BAHAMAS PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS – REVIEWED

The Bahamas introduced its foundation law in 2004, following a detailed review of Foundations’ legislation in comparable jurisdictions:- The authors of the Bahamas Foundations legislation took into account the specific requirements of Private Clients and their need to exercise a degree of control which a Trust may not permit.

 

Foundations have been used for the past 100 years. Their use in international tax and asset protection planning began in Liechtenstein in the late 1930s, moved to other European countries in subsequent years and more recently to Panama, Belize, Nevis, Mauritius, Anguilla, Seychelles and the Netherlands Antilles. Their most active initial use was to provide protection for assets as well as confidentiality during the Second World War. Foundations have since become well-known and acceptable in many civil law jurisdictions, especially those located in Europe and Latin America, where Trusts are less well known.

 

Uses of Foundations

 

Common uses for Private Foundations include:

  • Tax and estate planning
  • Asset protection planning
  • Maintenance of corporate control
  • Assistance to charities
  • Separation of voting and economic benefits in investment holding companies
  • Ownership of Private Trust Companies
  • Operation of employee share option schemes
  • Holding assets off-balance sheet in connection with the securitisation of mortgage

 

Bahamas Foundations Legislation Summary

 

A Bahamas Foundation is a registered legal entity. Assets placed within the foundation are solely owned by the foundation.

 

Bahamas anti-forced heirship rules apply to transfers to a Bahamas Foundation.

A Bahamas Foundation can be established for either an indefinite period or for a fixed period.

 

A Bahamas Foundation can be established for charitable, commercial or private purposes.

 

The Founder can be an individual, a corporation or a Nominee.

 

The establishment of the Foundation becomes effective after all registration formalities have been completed.

 

The Founder may reserve certain powers. Alternatively, the law provides for the Foundation to have a Protector in whom powers can be vested in the event that a Nominee Founder is used.

 

One natural person must also be appointed as an Officer of the Foundation in addition to its Secretary.

 

A Foundation Council, or an alternative supervisory or governing body/person, including a Protector, can be appointed.

 

Vested Beneficiaries of a Bahamas Foundation must be notified of their interest and will be entitled to request information from the Officers of the Foundation.

 

Proper records and accounts must be kept by the Officers of the Foundation which can be inspected by an Officer, Foundation Council Member, Founder, auditor or any other supervisory person (e.g. Protector) at any time.

 

Confidentiality provisions restrict any person acquiring information in his capacity as an Officer, Protector, Council Member, Attorney or Auditor of the Foundation from disclosing information relating to the Foundation without the express consent of the Founder and Beneficiaries.

 

A Bahamas Foundation has the ability to re-domicile to another jurisdiction. Similarly, a Foreign Foundation can redomicile to and become a registered Bahamas Foundation

 

Bahamas Foundation Registration

 

The registration process for a Foundation in Bahamas is comparable to that for a Bahamas company – The Foundation is registered with the Registrar General’s Office and the name of the Foundation must first be reserved at the Registrar prior to the submission of the necessary documentation. The Registrar will confirm that the foundation name is valid for use and has been reserved for a period of 90 days.

 

After the Foundation name has been reserved the required documentation must be submitted to the Registrar.

 

Required Documentation for a Foundation

 

  1. An application for registration
  2. A statement signed by the Secretary of the Foundation or any Attorney engaged to form the Foundation which contains extracts from the Charter of the Foundation as follows:

• Name of the Foundation

• Date of Charter and Articles (if any)

• Summary of the Foundation’s purposes

• Name and address in the Bahamas of the Foundation for service of documents

• Name and address of the Secretary

• Name and address of the Foundation Council

• Address of Registered Office

• Value of initial assets, and

• Period for which the Foundation will be active ––A list of the name(s) and address(es) of the Officer(s) of the Foundation

 

3. A statutory declaration certifying to the Registrar that:

• The Foundation Charter contains a statement that the value of the assets of the Foundation may not be less than US$10,000 or the equivalent in any other currency.

• All of the requirements of the Foundations Act in respect of the registration of the foundation have been complied with.

 

The Foundation Charter or Articles may, but need not, be filed with the Registrar to complete the registration process.

 

After the documentation is accepted by the Registrar, a Certificate of Registration will then be issued specifying the name and number of the Foundation and stating that the Foundation has been registered in accordance with the provisions of the Bahamas Foundations Act, 2004: – At that stage the Foundation will be regarded as a registered entity and can carry on its business as outlined by the Charter.

 

OCI can assist to set up and administer your Bahamas Foundation. Cost would be:

 

Set up including First years basic admin: $US3,450

From 2nd year $1,800

 

Would you like to know more? Then please Contact Us:

 

www.offshoreincorporate.com

 

info@offshorecompaniesinternational.com

 

ocil@protonmail.com

 

oci@tutanota.com

 

oci@safe-mail.net

 

ociceo@hushmail.com

 

DISCLAIMER: OCI is a Company/Trust/LLC/LP/Foundation Formation Agency. We are not tax advisers or legal advisers. You are advised to seek local legal/tax/financial advice in regards to your local reporting/tax requirements before committing to set up or use an Offshore Company or other entity.

 

Bahamas International Business Companies

The Bahamas, a former British colony independently governed since 1973, comprises of an area of ocean across a 1,225 km arc from 78 km east of Palm Beach, Florida, to just north of Haiti and is made up of an archipelago of nearly 700 islands and 2,400 cays. It is an ideal location for individuals and businesses looking for an Incorporation location that offers tax benefits, a solid name and confidentiality. (The Bahamas has been an active and well respected International Offshore Financial Centre since the 1930s).

 

Financial Services is a key economic pillar of the country plan contributing roughly 20% of Bahamas GDP. The Bahamas have aggressively promoted the islands as an international financial center and the business and professional sectors are finely attuned to the needs of the offshore sector.

 

There is no income tax in the Bahamas, nor are there capital gains, VAT or Sales tax. As such, the Bahamas is an attractive jurisdiction from which to conduct international business/trade. Moreover with a solid reputation, the Bahamas offshore company is globally accepted and highly regarded.

 

Investors choose to conduct offshore/international business through the offshore corporation, more formally known as the Bahamas International Business Company, IBC. There are other Bahamas companies that can be used for offshore activities, but the Bahamas offshore company (IBC) is the most popular and most popular company launching, comparable to a Panama SA Company. Generally, the Bahamas offshore company takes on the form of a private company (limited by shares).

 

The current legislation governing the Bahamas IBC is the International Business Companies Act 1989 (as amended).

 

Applicable Tax Rates:

 

  1. Corporate tax rate – 0%;
  2. Personal income tax – 0%;
  3. VAT rate – (7.5%-12%);
  4. No inheritance, capital gains and estate tax;

 

All Bahamas offshore companies are exempt from foreign exchange controls, stamp duties and other local taxes. Another attractive benefit the Bahamas provides for foreigners is tax exemption to both the corporation and its shareholders for twenty years after the process of incorporation is complete.

 

Bahamas offshore corporations may be managed and operated from within the Bahamas, which is unlike other offshore companies from other jurisdictions. Further, the Bahamas IBC is allowed to invest and own interest in other Bahamas Companies.

 

There are limitations and restrictions for the Bahamas offshore company are similar to other offshore corporations in that the Bahamas IBC must have a Bahamas registered agent. The Bahamas International Corporation cannot do any business in Bahamas, or with Bahamas residents. The Bahamas Company may not own or have any ownership interest in Bahamas property.

