header-logo header-logo

Give me shelter

08 April 2016 / James Mather
Issue: 7694 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

The new register of companies' beneficial owners won’t prevent “real owners” taking refuge, as James Mather explains

The new requirement on English companies and LLPs to hold a register of “people with significant control” (PSCs), which applies from 6 April 2016, is designed to “bring information about company ownership into the open”. Obscure company ownership structures, the government stresses, can “facilitate tax evasion, money laundering and even terrorist financing”. It hopes that the register will impede such abuses by revealing “who is behind a company””, and has trumpeted the new register in the wake of the Panama Papers affair.

With such high expectations, one would therefore have expected the new rules to make clear that offshore discretionary trust structures are a primary target. While having their legitimate uses, after all, these are also the pre-eminent vehicle for obscuring ownership from creditors, spouses, tax authorities and the like. The “real owners” behind companies held in this way are surely the discretionary beneficiaries, often the settlor and members of his family. Where such beneficiaries make a request

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll