophisticated offshore insurance markets, onshore insurance companies can also
establish an offshore subsidiary in the jurisdiction to reinsure certain risks
underwritten by the onshore parent, and thereby reduce overall reserve and
capital requirements. Onshore reinsurance companies may also incorporate an
offshore subsidiary to reinsure catastrophic risks.
Bermuda's insurance and re-insurance market is now the third
largest in the world.[46] There are also signs the primary insurance market is
becoming increasingly focused upon Bermuda; in September 2006 Hiscox PLC, the
FTSE 250 insurance company announced that it planned to relocate to Bermuda
citing tax and regulatory advantages.
Collective investment
vehicles
Many offshore jurisdictions specialise in the formation of
collective investment schemes, or mutual funds. The market leader is the Cayman
Islands, estimated to house about 75% of world’s hedge funds and nearly half
the industry's estimated $1.1 trillion of assets under management, followed by Bermuda, although a market shift
has meant that a number of hedge funds are now formed in the British Virgin Islands.
As at year end 2005, there were 7,106 hedge funds registered in the Cayman
Islands, 2,372 hedge funds in the British Virgin Islands and 1,182 in Bermuda.
These figures do not include other collective investment vehicles. See also the
recent survey by Deloitte in Hedgeweek.
But the greater appeal of offshore jurisdictions to form
mutual funds is usually in the regulatory considerations. Offshore
jurisdictions tend to impose few if any restrictions on what investment
strategy the mutual funds may pursue and no limitations on the amount of
leverage which mutual funds can employ in their investment strategy. Many
offshore jurisdictions (Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands and
Guernsey) allow promoters to incorporate segregated portfolio companies (or
SPCs) for use as mutual funds; the unavailability of a similar corporate
vehicle onshore has also helped fuel the growth of offshore incorporated
funds.[citation needed]
Banking Traditionally,
a number of offshore jurisdictions offered banking licences to institutions
with relatively little scrutiny. International initiatives have largely stopped
this practice, and very few offshore financial centres will now issue licences
to offshore banks that do not already hold a banking licence in a major onshore
jurisdiction. The most recent reliable figures for offshore banks indicates
that the Cayman Islands has 285 licensed banks, the Bahamas has 301. By
contrast, the British Virgin Islands only has seven licensed offshore banks.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.