 

Key Features Include:

  • The Bahamas is a pure tax haven and has no direct taxation in the form of income tax, capital gains tax, gift tax or inheritance tax
  • International Business Companies are not subject to exchange controls
  • No minimum paid up capital required in order to complete registration
  • Only one director and one shareholder are required, both of whom can be foreigners and need not reside in the Bahamas
  • Incorporation is fairly quick and can typically be completed within 2 to 5 days
  • The Bahamas has excellent communications. There are direct flights from Europe as well as many US cities. Miami is only 30 minutes away and New York is less than three hours away
  • The official and spoken language is English
  • Shares for Bahamas Company may be issued in any legal tender, and must be registered
  • No requirement to file annual returns or financial statements.

 

Other features Include:

 

– Bearer shares are not permitted.

– Registered shares can be held in nominee form.

– Exemption of company and Shareholders from all Bahamian taxes and duties.

– Board meetings can be held anywhere in the world and can be conducted by telephone.

– Purchase and ownership by the company of its own shares is permitted.

– Statutory power is given to IBCs to engage in any lawful activity.

– Corporate domicile can be changed to another jurisdiction.

– The word Limited, Corporation, Incorporated,Société Anonyme, Gesellschaft mit beschrankter Haftung, Sociedad Anónima or the abbreviations “Ltd”, “Corp”, “Inc”, GmbH” or “S.A.” can be used in a company’s name to denote limited liability.

– Amendments to the Memorandum and Articles of Association can be easily made.

– The Board of Directors can determine, by resolution, the rights attaching to classes of shares.

– IBCs can conduct business with Bahamians directly and may also own Bahamian real estate, but will in these cases be subject to local exchange controls and stamp duty.

– Details of the Directors and Officers of an IBC must be filed with the Registrar and are open to public inspection (though Nominees can be deployed) – Incorporation under the Act is straightforward and can normally be completed in two to three days.

– Company names can be reserved by telephone or fax.

– A company is deemed incorporated on the day incorporation papers are filed with the Registrar of Companies. The certificate of incorporation is issued shortly after the filing of incorporation papers and payment of the relevant government fee. – Shelf companies are available for immediate delivery.

 

Benefits of Incorporating in the Bahamas:

  1. Politically stable, very reputable jurisdiction
  2. Favourable tax jurisdiction
  3. Details of shareholders and beneficiaries are not available to the public
  4. No minimum capital requirements
  5. Minimum requirement of only 1 shareholder and 1 director
  6. Legal system based on English Common law
  7. No currency control.

 

Set up etc Costs

 

To incorporate a Bahamas Company with OCI will cost as follows:

  • Incorporation $US950 (including Applying to Registrar for up to three alternative names, preparing and filing of two copies of memorandum and articles of association, confirming incorporation, preparation of subscriber’s minutes to appoint first Directors, provision of special IBC company register, forwarding of original and three certified copies of original Memorandum and Articles, general correspondence and communication with instructing party in respect of the above as well as filing the Record Keeping Declaration with The Bahamas Registry).
  • Annual Registered Agent & Registered Office $900 The annual fee is payable in advance and includes: Acting as Registered Agent, Provision of Registered Office, Filing of Annual Licence Return
  • Government Incorporation Fee $430
  • Government Name Reservation Fee $25
  • Disbursements $245 (Corporate seal, photocopying, courier and telephone etc)

 

Total: $2550

 

OCI Bahamas IBC Services

 

At OCI we believe in giving you more for your money than would the average IBC formation service. Hence also included in the incorporation package for your Bahamas Company is the following:

 

Services:

 

  • Advice from an experienced International Corporate Lawyer on how to structure your company
  • Preparation (overseen by a lawyer) of application to incorporate the company
  • Preparation (overseen by a lawyer) of the company’s memorandum of association
  • Preparation (overseen by a lawyer) of the company’s articles of association
  • Attending to filing incorporation request with the company registry
  • Attending to payment of government filing fees
  • One year’s Registered Agent service in the country of incorporation
  • One year’s Registered Office service in the country of incorporation
  • Mailing address in the country of incorporation
  • Delivery of Incorp pack by international courier (ie DHL/Fedex/TNT etc)
  • Unlimited free legal consultations for 12 months

 

Documents included in your Incorp pack:

 

  • Certificate of incorporation
  • 2 sealed/stamped copies of the company’s Memorandum of Association
  • 2 sealed/stamped copies of the company’s Articles of Association
  • Resolution appointing first director/s
  • Resolution appointing first shareholder/s
  • Up to 5 share certificates
  • Resolution to open a bank account
  • Resolution to rent an office
  • Resolution/s to engage a Phone, Internet & Website service provider
  • Resolution to hire a staff member/s
  • Resolution to appoint a company lawyer
  • Resolution to appoint a company accountant
  • Resolution appointing you as the company’s authorised representative in commercial negotiations
  • Resolution issuing a Power of Attorney in your favour
  • Agreement authorising you to represent the company in commercial negotiations
  • Power of attorney authorising you to sign documents on behalf of the company
  • Register of directors
  • Register of shareholders
  • Expression of wishes (ie an “Offshore” Will)
  • Lawyer authored User Guide (“How to Use Your Offshore Company”)

 

Full  Nominees Package (ie including Professional Corporate “Nominee” Director, Shareholder & Company Secretary): + $400 p/a.

 

Every effort has been made to ensure that the details contained herein are correct and up-to-date, but this does not constitute legal, taxation, financial or other professional advice. We do not accept any responsibility, legal or otherwise, for any error or omission.

 

Would you like to know more? Then please Contact Us:

 

www.offshoreincorporate.com

 

info@offshorecompaniesinternational.com

 

ocil@protonmail.com

 

oci@tutanota.com

 

oci@safe-mail.net

 

ociceo@hushmail.com

 

DISCLAIMER: OCI is a Company/Trust/LLC/LP/Foundation Formation Agency. We are not tax advisers or legal advisers. You are advised to seek local legal/tax/financial advice in regards to your local reporting/tax requirements before committing to set up or use an Offshore Company or other entity.

 

 

Belize IBC & LLC s – New Compliance & Etc Requirements

The Belize Legislature has passed into law*certain Compliance changes as regards Belize Incorporated IBCs. In this Article we will discuss the details, the impacts and the options.

 

To begin with there are now a number of new documents that must be collated. These are the items that we must meet/collect for each company:

 

  • IPAG (Intellectual Property Assets Grandfathering Program form) – to be done by all companies incorporated before January 2019.
  • IP Declaration form – to be done by all companies incorporated on or before 16 October 2017.
  • TIN application form (Tax Identification Number) – all companies
  • Economic Substance Reportingform – depends on what kind of activity the company is engaged in
    • Form B – Included entities, which are those companies engaged in a relevant activity (banking business; insurance business; fund management business; financing and leasing business; headquarters business; distribution and service center business; shipping business; as a holding company, engaged, or where one or more of its subsidiaries is engaged in one of the relevant activities stated.)
    • Form C -  Pure Equity Holding Companies, which are companies which only hold equity participations and earn only dividends and capital gains or related incidental income
    • Form D – Non-included entities, which are those companies not engaged in a relevant activity
    • IBC Tax Return– to be submitted by all companies before 31 March 2022 (except those companies that apply for tax exemption)
      • a company that was incorporated prior to 16 October 2017 must submit a tax return to reflect gross receipts (gross revenue) earned between 1 July 2021 – 31 December 2021.
      • A company was incorporated on or after 17 October 2017 must submit 2 tax returns. One to reflect gross receipt for all of 2020 and another for 2021.
      • Tax Exemption – a company (except an included entity or a PEHC) may apply for tax exemption by completing Form E and the Annual Confirmation of Tax Exemption form. It is advised that companies apply for tax exemption before 31 March 2022. Note, this application captures the tax jurisdiction of the ubo. This information will be shared by our authority with said tax jurisdiction.
      • Tax Exemption – a company that is a registered tax resident in another jurisdiction (not blacklisted by EU) may apply for tax exempt status by submitting an Information Return form and supporting evidence of its tax residence outside of Belize.

