Risultati ricerca

Further comment has appeared on the England and Wales Family Court's decision to pierce the corporate veil in the financial remedy case of Akhmedova v Akhmedov (2018 EWFC 23 Fam). The judge considered it necessary to go against the long-standing legal principle, in response to Farkhad Akhmedov's 'continuing campaign to defeat his ex-wife by concealing his assets in a web of offshore companies', and issued orders to aid her enforcement of the judgment in the Isle of Man and Dubai FATTO

INTERNATIONAL - SPAIN: Foreign nationals can sue government over inheritance tax discrimination, following Supreme Court ruling

INTERNATIONAL - UK - Nearly 100,000 properties in England and Wales owned by foreign entities

INTERNATIONAL - FRANCE: Wealth property tax has significant effects for non-residents

INTERNATIONAL - JERSEY: Apple says relocation of Irish subsidiary does not reduce its tax liabilities

US: Trump proposes territorial tax system

Having broached subjects from the vendor's point of view as well, it is useful to recall that the burdensome INVIM (a tax originally levied on the vendor consequent upon his sale of a property) has been definitively abolished, to the great relief of the notary as well, given not only the complexity of calculating it but also (as always) the irksome role of tax collector that the law imposed on him. Nevertheless, it is helpful to emphasize that the vendor may still have to pay certain sums

Individuals who set up a company do so because they want to carry out a given economic activity together with other individuals.  This activity is the corporate purpose and must be indicated in the Memorandum of Association.  It may be changed during the life-time of the company only in accordance with the amendment rules envisaged in the Memorandum of Association.The activity must be a productive activity, i.e. a business aimed at producing or trading goods or providing services, while it c