International Law Firm

List of top consulting firms 2012

2011-12-16T07:58:00.000-08:00

Following is a list of the top consulting firms around the world with such details as ranking, company name, website url, headquarters, year founded, approximate number of employees, male to female ratio, and other statistics. Being a top consulting firm do not means always prestige and do not bring quality and values automatically, but clients and job seekers of the consulting profession may be interested by these statistics.

Purpose: To summarize and provide beneficial statistical information about the consulting industry and provide quick access gateway to a list of the top consulting companies and websites.
Serving: Researchers, students, professionals, job seekers in the consulting industry and all who seek information about top consulting companies.

Disclaimer: We are not claiming any rights, responsibilites or ownership pertaining to creating, developing, designing, or programming any of the websites listed on this page. All websites listed on this page are publically available for viewing on the internet.

Rankings: Any ranking information regarding the listings above have been made by 3rd parties, organizations which make their ranking info available on public viewable pages free of charge. For this particular listing we have gathered inforamtion from various sources on the internet, including, cnn.com, vault.com, fortune.com and linkedin.com.

The 2011 Best Firms to Work For (according to Consulting Magazine):

The Best Consulting Firms to Work For 2011

Bain & Company
The Boston Consulting Group
North Highland
Point B
Deloitte Consulting
Slalom Consulting
McKinsey & Company
PwC
Booz Allen Hamilton
Huron Consulting Group
Ernst & Young
Accenture
Crowe Horwath
Monitor
A.T. Kearney

The Best Small Consulting Firms to Work For 2011

Stroud Consulting
Impact Advisors
Cask
Vynamic
Infinitive
Fitzgerald Analytics
Lenati
Jabian Consulting
PeopleFirm
HiSoft (formerly Nouveon)
Plus Consulting
Meridian Compensation Partners
Marakon
SEI
IBB Consulting Group