 

Tax rates:

BusinessActivity Tax Rate
Trade or Business 1.75%
Professional Services 6.0%
Commissions (if revenue is less than US $12,500) 5.0%
Commissions (if revenue is  US $12,500 and above) 15.0%
Rental Income 3.0%
Long Term Lease – Real Estate 1.75%
Radio, On-air 0TV, Newspaper Revenue 0.75%
Domestic Airline Revenue 1.75%
Insurance Institutions General Revenue 1.75%
Telecommunications Revenue 19.0%
Fuel/lubricant Revenue 0.75%
Tour operators and Travel agents 6.0%
Real Estate Business – Real Estate Broker and Agents, earning Commissions 15.0%
Real Estate Business – real estate sales, developers, condominium owners and fractional Interest, Long term Leases, Time Share operators 1.75%
Foreign sourced Income: Dividends/Interest/Royalties 5.0%
Annual Net Gain 5.0%
Pure Equity Holding Company, Holding Company not engaged in a relevant activity 0%

 

BELIZE COMPLIANCE CHANGES – YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED

 

What are the set up and annual Compliance/reporting tax payable requirements in Belize for a new Belize IBC?

  1. Consider the activity. If the company is a relevant activity, then economic substance must materialize as soon as possible.
  2. TIN. All companies (does not matter what activity) must apply for a TIN.
  3. Preferably at anniversary of incorporation, the company must file ES forms. (B,C,D)
  4. By 31 March every year, the company must file a tax return. OR it must apply for tax exemption (if it is not engaged in a relevant activity)
  5. Usual annual renewal fees apply, no late penalties. However, it must be paid before any other filing service or request of the registry is done.
  6. KYC (passport, utility bill)

 

What are the set up and annual Compliance/reporting tax payable requirements in Belize for a new Belize LLC?

No changes to LLCs. Not included in ES legislation. No tax.

 

What kind of business can a new IBC do as of right? What kind of business can a new IBC NOT do as of right?

IBC can do any business except IP business (holding IP etc.). Relevant activities require economic substance.

 

What kind of business can a new LLC do as of right? What kind of business can a new IBC NOT do as of right?

An LLC can do any business not prohibited by law.  LLCs can hold IP assets.

 

What kind of assets can a new IBC hold? What kind of assets can a new IBC NOT hold? An IBC cannot hold any IP Assets.

 

What kind of assets can a new LLC hold? What kind of assets can a new LLC NOT hold?

No restriction.

 

The Belize LLC – Under the Microscope

 

Simply put, moving forward, it would appear that the preferred Corporate Vehicle for anyone looking to incorporate in Belize would be an LLC.

 

An LLC (Limited Liability Corporation) is, effectively, a hybrid of a Limited Company and a Partnership.

 

It’s like a Company in that that liability of the Company is limited to the capital invested and assets purchased by the Company.

 

Like a partnership it’s a flow through entity: An LLC does not have to file a tax return; the nett profits are passed through to the members of the LLC (members are to an LLC what shareholders are to a Limited Company) who are responsible for taxes (if applicable) in their country of tax residence. (ie same tax treatment as partners in the case of a Partnership).

 

From a member/partner’s perspective an LLC is superior from a liability perspective to a Limited Partnership (“LP”) because in the case of a Limited Partnership (which is constituted by a Limited Partner and a General Partner) one partner can be made liable for the debts of the partnership. In the case of an LLC the liability of the members is limited to the extent of the member’s capital contribution (unless a personal guarantee has been given by a member to a supplier of the LLC).

 

LLC members can fully participate in the management of the LLC (which is different to an LP – in the case of an LP the Limited Partner usually can’t participate in the management of the enterprise without risking his/her Limited Liability status).

 

Key Benefits include:

         Privacy: There is no public register of owners/members or Directors/Managers in Belize

         Tax Effectiveness: Belize LLCs are not liable to corporate or business or any other form of tax in Belize

         Simplicity: There is no requirement in Belize to prepare annual accounts or appoint an auditor

         Flexibility: Belize LLCs can be used to own/operate a wide range of businesses as of right

         Asset Protection: Before you can sue a Belize LLC you have to pay a deposit being an amount equal to the greater of (i) one half of the amount claimed or $US50,000 whichever is the greater

 

Other features of the Belize LLC Law include:

 

  1. A Belize LLC:

(a)    can be structured according to its own rules rather than being dictated to by statute

(b)   is a legal entity with separate rights and liabilities distinct from its members & managers. (This means noone other than the LLC itself can be made liable for the debts of the LLC)

(c)    Somebody suing a Belize LLC member at best can only have the members rights assigned to him; he can’t participate in the management of the LLC

  1. Belize doesn’t recognize foreign judgments. Only a judgment made by a Belize Court can be given against a Belize LLC
  2. LLCs from other jurisdictions can migrate to Belize and vice versa (ie a Belize LLC can redomicile and become eg a Nevis LLC)
  3. Civil legal proceedings against a Belize LLC must be held in private (and there are penalties for unauthorised disclosure).

 

Set Up cost: $UD1,200 From 2nd year $890

 

Would you like to know more? Then please Contact Us:

 

www.offshoreincorporate.com

 

info@offshorecompaniesinternational.com

 

ocil@protonmail.com

 

oci@tutanota.com

 

oci@safe-mail.net

 

ociceo@hushmail.com

 

DISCLAIMER: OCI is a Company/Trust/LLC/LP/Foundation Formation Agency. We are not tax advisers or legal advisers. You are advised to seek local legal/tax/financial advice in regards to your local reporting/tax requirements before committing to set up or use an Offshore Company or other entity.

*Information current as at 3 March 2022

 

 

 

Wyoming DAO LLCs

Are you looking to form a DAO?

 

A decentralized autonomous organization, or a “DAO,” is a Blockchain based “organization” encoded as a transparent computer program, controlled by the organization members rather than by any outside entity or authority.

 

Without incorporating a DAO looks like a Club or Partnership ie an unincorporated association wherein each of the members is jointly and severally liable in the event that the DAO is successfully sued pr incurs some other liability.

 

In order to ensure that the members can avoid personal liability – and so that the liability of the group collectively might be Limited – it is submitted that the preferred legal structure for most DAOs would be to incorporate as a Company.

 

Why Incorporate a DAO LLC?

 

It is anticipated that most DAOs will want to incorporate as a Company. As things presently stand the Wyoming DAO LLC would appear to be the most flexible vehicle for such purposes.

 

A DAO LLC is a type of limited liability company (LLC) in which there is no single commanding body behind decisions. All decisions are made by majority vote by either those who have invested in the organization or through a computer algorithm, depending on the type of DAO. A DAO effectively runs itself based on a set of rules that are implemented upon its creation and then updated by either stakeholders of the organization or by an algorithm over time.

 

A DAO completes actions through a series of “smart contracts”, which are different from traditional legal contracts in that they exist and operate autonomously through the internet without need for manual human action. Despite this autonomy, there are still some actions a DAO cannot complete autonomously, for example some interactions with the legal system.

 

This autonomous action allows for a DAO system to operate outside of the administrative structure of a traditional organization. Instead of top-down management, every member has an equal part in deciding the action of the organization, or all management can be conducted by a computer program outside the control of the establishing party. In either case, no single person or party makes decisions within the DAO.

 

This has both advantages and disadvantages in the efficiency of decision making. Being more responsive to the needs of stakeholders is a common advantage when a DAO is managed by a group, but is often met with potential for less-informed and slower changes. When managed by an algorithm, it is possible for mistakes to be made that a human would not, but this often comes with the benefit of increased objectiveness and success-oriented action. It is important to note that although a DAO LLC is technically still an LLC, the operations of the two vary drastically in practice.

 

Creation of a DAO LLC

 

A DAO LLC is formed very similarly to a traditional LLC, with the primary difference being the two new steps of establishing the rules behind the DAO and funding the DAO prior to it becoming operational.

 

Establishing the rules involves deciding how the DAO will operate at the time of the formation and, although this can be changed later on, doing so often involves significant action from stakeholders.

 

Funding the DAO involves creating a token which represents and tracks the investments of stakeholders in the DAO, and is a way for stakeholders to participate in and influence the actions of the DAO.

 

DAO’s are not controlled by any single entity; although there must be an entity to create the DAO, this founder does not control the DAO after its creation. Although it is common for the founder of a DAO to participate in said DAO by contributing to the initial funding, this is not necessary. It is possible for a founder to create a DAO, but have no part in the management of said DAO following its creation.

 

Because DAO’s rely heavily on the initial ruleset implemented during formation, it is extremely important that the code behind this rule set is carefully written and that all potential bugs and security flaws are fixed before the system is deployed. Having a strong initial base for the DAO is essential to the success of the DAO moving forwards.

 

OCI Wyoming DAO LLC Formation Services

 

Decentralized autonomous organizations are completely legal, however as with all new technologies, DAO’s are subject to significant changes in regulation. Current Wyoming legislation under Bill-SF0038 (effective 07/01/2021) dictates that the management of a DAO LLC has many of the same requirements of traditional LLC’s, with some additional criteria for the more complex management structure and backend required for its operation.

 

A Wyoming DAO LLC can be formed quickly, correctly and inexpensively.  We charge $US1,500 and it includes the following:

  • Option To Select Member Managed or Algorithmically Managed Structure
  • Inclusion of Publicly Available Identifier of Any Smart Contract Directly Used to Manage, Facilitate, or Operate the DAO in Articles of Organization As Required by Law
  • Anonymous Filing of Articles of Organization Which Meet All Legal Requirements
  • For Member Managed DAO, Operating Agreement Which Meets All Legal Requirements
  • Resignation of Organizer Document
  • 1st Year of Registered Agent Services As Required By Wyoming Law
  • 5 Pieces of Mail Scanning
  • Free Use of Our Address

 

NOTE: This option should ONLY be used by seasoned blockchain entrepreneurs with prior experience creating DAOs and Smart Contracts who are seeking to add the protections of Wyoming limited liability protections.

 

Would you like to know more? Then please Contact Us:

 

www.offshoreincorporate.com

 

info@offshorecompaniesinternational.com

 

ocil@protonmail.com

 

oci@tutanota.com

 

oci@safe-mail.net

 

ociceo@hushmail.com

 

DISCLAIMER: OCI is a Company/Trust/LLC/LP/Foundation Formation Agency. We are not tax advisers or legal advisers. You are advised to seek local legal/tax/financial advice in regards to your local reporting/tax requirements before committing to set up or use an Offshore Company or other entity.

 

How & Where To Set Up a DAO

A decentralized autonomous organization, or a “DAO,” is a Blockchain based “organization” encoded as a transparent computer program, controlled by the organization members rather than by any outside entity or authority.

 

Distributed-ledger technology is probably the most discussed innovation in the digital transformation of the economy and society. With features such as decentralization, reliability, and anti-counterfeiting, it opens up a broad field of innovative applications and completely new forms of cooperation.

 

Although developments often focus on payment systems and other financial instruments, large blockchain-based ecosystems and projects point to a development in which online groups coordinate at eye level and possibly pseudonymously, relying exclusively or entirely on software. These digitally resident/created decentralized organizations – that operate autonomously without traditional leadership and hierarchy – have come to be known as Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs).

 

Prelim

 

A DAO is a Blockchain structure (like a secure database), that any member can leverage to self-govern through participation; A DAO sets rules – baked into code – and permits voting through digital tokens (a form of cryptocurrency) — all while leveraging smart contracts. Only that DAO’s Token holders have the power to vote.

 

In essence, a DAO allows groups of participants to create organizational forms beyond the hierarchical, top-down corporate firm (which must be responsive to the needs of a board and shareholders). DAOs essentially eliminate or minimize the roles of executives and managers in the organization, relying instead on transparent rules that apply to all members and participants

 

How does a DAO work?

 

The primary aim behind the creation of a DAO is to create a virtual entity to replace the central management of previous forms of organization. A decentralized autonomous organization (DAO), is an organization, particularized by rules encoded as a computer program, that is transparent, and controlled by the organization members. In terms of decision making a DAO is, in effect, unable to be influenced by any outside party including any central government.

 

DAOs are particularly prevalent in the Ethereum blockchain ecosystem, combining ideas about organizational forms, coordination, network effects, blockchain, and smart contract technology. A DAO allows a group to organize around a mission or goal and to coordinate the mission via smart contracts, enforced immutably and autonomously on the blockchain. DAOs represent an evolution in how people coordinate with one another, as the organization itself is autonomous from any third party intermediary’s influence and goals.

 

The main reason a DAO is formed is to decentralize and automate the governance of an organization. The rules by which a DAO operates are encoded as a computer program that is accessible via the blockchain, and controlled by all of the organizing members, rather than by a central governing board. Since the blockchain is essentially a public record, the DAO seeks to provide total transparency, requiring that all of its financial transaction records be recorded by a public facing blockchain. There is no top-down hierarchal structure to a DAO; A DAO depends almost entirely on the operation of autonomous smart contracts to enliven the rules and carry out the decisions made by/within the organization.

 

Tokens

 

Typically, tokens (a random cryptocurrency) are used to govern a DAO, and provide voting and decision-making power to participants, with greater power being given to those with more tokens.

 

A DAO is in effect a cooperative association which has a stated purpose and a plan to execute decisions via code. (For example the intended purpose of a DAO could be to win a Sotheby’s auction and retain an original copy of the US Constitution). Also stipulated in the DAO is its governance — for example (if it wins the auction) where does the community want the document to be stored or displayed?

 

In effect a DAO is a new form of scalable, open, self-organized network that is coordinated by crypto-economic incentives as well as by self-executing code on the blockchain that enables the participants to achieve common goals.3

 

Forming a DAO as your core business structure provides for a number of advantages including:

 

  • making it easier to attract investors
  • limits short-termed speculation
  • allows for a democratic approach to asset management;

 

Business Structure

 

The precise legal status of this type of business organization (ia a/the DAO) is unclear.

 

Traditional business structures (eg Companies Limited by shares) are focussed on limiting liability in the event of commercial failure or law suits, perpetual succession and/or on providing tax benefits. The uncertainty surrounding the legal status of a typical DAO creates potential legal exposure, leaving open questions, such as, whether or not DAO owners are unlimitedly, directly and personally liable for all financial obligations, debts, and taxes incurred by the DAO, and/or in respect of legal action taken against the DAO.

 

Furthermore, it is not clear as to whether or not a DAO would even be legally recognized by a court of law. As such, if a court determines that a DAO is not a legally recognized business structure, then that DAO would simply be considered a general partnership, and all members of the DAO would share unlimited, direct personal liability to all debt and legal actions taken against the partnership.

 

Legal Status?

 

DAOs represent a unique opportunity and challenge today as they are rapidly evolving into a new class of organization. DAOs are reminiscent of cooperatives (co-ops) in many ways, albeit with an expanded set of abilities enabled by the decentralized and transparent nature of the blockchain combined with automatically executing smart contract logic. The transparency of DAOs is one of their main benefits, since all of the actions and funding in DAOs are viewable by anyone. This significantly reduces the risk of corruption and censorship. The transactions undergone by a DAO are individually visible at any time, whilst also protecting the anonymity of their members through cryptography.