Rank	Consulting Firms	HQ	Industry	Type	# of employees	Year founded	Med age	Male	Fe- male
1	McKinsey & Company	Greater New York City Area	Management Consulting	Partnership	15000	1926	29	67%	33%
2	The Boston Consulting Group, Inc	Greater Boston Area	Management Consulting	Partnership	6000	1963	28	67%	33%
3	Bain & Company	Greater Boston Area	Management Consulting	Privately Held	10000	1973	28	65%	35%
4	Booz & Company	Washington DC Metro Area	Management Consulting	Privately Held	22000	1914	32	64%	36%
5	Deloitte Consulting LLP	Greater New York City Area	Financial Services	Partnership	168000	-	29	61%	39%
6	Monitor Group	Greater Boston Area	Management Consulting	Privately Held	1500	1983	29	63%	37%
7	PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP	Greater New York City Area	Accounting	Partnership	17500	-	29	59%	41%
8	Mercer LLC	Greater New York City Area	Human Resources	Public	18000	1937	34	51%	49%
9	Ernst & Young LLP	Greater New York City Area	Accounting	Partnership	144000	-	29	59%	41%
10	Oliver Wyman	Greater New York City Area	Management Consulting	Public	1001	-	30	70%	30%
11	Accenture	Greater Chicago Area	Management Consulting	Public	177000	1989	30	67%	33%
12	IBM Global Business Services	Greater New York City Area	Information Technology and Services	Public	300000	1911	34	76%	24%
13	KPMG LLP	Amsterdam Area, Netherlands	Accounting	Partnership	137000	-	30	60%	40%
14	Towers Watson	Greater Philadelphia Area	Management Consulting	Privately Held	6400	1934	34	52%	48%
15	AlixPartners, LLP	Greater Detroit Area	Management Consulting	Privately Held	900	1981	35	77%	23%
16	A.T. Kearney	Greater Chicago Area	Management Consulting	Partnership	2700	1926	30	68%	32%
17	Braxton Consulting	Eurpe & Latin America	Management Consulting	Privately Held	250	1996	31	54%	46%
18	The Parthenon Group	Greater Boston Area	Management Consulting	Privately Held	200	1999	28	62%	38%
19	Towers Watson	-	Financial Services	Public	14000	-	34	53%	47%
20	L.E.K. Consulting	London, UK	Management Consulting	Partnership	900	1983	28	70%	30%
21	FTI Consulting, Inc.	Washington DC Metro Area	Management Consulting	Public	3500	1982	32	71%	29%
22	Alvarez & Marsal	Greater New York City Area	Management Consulting	Privately Held	1600	1983	33	73%	27%
23	NERA Economic Consulting	Greater New York City Area	Management Consulting	Public	600	1961	27	61%	39%
24	Capgemini	Paris Area, France	Information Technology and Services	Privately Held	91000	1967	32	77%	23%
25	Navigant Consulting, Inc.	Greater Chicago Area	Management Consulting	Public	2500	1983	32	62%	38%
26	Huron Consulting Group	Greater Chicago Area	Management Consulting	Public	2000	2002	30	61%	39%
27	Hewitt Associates	Greater Chicago Area	Outsourcing/Offshoring	Public	25000	1940	32	55%	45%
28	Roland Berger Strategy Consultants	-	Management Consulting	Partnership	2100	1967	28	72%	28%
29	ZS Associates	Greater Chicago Area	Management Consulting	Privately Held	1400	1983	27	72%	28%
30	CRA International, Inc.	Greater Boston Area	Management Consulting	Public	800	1965	33	65%	35%
31	Arthur D. Little	Paris Area, France	Management Consulting	Privately Held	1000	-	30	75%	25%
32	Kurt Salmon Associates	Greater Atlanta Area	Management Consulting	Public	700	1935	33	63%	37%
33	LECG	San Francisco Bay Area	Management Consulting	Public	1200	1988	34	69%	31%
34	Gallup Consulting	District of Columbia	Management Consulting	Privately Held	2000	-	27	60%	40%
35	Aon Consulting Worldwide	Greater Chicago Area	Management Consulting	Public	6300	1983	36	52%	48%
36	BraxtonTechnology	Europe, Asia & Latin America	Technology Consulting & Services	Privately Held	219	2005	26	74%	26%
37	Cornerstone Research	San Francisco Bay Area	Legal Services	Privately Held	201	1989	27	61%	39%
38	Corporate Executive Board	Washington DC Metro Area	Management Consulting	Public	2000	1979	28	50%	50%
39	Hay Group	Greater Philadelphia Area	Management Consulting	Privately Held	2600	1943	32	47%	53%
40	Analysis Group, Inc.	Greater Boston Area	Management Consulting	Privately Held	500	1981	30	62%	38%
41	Milliman, Inc	Greater Seattle Area	Insurance	Privately Held	2000	1947	35	62%	38%
42	Zolfo Cooper	Greater New York City Area	Financial Services	Privately Held	75	-	31	67%	33%
43	Mars & Co	-	-	-	-	1979	-	-	-
44	The Advisory Board Company	Washington DC Metro Area	Hospital & Health Care	Public	1000	1979	28	43%	57%
45	Putnam Associates	Greater Boston Area	Management Consulting	Privately Held	50	1988	26	64%	36%
46	First Manhattan Consulting Group	Greater New York City Area	Management Consulting	Privately Held	51	1980	26	76%	24%
47	IMS Health Incorporated	Greater Philadelphia Area	Pharmaceuticals	Public	10000	1954	34	57%	43%
48	Buck Consultants	Greater New York City Area	Human Resources	Public	1900	1916	38	55%	45%
49	Giuliani Partners LLC	Greater New York City Area	Management Consulting	Privately Held	11	2002	45	79%	21%
50	Archstone Consulting	Greater New York City Area	Management Consulting	Privately Held	250	2003	34	63%	37%

Signed in THE DUBAI FINANCIAL CENTER (DIFC).- Memoranda of Understating

2011-06-11T07:12:00.000-07:00

Signed in THE DUBAI FINANCIAL CENTER (DIFC).- Memoranda of Understating

After consultation with a panel of market practitioners and experts, last year the DFSA made a series of regulatory changes to the DIFC’s Collective Investment Funds regime in order to make the Centre a more attractive investment centre for both international and domestic fund managers. In the third quarter the Carlyle Group became the first company to establish and manage an investment vehicle under the new funds regime.

2010 also saw continued DIFC Authority efforts aimed at supporting dialogue and international co-operation between counterparties, as well as creating strategic partnerships with international jurisdictions thus strengthening the DIFC’s offering to clients. Six Memoranda of Understating (MoUs) were signed in 2010 to bring the total up to 11 MoUs with various jurisdictions. The MoUs signed in 2010 were with Luxembourg, Madrid Centro Financiero, the UAE Ministry of Finance, the Economic Zones World, the Dubai Department of Economic Development and the Dubai Department of Tourism & Commerce Marketing. Meanwhile, the other independent entities under the DIFC umbrella, the DFSA and DIFC Courts, have also both signed a number of different cooperation agreements during 2010.

Over the course of 2010, the DFSA entered into eight new bilateral MoUs and two new multilateral MoUs, bringing the total MoUs signed to date to 56. New bilateral MoU partners include the Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority, Autorité des Marchés Financiers (France), the New York State Banking Department and The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions, Canada. At the same time, the DFSA signed multilateral MoUs with the Asian-Oceanian Standard-Setters Group and International Association of Insurance Supervisors. Meanwhile, the DIFC Courts signed its first international MoU with Jordan in Q2 2010. Adding to its existing MoUs with judicial counterparties from Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Ras Al Khaima.

Governor of DIFC Ahmed Humaid Al Tayer, said: “The solid growth witnessed by DIFC in 2010 reflects the importance of the Centre to financial and business institutions seeking to take advantage of opportunities present in the UAE and the wider region. With its continuous efforts to develop further its modern infrastructure, free zone offering and self-governing laws and courts, DIFC has consolidated its position as the pre-eminent and favoured financial centre in the region."

“We have already started reaping the rewards of our new business strategy and we are confident that DIFC will continue to play an important role in providing market participants vital support in the rapidly changing business environment in the region” He added.

CEO of DIFC Authority Abdulla Mohammed Al Awar, said: “We are very proud of the growth and success we have achieved on different levels in 2010.

We are committed to growing our existing client partnerships and we look forward to the continued support and guidance of our clients in our journey together to achieving greater success.”

There is no doubt that the road ahead remains challenging. Although, we believe that there are still many untapped opportunities that our new strategy will position us to take advantage of.

One-stop-shop

2011-03-22T03:50:00.000-07:00

One-stop-shop
Companies on groups will be able to deal with a single tax administration called principal tax authority, which should be the one belonging to the Member State in which the parent company of the group is resident for tax purposes also called principal taxpayer.
There is also an advance ruling mechanism on the proposal. Audits will be initiated and coordinated by the main tax authority but the tax authorities of any Member State in which a group member is subject to tax may request the initiation of an audit.
All the disputes between tax authorities and taxpayers are dealt with by an administrative body which is competent to hear appeals at first instance in accordance to the law of the Member State of the principal tax authority.

European Union Direct Taxes

2011-02-09T08:01:00.000-08:00

Permanent Establishment is a vital concept in international taxation. While for direct taxes, it is mainly defined by the OECD Model Convention, the European VAT Directive and its implementing Regulation provide an EU-wide approach for VAT.
Difficulties arise as terminology and definitions in indirect and direct tax diverge. Moreover, countries have implemented and interpreted the EU and OECD rules in a different way, impacting on issues like cross-border reorganisations, transfer pricing, taxation of dividends and interest and royalties, tax residence, temporary and permanent transfer of assets, place of supply and VAT liability.
In both direct and indirect tax, the concept of Permanent Establishment has undergone very recent changes: The 2010 changes to the OECD Model Convention and Commentary, and in particular the new Art. 7, will be adopted in national law, as speakers from the Netherlands and Germany will report. The effect of the new definition on treaties with other countries will also be considered.
Some of this topic is addressed in the new book "European Union Direct Taxes", by the International Tax Professor Salvador Trinxet Llorca.
In indirect tax, the current more important issue is the practical consequences of the adoption of the Regulation implementing the EU VAT Directive in January 2011.