 

DAOs also have low barriers of entry and exist in contrast to traditional hierarchical firms. While this can be a definite plus for fluidity and flexibility of DAO organization, it can also represent a unique challenge as successful DAOs need to have attractive incentivization structures and keep rent-seeking activities low to retain membership.

 

Flexibility

 

DAOs have a key differential in their structure from the hierarchical firm in that they are decentralized, consisting of many autonomous individuals and small teams that take responsibility for their own goals and determine their own forms of governance. Static job descriptions are replaced by a fluidity of roles, where members are allowed to opt in or out as they see fit. The fluidity of roles and ease of entering and exiting DAOs can be a large boon as well as a challenge.

 

Without the same structure as a firm locking people into certain roles, the game theoretic incentives that keep members participating become increasingly important. A DAO that does not end up structuring its smart contracts and coordination mechanisms in a way that incentivizes and benefits the members faces challenges from a DAO that has a more positive benefit structure for all of its members.

 

A crucial part of the structure within DAOs that helps with this issue are the autonomous groups that often form within it, to pursue objectives tangential and related to the overarching mission of the DAO. In many current DAOs, these small teams are often called “guilds,” reminiscent not only of medieval crafting associations, but from the squad-like entities born of modern massively multiplayer online games (MMOGs).

 

The gamification of interaction in DAOs is an important part of how DAOs function, as game theoretic incentives allow DAOs to build inner structures that reward members and encourage positive participation. These incentives also foster a sense of individual and cooperative ownership in the efforts that fulfill the objectives of the DAO. These incentives are not only in the positive feeling members get for participating and furthering the goals of an organization they participate and believe in, but there can also be direct financial incentives through ERC-20 tokens, or non-fungible tokens (NFTs). The renumeration isn’t always financial though, as the NFTs that a DAO generates for its activities or to reward members are often a key piece in establishing a communal identity within the overarching DAO itself.

 

The ability of members to decentralize and formulate rapidly executing autonomous groups within DAOs, while also adhering to the central mission of the DAO, allow powerful network effects to begin to accumulate, as a DAO itself becomes an organization of organizations. This is where DAOs begin to separate from traditional co-ops in definition (although not entirely), and the organization itself begins to become an aggregate entity that members not only participate ii, but actively vote on and govern to create maximally beneficial rules for the participants.

 

Smart Contracts

 

Crucial to how DAOs function are smart contracts, which, (for the purposes of this article), we will be focusing on within the context of the Ethereum Ecosystem.

 

A smart contract is a directly executing computer program on a blockchain that can represent many different things, from agreements between two persons, to guaranteed execution of funding proposals, to even complex governing structures that cannot be censored. In the context of DAOs, smart contracts enable the rules of how a DAO functions to be executed without interference, and without the necessity of including a trusted third party to make sure that agreements are carried out.

 

DAOs take advantage of this in many ways, including how members are automatically paid for their efforts, how proposals are voted on and enacted, and even how the agreements of the DAO are audited. All smart contracts will execute and are all available openly to be viewed on the blockchain. This powerful transparency takes us to a point where you simply cannot structure a DAO that has perverse incentives going against the best interests of the members, as they can simply view it in real time, and due to low switching costs, leave the DAO for more appealing opportunities.

 

It should also be noted that while many DAO’s are for-profit organizations, they also can be set up as non-profit organizations to aggregate capital and fund specific projects (environmental, charitable, housing, social, etc.) based on the votes of the members.

 

Bankless DAO

 

A prime example of a rapidly evolving DAO is Bankless DAO, formed as a decentralized community to “help the world go bankless.” This DAO aims to accomplish its mission by forming a decentralized community to coordinate together and “propagate bankless media, culture and education. Its goal is to drive adoption and awareness of truly bankless money systems like Ethereum, DeFi, and Bitcoin”.

 

The Bankless DAO works towards its key aim/s through the collective participation of its community; A native governance token allows members voting rights in proposals for the DAO and funds a community treasury for the pursuance of the goals of the Bankless DAO. Members are free to organize into guilds and pursue whatever sub-goals they see fit in accomplishing the main mission of the DAO. These autonomous groups within the overarching group are a key aspect of the organizational strength and evolving coordination abilities of how DAOs seek the accomplishment of their objectives.

 

Autonomy

 

DAOs are autonomous in the sense that they are unable to be corrupted by an outside groups objective, as the coordination and incentivization layer is the Blockchain that the DAO uses for coordinating its objectives. This is a critically important piece in the evolution of coordination, as third-party influences do not end up co-opting the goals of the DAO, and it remains “autonomous” in the sense that the DAO fulfills the accomplishment of whatever goals the members select without third party input or influence.

 

While DAOs at a high level represent an evolution in how human beings organize and coordinate, at a lower level they are simply an extension of many related web3 and blockchain technologies. Digital assets allow ownership of fungible and non-fungible goods to be tokenized. Besides the many cryptocurrencies we have seen rise over the past decade, lately there has been an explosion in NFTs ie Non-Fungible Tokens, (where each token is not a 1 to 1 exchange for another).

 

Importantly, participation in a DAO can be tokenized, and members granted voting rights and incentives based on what tokens they hold. As tokens are all smart contracts, the way DAOs are governed can be programmed and voted on by their participants. Smart contracts run immutably on the blockchain and are censorship resistant. This means that 3rd parties can’t arbitrarily change the rules to their benefit, and members can know that voting proposals within a DAO will execute autonomously of human intervention.

 

The Coordination Evolution

 

As an extension of the many different technologies humanity has been building for many decades, DAOs represent an evolution in coordination, and not a revolution. They represent simply an interesting and powerful new way for human beings to coordinate, and with that, a way to help solve many formerly intractable problems.

 

Many of the large-scale problems affecting humanity today are rooted in an inability for people interested in solving these problems to develop a proper way to coordinate effectively:-By the time interested people and parties are at a scale to effect change, many third parties have established themselves along the coordination layer and inserted their own needs (openly or not) that may come at the expense of the overall mission. DAOs offer an opportunity to change that dynamic and offer a chance at re-imagining how we group together with one another to solve problems.

 

This isn’t to say there aren’t problems facing DAOs, as in any emergent technology. Issues with long term member retention, gamified participation (that can itself be gamed by bots), benefits for members, governance structures, legal compliance, recruiting, talent retainment, income volatility, and voting are all open issues many DAOs and their members are actively experiencing and attempting to solve.

 

DAOs are rapidly expanding in the Ethereum blockchain ecosystem, and are being experimented with, used, built, and iterated on in real time. Regardless of the current problems, DAOs have the potential to empower groups to solve problems, coordinate, and execute ideas in a way that may be increasingly necessary to solve entrenched 21st century problems. Moreover, the creation of DAOs as a coordination structure represent an important evolution in how people can democratically coordinate on their own terms to achieve objectives they choose. This of itself represents an important piece of humanity’s own evolution and may indeed play a part in resolving many of the current challenges we face today.

 

Organizational Structure

 

DAOs have no leaders, board members or operations beyond what is mutually agreed upon by members in the smart contracts which govern the operation of a DAO. These software enforced rules can cover any aspect of operations, but usually relate to a treasury of digital assets held by the DAO and deployed in grants. No one person can control, profit or endanger the organisation as the model seeks to create a genuine distribution of power among members.

 

With lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic, businesses have been forced to adapt, realising the potential for at home work, and greater digital based collaboration. Global manufacturing, loans and peer-to-peer goods/services could make find improvements to their business models using DAO elements.

 

The Way Forward?