SME Internationalization

2010-12-20T04:33:00.001-08:00

This realisation was at the heart of the 2007 OECD-APEC study on Removing Barriers to SME Access to International Markets, which provided general findings on the major barriers to SME internationalization as perceived by SMEs and policymakers in OECD and APEC member economies. The need to obtain a greater depth of understanding and an updated view of the issues raised by the OECD-APEC study provided a raison d'être for this follow-up project. Internationalization and international entrepreneurship among small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) has remained a topic of considerable contemporary relevance, principally owing to the observed growth effects of cross-border venturing, and the demonstrated capacity of SMEs to drive economic development at national, regional, and global levels (European Commission, 2007). Other value adding features include the additional focus on motivations for SME internationalization ; the coverage of recently available documentation from economies involved in the OECD enlargement (Chile, Estonia, Israel, Russia, and Slovenia) and enhanced engagement process (Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, and South Africa); and the sub-national and sectoral insights offered on SME internationalization barriers, motivations and support programs.

OCDE prerrogatives for internationalisation on SME

2010-12-16T04:43:00.001-08:00

i. To analyse in-depth the most significant barriers to SME

internationalisation identified from the 2007 OECD-APEC sponsored research on this theme, with a view to uncovering new insights into the nature of these top barriers;

ii. To review recent work pertaining to factors that drive or motivate the internationalisation of SMEs; and

iii. To develop a deeper understanding of the current programs for SME internationalisation, particularly the specific measures aimed at addressing the top barriers identified.

To provide an updated appreciation of pertinent aspects of SME internationalisation, the report reviewed the post OECD-APEC survey evidence on the top barriers, drivers and support programs across OECD and APEC member economies and other economies involved in the OECD enlargement and enhanced engagement processes. This has yielded important longitudinal insights, thereby indicating that support programs are appropriately focused on the most resilient and enduring of the factors affecting SME internationalisation.

To ensure a greater depth of understanding on SME internationalisation barriers, this study focused on the top four barriers identified by the OECD-APEC study as being by far and away the most serious impediments to SME internationalisation (see Table 1). These include 1) Shortage of working capital to finance exports; 2) Identifying foreign business opportunities; 3) Limited information to locate/analyse markets; and 4) Inability to contact potential overseas customers. A fifth barrier, „lack of managerial time, skills and knowledge‟, is additionally examined. The reasoning is threefold: one, this reflects the importance of this barrier in the Member Economy survey (see Table 2); two, the consistently highlighted primacy of managerial factors in previous relevant global surveys; and three, the widely acknowledged importance of skilled human resources in all areas of economic activity, including market innovation.

An opinion from one of our readers commenting the news from Yahoo

2010-12-09T04:13:00.001-08:00

What difference would it make to our standard of living if EVERYONE paid an increase in taxes?. Several people are tired of the argument over tax the rich but not the middle class. Social Security recipients have given up the COLA for two years. Who else in the country has already given up that much? Why not let the Bush tax cuts expire for everyone? Returning taxes to the Clinton era levels might return us to the Clinton era prosperity levels. It is worth a try since nothing we have done since the Clinton era has worked. America has been in decline since he left office.

Another blog where you'll find International Tax information is International Tax Spain

Proposta da Comissão

2010-12-01T04:33:00.001-08:00

O objectivo da proposta consiste em estabelecer um procedimento que permita à Comunidade avaliar se existe um interesse comunitário suficiente para concluir acordos bilaterais propostos com países terceiros e, na ausência do mesmo, autorizar os Estados-Membros a concluírem estes acordos com países terceiros em certos domínios da cooperação judiciária em materia civil e comercial que são da competência exclusiva da Comunidade.

Uma vez que a autorização concedida aos Estados-Membros constitui uma derrogação à regra segundo a qual a Comunidade tem competência exclusiva para concluir acordos internacionais sobre estas matérias, o procedimento deve ser considerado uma medida excepcional e ter um âmbito de aplicação e uma duração limitados.