 

Being an emergent technology, DAOs are rapidly expanding in the Ethereum blockchain ecosystem, and are being experimented with, used, built, and iterated on in real time. There are many unsolved problems with DAOs, particularly around issues involving legal compliance, benefits, recruiting, talent retainment, income volatility, and governance. Regardless of the current problems, DAOs have the potential to empower groups to solve problems, coordinate, and execute ideas in a way that may be increasingly necessary to solve entrenched 21st century problems.

 

DAOs represent a unique opportunity and challenge today as they are rapidly evolving into a new class of organization. DAOs are reminiscent of cooperatives (co-ops) in many ways, albeit with an expanded set of abilities enabled by the decentralized and transparent nature of the blockchain combined with automatically executing smart contract logic. The transparency of DAOs is one of their main benefits, “since all of the actions and funding in DAOs are viewable by anyone. This significantly reduces the risk of corruption and censorship.The transactions undergone by a DAO are individually visible at any time, while also protecting the anonymity of their members through cryptography.

 

DAOs also have low barriers of entry and exist in contrast to traditional hierarchical firms. While this can be a definite plus for fluidity and flexibility of DAO organization, it can also represent a unique challenge as successful DAOs need to have attractive incentivization structures and keep rent-seeking activities low to retain membership.

 

More Examples

 

What are some current examples of DAOs? DAOs currently active include MakerDAO, MolochDAO, BanklessDAO, Raid Guild, and MetaFactory. These DAOs all have different purposes, from governing the issuance of funds against crypto collateral, funding grant proposals for different projects (MolochDAO), being a collective of guilds that members vote on to decide different objectives (BanklessDAO), undergoing collective development projects (RaidGuild), and organizing around fashion and culture that creator members produce (MetaFactory). This is only a small snapshot of DAOs, and many more are being created by the day. Another important point is that while many DAO’s are for-profit organizations, they also can be set up as non-profit organizations to aggregate capital and fund specific projects (environmental, charitable, housing, social, etc.) based on the votes of the members.

 

An example of a very successful DAO is action is MakerDAO. MakerDAO is the governance structure of the Maker protocol. The Maker protocol “allows anyone, anywhere to generate the Dai stable going against crypto collateral assets.” The Maker DAO employs a two-token system, one being the Dai stablecoin, and MKR, the governance token used by stakeholders to vote on proposals and manage the Dai stablecoin and how it is implemented. MKR token holders are the decision makers of the Maker protocol. Token holders vote to decide on different policies governing the DAI stablecoin, including the “stability, transparency, and efficiency” of the stablecoin. The DAO governs the protocol, and the incentives of the token holders ensure that policies benefit all who use MakerDAO, as there is an incentive to coordinate the best policies for all token holders.

 

The Constitution DAO

 

As alluded to above, a collective formed a little while back to bid at auction for one of the last remaining original copies of the American Constitution. Had the ConstitutionDAO won the auction,  questions of governance would have been proposed, and the individuals who own the requisite digital tokens in their wallets, could have then voted. Indeed, individuals now can create wallets to store tokens or cryptocurrency that not only allows them to own digital assets like cryptocurrency, digital art (NFTs), or land in the Metaverse, but also sign or vote on a topic that a DAO has offered. (They must own those specific DAO tokens in their wallet in order to vote.) These wallets are the future of identity, asset ownership, and your ability to prove something, vote, or sign agreements.

 

ConstitutionDAO started with the idea that the general population could own a copy of the Constitution. They gave themselves six days to raise the high end of the projected winning auction, $20 million; and at the time of this writing, 7,500 people had contributed to this DAO, at a sum of well over $40 million, blowing past the original goal. (Since ConstitutionDAO did not win the auction, all funds will be returned to those who donated them.)

 

If anyone wishes to participate in a DAO, you first must purchase tokens, which typically gives voting rights that will allow the owner to guide what that organization does in conjunction with the rest of the community that also owns the tokens. We may also see DAOs using factional ownership of an asset — for example, a Picasso painting, London Bridge, or the Empire State Building. In this instance you have the ability to influence decisions, but you also have a partial ownership of the underlining asset as it appreciates or depreciates.

 

Kinship groups, tribes, armies, churches, and modern firms (profit and non-profit) are all types of organizations that have evolved legally and in business to coordinate increasingly complex human interactions, goals, and projects. DAOs are what is referred to in the book “Reinventing Organizations” as a “Teal Organization,” or an “organization as an independent force with its own purpose, and not merely as a vehicle for achieving management’s objectives. Teal organizations are characterized by self-organization and self-management.” DAOs are autonomous in the sense that they are autonomous from an outside groups objective, as the coordination and incentivization layer is the blockchain the DAO uses for coordinating its objectives. This is a critically important piece in the evolution of coordination, as third-party influences do not end up co-opting the goals of the DAO, and it remains “autonomous” in the sense that the DAO fulfills the accomplishment of whatever goals the members select without third party input or influence.

 

While DAOs at a high level represent an evolution in how human beings organize and coordinate, at a lower level they are simply an extension of many related web3 and blockchain technologies. Digital assets allow ownership of fungible and non-fungible goods to be tokenized. Besides the many cryptocurrencies we have seen rise over the past decade, lately there has been an explosion in Non-Fungible Tokens (NFT)s, simply meaning that each token is not a 1 to 1 exchange for another. Importantly, participation in a DAO can be tokenized, and members granted voting rights and incentives based on what tokens they hold. As tokens are all smart contracts, the way DAOs are governed can be programmed and voted on by their participants. Smart contracts run immutably on the blockchain and are censorship resistant. This means that 3rd parties can’t arbitrarily change the rules to their benefit, and members can know that voting proposals within a DAO will execute autonomously of human intervention.

 

Improved Inter-Communications

 

Many of the large-scale problems affecting humanity today are rooted in an inability for people interested in solving these problems to develop a proper way to coordinate effectively. By the time interested people and parties are at a scale to effect change, many third parties have established themselves along the coordination layer and inserted their own needs (openly or not) that may come at the expense of the overall mission. DAOs offer an opportunity to change that dynamic and offer a chance at re-imagining how we group together with one another to solve problems.

 

Legal Framework

 

Without legal protection, those operating within a DAO may be considered to be in a general partnership or some form of unincorporated association.

 

This means that where one member to the DAO commits a wrong, the other members, while perhaps being entirely innocent, could be liable at law. Pinpointing which individual is responsible for a wrongdoing could be a potential issue particularly given the lack of legal regulation and the way in which blockchain systems operate.

 

Since the DAO model first emerged, the series of benefits that an organisation without a centralised controller could provide has been recognised. But the unique features of a DAO also means that hitherto DAOs have operated without a specific legal framework and, as a result, do not have any legal personality at law.

 

Without such a framework the legal ownership of assets controlled by a DAO remains unclear; A DAO can look a lot like a general partnership or unincorporated association, exposing its stakeholders to personal liability for any debts or legal actions against a member of the DAO. These are core issues which need to be resolved by law so that emerging types of blockchain-based organisations can operate effectively in the countries wherein the members are based or intend to pursue objectives.

 

The Beginnings of Legal Recognition

 

In April of 2021, the progressive American State of Wyoming (the birthplace of the LLC ie a Company/Partnership hybrid that can enable tax to be avoided at a/the Corporate level) made headlines when its legislature approved a first-of-its-kind bill that determined individuals and organisations in the blockchain industry can create a legally recognised Decentralized Autonomous Organisation (DAO) in Wyoming. If countries are spurred to play catch-up and enact their own DAO related laws, the new type of organisation may no longer need to be viewed as a risky experiment but a possible corporate option.

 

Since the DAO model first emerged, the series of benefits that an organisation without a centralised controller could provide has been recognised. But the unique features of a DAO has also meant that they operate without a specific legal framework and, as a result, are not given any legal personality at law.