Propõe-se limitar o procedimento em causa às questões sectoriais relacionadas com as matérias matrimoniais, a responsabilidade parental e de obrigações de alimentos, por um lado, e com a lei aplicável às obrigações contratuais e extracontratuais, por outro. A proposta em anexo diz respeito ao segundo domínio.

A Comissão propõe as garantias a seguir descritas com o objectivo de preservar o acervo comunitário, incluindo a integridade do sistema comunitário no domínio em causa.

O procedimento baseia-se na notificação prévia do projecto de acordo pelos Estados-Membros que pretendem obter uma autorização para renegociar e concluir um acordó com um país terceiro com base em condições específicas a avaliar caso a caso.

More about international lawyers on International Lawyers

Behavioral marketing by International Lawyers

2010-12-01T04:27:00.001-08:00

EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS BELONG TOGETHER

When Starting a business behavioral marketing also fosters a worldwide exchange of information internally as experienced by International Lawyers. Knowledge of global events and issues is only useful to customers if it is available around the world. When it comes to efficient marketing, Freshfields combines specialization with the advantages inherent in a large-scale company. For example, one of its objectives is to represent clients who were acquired in the finance or corporate sectors in the labor law area, too. Cross-selling is also used as a marketing support tool—if cases span sectors, Freshfields will offer a price discount. Clear positioning is necessary and becomes all the more difficult as more companies seek it. And this dictum applies to Freshfields and its competitors as it does to every service industry. "There's no sense in sprucing up a commercial if you're putting out the same message as your competitors," says Kotler. In other words, "focus" will be the buzzword in future, particularly within the service sector. Looking at seemingly straightforward services, two-way communications (preferably demand-oriented) with the customer are becoming more significant, and that extends all the way to complaint management. The Pizza Hut franchise chain, for example, prints its hotline number on every pizza box to take calls from unsatisfied customers. The franchise manager then has 48 hours to resolve the problem. The luxury-hotel chain Hyatt is also known for its fast response times to customer complaints— you can even send them to management using the in-room television and its remote control.

DOES DEMARKETING CREATE A NEW SENSE OF TRUST?

For Kotler, such trust-enhancing measures are just a small part of the imminent marketing revolution. "We want to develop methods that will actually reduce an otherwise continually increasing demand," is Kotler's position, which is surprising from a marketing perspective. The essence of this approach is to perceive "demarketing" as a source of trust. According to this notion, keeping certain types of customers away from your product may actually be a positive marketing approach. One might be inclined to think that this attitude is naïve. But that's not necessarily so, says Kotler, although it does have to be grasped properly in-house. "First, one has to identify values. And then one has to hire people who believe in these values and embody them." Crises always represent crucial tests for Kotler's value-based marketing. For example, in difficult times, how do companies deal with clients that are late with payments? John Deere, the US-based agricultural equipment manufacturer, may serve as a role model, he says. "John Deere helped farmers, while rival International Harvester unceremoniously seized its machines." John Deere's level of generosity is rarely found among service providers, even though times of crisis are a perfect opportunity to create new customer loyalty. Kotler recommends to banks and insurance companies in particular that they fully understand the acute problems some of their customers may be facing. He also thinks that their advertising requires a different tone. "The financial crisis compelled many service providers to rethink their marketing and advertising strategies." Solidarity is the new mantra, he says. For example, Morgan Stanley's European advertisements promote their high equity ratio compared with other banks. "They're probably doing the right thing," Kotler explains "Especially if other banks have to address some rather uncomfortable questions on this point."

IT'S EASIER TO SEPARATE THE GOOD GUYS FROM THE BAD GUYS

These questions are certainly being asked, not just in the industry but publicly as well when starting a business. The growth of social media makes companies an ongoing subject of debate. Internet portals where consumers can discuss their experiences make it "easy these days to differentiate the good guys from the bad guys." From a marketing perspective, turbulent times are actually good times, according to the tenor of Kotler's new book Chaotics. "Ryanair is an example that says a few things about seizing an opportunity that arose from the crisis," he states. During the crisis, Ryanair ran a massive advertising campaign and thereby tapped customers' magnified price consciousness. The outcome was a substantial gain in market share.