 

Without these protections the legal ownership of assets controlled by a DAO has been unclear, and a DAO can look a lot like a general partnership or unincorporated association, exposing its stakeholders to personal liability for any debts or legal actions against a member of the DAO. These are the core issues which need to be resolved by a DAO law so that emerging types of blockchain-based organisations can operate effectively.

 

The Wyoming Solution

 

Much like the DAO model law proposed by the Coalition Of Automated Legal Applications (COALA), the Wyoming law (see Wyoming’s DAO law ) attempts to resolve the above-referred issues. At a high-level, the Wyoming law prohibits lawsuits against DAOs as general partnerships and enforces the rights of DAOs as legal persons in state court to protect individual DAO members. As a result, the law extends traditional legal protections to DAO members in aims to minimise the risk of DAO members being held personally liable by a DAO.

 

That’s not to say the new law has been free of criticisms. Since Wyoming’s recognition of DAOs, there have been some strong opinions shared on the law, including questions about the additional and allegedly unnecessary burdens it creates for DAOs, an “unsound definition of smart contracts” as a form of a constituent company document, and the law’s lack of significant guidance for the ways in which a DAO company in Wyoming practically differs from a traditional company in Wyoming. The discourse is all useful for any jurisdiction that may wish to follow Wyoming in formulating a DAO Legal structure.

 

Comments from US lawyers note the approach of Wyoming’s DAO legislation is to give maximum effect to the freedom of contract principle, including by waiving the fiduciary duties of DAO members by default. Under the new law, while members of traditional Wyoming companies still owe fiduciary duties of loyalty and care to the company and other members, DAO members participating in a DAO company are only subject to an implied contractual covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

 

The Wyoming DAO Company Law – Details

 

The Wyoming DAO recognition law is a supplement to the existing LLC Law, which was notably the first in the nation. The law allows the creation of DAOs as limited liability companies, conferring legal status and identity on such entities for the first time.

 

As a supplement to the LLC Law, the DAO Supplement is viewed as providing exceptional coverage for DAOs, but the rest of the LLC Law applies to them, where not specifically carved out. The technical requirements include using DAO, LAO, or DAO LLC in the name of the organization to distinguish it from current LLC usages. The Article of Organization must include a specific notice to alert all potential members that the DAO may eliminate fiduciary duties and restrict transfers of ownership interests, withdrawal, or resignation from the DAO, return of capital contributions and dissolution of the DAO.

 

The Articles of Organization, or alternatively, the Operating Agreement of the DAO, must indicate whether it will be member-managed, with at least one person who is a member in order to conduct the business of the DAO LLC, because management shall be vested in its members. The Articles of Organization will govern a range of activities generally undertaken by corporations, including: members’ rights, duties, relations, voting rights, DAO activities and how they will be conducted, means of amending the articles or operating agreement, distributions to members, transferability of membership interests, withdrawals of members and their contributions, dissolution and distribution to members upon dissolution, procedures for amending, updating, editing or changing applicable smart contracts, and a publicly available identifier for any smart contact used to manage, facilitate or operate the DAO. Much of the information necessary to operate the DAO will be available in the white paper of the entity creating the DAO and publicizing its advantages to potential members.

 

Alternatively, the DAO may be “algorithmically-managed”, by the underlying smart contract without human intervention. It is not necessary for the DAO to reveal the workings of the smart contract(s) used for transacting the business of the DAO, but the law requires that the underlying smart contracts must be “able to be updated, modified or otherwise upgraded.” This requirement can work a hardship on many DAOs, because one of the main attractions of using blockchain and smart contracts is that the record is immutable, so having the contracts readily modified is not really possible without an entirely new contract to replace the prior version.

 

Potential members should be aware that the law specifically precludes rights of inspection of records because transactions will be transparent on the blockchain and therefore there is no need for additional documentary transparency. “Open blockchain” means a blockchain as defined in W.S. 34-29-106(g)(i) that is publicly accessible, and its ledger of transactions is transparent;”

 

The Usefulness of the DAO Supplement

 

The DAO Supplement anticipates that DAOs will be used to transact business using digital assets, which are defined as “a representation of economic, proprietary or access rights that is stored in a computer readable format and is either a digital consumer asset, digital security or virtual currency;” or digital consumer security, defined as “a digital asset that is used or bought primarily for consumptive, personal or household purposes and includes:(A) An open blockchain token constituting intangible personal property as otherwise provided by law;(B) Any other digital asset which does not fall within paragraphs (iii) and (iv) of this subsection.

 

Wyoming has enacted a Digital Identity statute that provides some additional support for the use of DAOs under the DAO Supplement. The state legislation can be used in a complementary manner to enable the creation of a DAO with members using digital identities and even to undertake limited in-state crowdfunding efforts to create the treasury needed to support the projects the DAO undertakes. No other jurisdiction has combined these approaches in such a complementary fashion.

 

The future of DAOs?

 

As has been noted, DAOs have the potential to become the future of businesses or organizational structures not only in the Metaverse, but in the real world. At the Thomson Reuters Institute’s recent 2021 Emerging Legal Technology Forum, a Lawyer colleague sat on a panel discussing the evolution of blockchain and tossed out a prediction that a DAO will own a major sporting franchise within the next four years. The comment was received with a collective gasp in the room. Imagine the ability for you and others to vote on which players the New York Giants pro football team acquires… yet, by owning tokens of the NYGiantsDAO or whatever it may come to be named, you in combination with others who own said tokens could vote to acquire the next greatest player or even possibly vote on who to bench in the next game. The implications are profound.

 

The sums of money that DAOs will raise likely will be staggering, such that they could overwhelm current ownership models with a flood of money from massive numbers of private individuals interested in participating. We have seen this with ConstitutionDAO now having raised more than $40 million and counting in just six days.

 

DAOs in Every day Life

 

Here is one simple example of a DAO translated into real life. Think about the interaction you have with a vending machine. In essence, it is a legal contract that you are entering. You approach the machine in your breakroom, and it takes your money via credit card. You choose your confectionery, and the machine dispenses the snack. As a DAO, it uses that money to re-order more Snickers or Mars bars, when it knows that that row is nearly empty. It can also order cleaning services and pay the rent all by itself. As you put money into that machine, you and its other users have a say in which snacks it will order and how often it should be cleaned. Ultimately, it has no managers, and all of those processes were pre-written into its code.

 

Most initial DAOs will have a board or controlling entity, of course, but they will use code and voting rights-governing models to establish equitable means of responsibility and decision-making. However, ultimately it is a system whereby the code could be fully autonomous, meaning a business could be established and run nearly or completely autonomously.

 

Decentralized Finance

 

In the Decentralized Finance (DeFi) space, many of the exchanges are code-based executions of asset swapping or purchases of assets like cryptocurrency or synthetic assets that mirror stocks. These organizations are increasingly DAO-centric and will eventually not have much human intervention, because much of its operations should be programmed into the organizational structure, only needing tweaks of code voted on by the DAO members.

 

DAOs are the future of organizations. They will create an amazing world of possibilities, but simultaneously disrupt many structures we currently have in place now. On the legal side, there is incredible opportunity for Lawyers in both transactional practice areas as well as the eventual litigation side of the business. When regulation comes, it will be fascinating to watch how Lawyers embrace and adapt to this decentralized model with the current lens.

 

Compliance

 

What will be the Finance/Securities Regulators approach be to regulating DAOs? On the one hand, if a DAO is about trading different types of cryptocurrencies, no doubt it will be regulated because of the close similarities to equity investment vehicles or exchanges. On the other hand, many DAOs will not necessarily be about the value of the tokens used to transact business of the DAO, but more about how to deploy resources to more efficiently work cooperatively to achieve a goal that the members of the DAO agree is something they want accomplished.