KOTLER'S "KEY" POINTERS FOR SERVICE MARKETING MANAGERS. "QUALITY IS KING"

Nowadays, customers have precise expectations of services they utilize. Social media platforms such as Facebook increase transparency, which means customers now define quality.

"BUILDING THE MARKETING ORGANIZATION"

Building up long-term customer relationships is more difficult today than ever before. Customers are fickle. Marketing must quickly adjust to new situations and therefore needs to have, first and foremost, a very flexible organization.

"THE FIRM CAN'T BE ALL THINGS TO ALL PEOPLE"

Opportunities for service companies to differentiate themselves from one another are on the rise. They can be socially oriented or maintain higher environmental standards than their competitors. It's all about accessibility. The physical presence remains irreplaceable. For example, online banks in Europe are currently setting up "finance lounges" in major cities.

More about the International Lawyers that you will need to start a business on International Lawyers to start a business

Litigation Risk

2010-11-26T03:05:00.001-08:00

Litigation Risk

Despite prudent decisions and the best possible advice, corporate directors face an increase in international legal actions that can impact their personal assets. think:act examines what top managers should look for in corporate D&O (directors and officers) programs.

The Enron scandal of the last decade transformed corporate governance. It also had a lasting effect on the D&O insurance market, given CEO Jeffrey Skilling's legal bills estimated at $23 million: The case piqued interest in the coverage that protects company officers from personal financial liability if they are sued. And, as insurers assessed the riskier business climate, premiums began to rise. Like malpractice insurance for high-level managers, the "directors and officers" insurance forms a worldwide market today, worth $8.8 billion in 2008, and covers top managers in the event of a breach of duty and a resulting lawsuit. Usually reserved for companies with a fair share of assets and management board structures, the pricey insurance policies, with premiums that can reach up to several hundred thousand euros a year for millions in coverage, essentially let individuals hedge the personal financial risks they face by playing in the top league. At the same time, the policies are a tool for making corporate entities responsible for the actions of their employees and protecting corporate assets.

D&O Policy Holders are more likely than ever to be sued.

In the aftermath of the subprime financial crisis, companies as well as their directors are advised to be even more cautious about potential financial liability for their management decisions, says attorney Kevin M. LaCroix, the author of the D&O Diary and a director of OakBridge Insurance Services. That's because D&O policyholders are now more likely to be sued, and more likely to be sued for larger amounts, than in the presubprime era. Whereas class-action lawsuits were once common only in the US, such lawsuits— with their massive potential for financial damage—are gaining popularity outside North America as part of governance reform aimed at securing recourse for shareholders. According to Advisen, an insurance research firm, cases settled since 2005 in Europe were for average settlements of €117 million. Although some anti-corporate activists argue that the coverage creates an incentive for misbehavior, scholars find no evidence that the coverage motivates mismanagement, just as carrying auto liability insurance hardly gives drivers a reason to cause an accident. Suits against managers can come with a host of punitive effects, including reputational loss, jail time and possible fines in the event of a scandal. Enron's Skilling is serving a 24-year term in prison and was fined $45 million. Fines are typically excluded from a policy's benefits. D&O coverage tends to be best advised on by lawyers and specialized insurance brokers. The specialists recommend that policies go far beyond the basic requirements of being large enough to cover the cost of settlements. They stress that policies must be tailored for each individual buyer, depending on the area of business and the risks present. In the US, a large number of D&O claims are made for a manager's conduct related to human resources, such as hiring and firing decisions. But an increasing number of claims are being filed against directors and officers for securities-related misconduct. What's more, American law is known to have a long arm from which managers around the world might need to defend themselves. Witness the Enron-related case of the NatWest Three. The British bankers involved were extradited to and tried in the United States, where they also served prison terms for wire fraud committed in the UK.

Megan Colwell, an expert in management liability insurance at Woodruff Sawyer & Co., a California insurance brokerage and specialist of international legal actions, offers her clients a choice of roughly 10 to 15 insurers. Her firm is paid by commission from insurance companies or consulting fees from the client. Colwell recommends that companies with international operations acquire specialized advice to align their corporate D&O program to the risks in different countries.

More about international tax on international tax and international legal actions

Transfer priciing in China

2010-11-25T02:28:00.001-08:00

Transfer priciing in China

Braxton is an international tax specialist in transfer pricing. This also covers China. Years ago, when we actively represented corporate clients in Chinese tax matters, there was not a transfer pricing "problem" for smaller wholly foreign enterprises, as the number of SAT specialists was so small that they could only delve into matters of corporate entities far larger than those I represented. But now it is quite different. On July 12 Circular 323 was issued by the SAT. The SAT is beginning a nationwide inspection of transfer pricing documentation. Local authorities have been instructed to select for audit for years 2008 and 2009 a minimum of 10 percent of taxpayers who have related-party transactions. While we don't know if this instruction filtered down to all levels of SAT offices, we do know that it has reached the Guangzhou SAT. It is time for some of those smaller businesses - the type that we used to work with - to be concerned about having their transfer pricing documentation in order. From what we hear, it will be more than the minimum of 10 percent who will be audited.

More about international tax, asset protection and wealth on asset protection

Accrued and capitalised interest

2010-11-25T02:25:00.001-08:00

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

2010-11-24T03:08:00.001-08:00

"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

Collective investment funds: income realised at sale or redemption of fund units

2010-11-23T02:46:00.001-08:00

Guidance Notes vs. 5 - draft vs. 8 - cleaned up version

According to the Savings Directive, "Savings income also arises when units or shares in a collective investment fund are sold to a paying agent (or a receiving agent) or redeemed by the fund. This is analogous to the inclusion of accrued interest in the sale or redemption price of a security (see paragraphs 97 to 103 above).

Savings income only arises under this heading if the fund has invested more than 25% of its assets directly or indirectly (via other collective investment funds or residual entities) in money debts. Up to and including 31 December 2010 the figure was 40% of its assets. This applies to all funds and does not depend on any requirements of the territory in which the fund is established.

A In determining whether a sale or redemption of units or shares in a collective investment fund is reportable under these arrangements the information described at paragraphs 121 – 123 below may be used and relied upon. The paragraphs 118B – below provide additional guidance for particular circumstances if need be.

Where a fund has historically invested more than 40% of its assets in money debts it is unlikely to be affected by the reduction of the percentage to 25% from 1 January 2011 – by definition income realised at sale or redemption will be reportable throughout.

However if a fund under its rules or instrument of incorporation (see 121 below) or actual composition of assets (see 122 below) operates so as not to pass the 40% threshold, it will need to ensure, as soon as practical, after 1 January 2011 that its asset holding in money debts (including holdings of grandfathered bonds) is reduced so as not to pass the 25% threshold if the intention is that it continues to operate so that sales/redemptions will not be reportable under these regulations.

Providing a fund does so reduce its holdings in money debts sales/redemptions will not be reportable as savings income throughout.

In this context a fund will be regarded as having acted as soon as practical if by the start of the first accounting period commencing on or after 1 January 2011 or the 30 April 2011, whichever is the later, its assets in money debts do not pass the lower threshold.

This period should facilitate the necessary changes to be made and enable the fund to operate as it intended.

If the fund has met the old threshold under its rules but decides not to meet the new lower threshold then savings income will arise on a sale/redemption once its assets in money debts pass the 25% threshold."

Guidance Notes vs. 5 - draft vs. 8 - cleaned up version

More information about International Tax on International Tax

NEW ADMISSIONS IN THE PLUS MARKET (LONDON)

2010-11-19T00:32:00.001-08:00

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

2010-11-18T03:38:00.001-08:00

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

2010-11-17T01:22:00.001-08:00

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

2010-11-16T03:34:00.001-08:00

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://foreign-tax.blogspot.com/

International Tax in Venezuela

2009-01-12T19:29:00.000-08:00

The "agency PE" in international taxation at Venezuela.

As happens with regard to the basic rule PE and other PE rules under article 5 of the OECD model, there is little authority dealing with the way the agency PE rule must be interpreted.

Tax treaty practice in Venezuela regarding the agency PE has evolved from the initial tax treaties copying the 1963 OECD model (article 5, paragraph 4), and then the OECD model as amended from 1977 onwards (article 5, paragraph 4) for the agency PE rule, to the use of a variation of the agency PE rule under article 5 paragraph 5.
When it comes to the agency PE, Venezuela has not only copied in its latest tax treaties negotiated article 5 paragraph 5(b) of the UN model but it has included an additional paragraph under which there is an agency PE if the agent or representative habitually handles or secures customer requests - purchases - wholly or almost wholly on behalf of the enterprise (this would be the case with the tax treaties with Indonesia and Norway).

Furthermore, when it comes to identifying an independent agent, most recent treaties use a variation of article 5, paragraph 7 of the UN model, under which "when the activities of such an agent are devoted wholly or almost wholly on behalf of that enterprise" the agent will not be considered an agent of independent status (that is the case for 12 of the tax treaties in place). However, only two of the Venezuelan tax treaties containing this type of deeming provision adopt the conditioning rule that the conditions made or imposed between the enterprise and the agent in their commercial and financial relations differ from those which would have been made between independent parties.

Under this framework, there is a single ruling referring to the agency PE, and only in an incidental manner. The guidance is contained in advisory letter ruling no. DCR-S-35773-6545 dated 20 August 2007 dealing with services rendered to a third party under an EPC contract structure by means of which a Chinese corporation rendered part of the services from overseas (including engineering and procurement) and its affiliate in Venezuela carried out the services in Venezuela (local procurement and construction). SENIAT, in applying the tax treaty with China, singled out the possibility that in an EPC contract a PE arises "where a person acts on behalf of an enterprise and has and habitually exercises in a Contracting State (Venezuela for the case at hand) an authority to accept [conclude] contracts in the name of the non-domiciled enterprise ... provided the same is not a broker, general commission agent or any other agent of an independent status ..."

Nevertheless, the ruling did not expand in interpreting for the particular case - the tax authority simply indicated that it did not know the facts well enough to identify whether there was a PE - the basis for considering whether the agent was an independent agent in light of the rule covered in the tax treaty with China, according to which "the activities of such an agent are devoted wholly or almost wholly on behalf of that enterprise".

In any case, while at first glance the reference may not seem to add much to the wording under the treaty, it may be relevant if taken against the backdrop of the domestic tax law definition of PE.

Article 7 of the Venezuelan Income Tax Law (VITL) conveys a very broad agency PE rule under which characterization is not conditional to the authority of the agent - person - to involve the enterprise in business activities in Venezuela, nor does it require that there is an authority to conclude contracts in the name of the enterprise or that the authority is exercised habitually; furthermore, the independent agent exception under article 7 VITL does not apply to otherwise independent agents, such as a broker or general commission agent, who have the power to conclude contracts in the name of the principal.

The provision seems to confuse the independent nature of the agency with the ability to conclude contracts in the name of the principal. This confusion may be the result of consistent case law in commercial and tax matters dealing with agency agreements where a line has been drawn between a disclosed agency - where the agent performs in the name and on behalf of the principal - and non-disclosed agency or commissionaire arrangements - where the agent performs in its own name but on behalf of its principal.

This confusion may translate into the interpretation of the tax treaty expression "agent of an independent status" as per domestic tax and commercial law statutory provisions as they have been interpreted so far, under which when there is legal independence of the agent, i.e. it is a broker or a commissionaire acting on behalf of the enterprise but not in its name, then it will be considered independent.
In this sense, practice has evidenced that a commissionaire agent or broker are commonly considered to perform as independent agents from a commercial stance and hence from a tax viewpoint, and there is no evidence that economic and legal factors referred to in the OECD model commentaries are followed in identifying the independent status of an agent.

In any case, as referred to earlier in this report, SENIAT has relied from time to time on the OECD model commentaries and therefore it would not be unimaginable that sooner rather than later it may attempt to apply some of the economic and legal factors covered in the commentaries to identify an independent agent status. In this scenario, a discussion is likely to take place as to the application of article 3(2) of the corresponding tax treaty.

International Law Firm

2003-08-12T05:56:00.000-07:00

International Law Firm

International Law Firm

International Law Firm