 

What Does Compliance Look Like for DAOs?

 

Key regulatory authorities have begun to identify the prime characteristics of anti-money laundering (AML) programs that will be acceptable. “An AML Program will in most cases need to include, at a minimum:

 

  • policies, procedures, and internal controls reasonably designed to achieve compliance with the provisions of the BSA and its implementing regulations;
  • independent testing for compliance;
  • designation of an individual or individuals responsible for implementing and monitoring the operations and internal controls; and
  • ongoing training for appropriate persons.

 

Rules for some financial institutions refer to additional elements of an AML Program, such as appropriate risk-based procedures for conducting ongoing customer due diligence.”

At a minimum, smart contracts will probably have to bake into the code some aspects of this list in order to become more widely acceptable and useful to businesses and individuals seeking to employ these new technologies seamlessly.

 

How to Make a DAO Work

 

One of the most promising benefits of DAOs is the low barrier to entry for individuals and small businesses who otherwise are not participating in the stock market, banking, and lending, or making their services or goods available to broader markets. The possibility of greater inclusion and grouping of like-minded individuals to undertake projects for the common good of the group is something new and inherently more democratic than most existing organizations.

 

Being internet-native organizations, DAOs have several advantages over traditional organizations. One significant advantage of DAOs is the lack of trust needed between two parties. While a traditional organization requires a lot of trust in the people behind it — especially on behalf of investors — with DAOs, only the code needs to be trusted. Trusting that code is easier to do as it’s publicly available and can be extensively tested before launch. Every action a DAO takes after being launched has to be approved by the community and is completely transparent and verifiable. Such an organization has no hierarchical structure. Yet, it can still accomplish tasks and grow while being controlled by stakeholders via its native token.

 

The lack of a hierarchy means any stakeholder can put forward an innovative idea that the entire group will consider and improve upon. Internal disputes are often easily solved through the voting system, in line with the pre-written rules in the smart contract. By allowing investors to pool funds, DAOs also give them a chance to invest in early-stage startups and decentralized projects while sharing the risk or any profits that may come out of them.

 

DAOs solve the principal-agent dilemma through community governance. Stakeholders aren’t forced to join a DAO and only do so after understanding the rules that govern it. They don’t need to trust any agent acting on their behalf and instead work as part of a group whose incentives are aligned. Token holders’ interests align as the nature of a DAO incentivizes them not to be malicious. Since they have a stake in the network, they will want to see it succeed. Acting against it would be acting against their self-interests.

 

In summary, DAOs provide an inherently evolutionary means to create organizations on a cooperative, democratic, and unbiased basis to accomplish goals held in common by the members and displayed transparently in the smart contracts underlying the operation of the DAO. While some DAOs may be engaged in investment activities that warrant supervision by the SEC and CFTC and their equivalents, many will certainly have other goals that could well permit regulation as cooperative associations in which the members manage and control the organization in a non-hierarchical manner and the sharing of profits or dividends is equitable and democratically governed.

 

Legal structures for DAOs

 

Currently, many DAOs are not established as legal entities, potentially exposing their members to a number of risks and liabilities. That said there a number of legal personalities that could be applied to and/or be used as a protective coating for the average DAO. Let’s consider the options…

 

Option 1: DAOs without a registered legal entity

 

The first option, commonly seen throughout the DeFi- Ecosystem, is to not set up a legal entity at all but rather, to try and create a fully decentralized structure. This does not mean, that DAOs without a registered legal entity operate outside the law. In most jurisdictions, they will be seen as general partnerships with the corresponding legal consequences. This most significant one is the risk of the personal liability of every participant. But this means also the DAO has a legal personality and can in most jurisdictions legally own assets and also employ people. In such a case, although the participants did not register the DAO, they created a fully recognized legal entity in most jurisdictions that can sue and can be sued. This is often misunderstood.

 

Although this bears significant risks, as mentioned, this structure also takes advantage of regulatory arbitrage in certain areas. If there is no central entity involved and the project is truly decentralized – and is launched anonymously – legal enforcement becomes challenging. Even the US SEC has acknowledged, that the greater a project’s decentralization, the less likely the underlying tokens would be considered securities.8

 

Moreover, regarding international private law, finding the applicable law and the responsible regulatory authority can be quite challenging in the case of a fully decentralized DAO. Because in the case of DAOs with economic interests, the cooperation agreement between the participants is sufficiently consolidated under conflict of laws, so that the connecting rules of international company law have to be applied.

 

If no explicit choice of law is made, the rules of international company law reach their limits in the case of DAOs. This is because, unlike traditional software applications that reside on a specific server under the control of an operator assigned to a specific jurisdiction, DAOs run on every node of a blockchain – everywhere and nowhere… And unlike traditional organizations – which are run by individuals living in distinct and identifiable territories – DAOs typically are collectively managed by a distributed network of peers who contribute to the underlying blockchain-based network from anywhere in the world. Consequently, a decentralized blockchain network, like a DAO, is fundamentally opposed to the traditional International Private Laws search for the cartographic center, since no spatial center of gravity can be determined!

 

The traditional theories to determine the jurisdiction for companies in most jurisdictions are linked either to the place of incorporation or to the administrative center. In the case of a DAO, these theories have little application, because typically neither of these places can be determined.

 

In addition to the above referred situs conundrum, other historical reference points also have limited application to DAOs. For example, the assets of a DAO can be, if consisting only in digital currency (as if often the case), spread all over the world. For that reason, the principle Lex loci rei sitae (law of the place where the property is situated) cannot be implemented.

 

A conceivable solution would be in some cases to determine the applicable law on the ground of jurisdiction of the other contractual party if the place can be identified and a contract in the legal sense exists. But this solution does not help with determining the legal status of a DAO in the first place.

 

Finally, it would be possible to always rely on the Lex Fori principle. This means the positive law of the state, nation, or jurisdiction within which a lawsuit is instituted or remedy sought. Apart from the legal-theoretical concerns, which the lex fori brings with it, the application also runs counter to considerable practical considerations due to the concept of the DAO. For example, it may be necessary for litigants to bring actions in several jurisdictions in order to obtain legal protection, meaning a law suit against a DAO may become very impracticable from an economic point of view.

 

As a consequence, it is quite difficult to determine the applicable law for DAOs and thus the competent jurisdiction and regulatory authorities, which also makes enforcement of law very difficult. Determining whether a project is sufficiently decentralized to avoid scrutiny from regulatory authorities for the unregistered sale of securities is a highly nuanced and complex process. No single factor is determinative and the regulatory authorities will look at the totality of the circumstances in making this determination. Therefore, if you are looking to launching a DAO and are concerned that the governing Tokens might be considered a “Security” it is strongly recommended that you reach out to regulatory authorities for guidance and also seek legal advice pre launch.

 

Option 2: Setting up a DAO with a liability wrapper or as a DAO LLC

 

The second option is setting up a DAO with a liability wrapper, which protects its members. This is an interesting option, especially for organizations willing to operate within the United States and give up some kind of decentralization. Within the US, you have a few options for which state to incorporate in.

 

Model Blockchain-Based Limited Liability Company (BBLLC) Vermont and Delaware LLC

 

The first step in this direction in Anglo-American law has already been taken. In 2018 US state of Vermont pass a law making it possible to establish a so-called Blockchain-Based Limited Liability Company (BBLLC) in Vermont. This opened up the possibility of establishing a limited liability DAO for the first time.  For this purpose, a Blockchain-Based Limited Liability Company (BBLLC) was registered in Vermont after the deployment of the DAO on the Ethereum Blockchain by dOrg. By linking the DAO to this BBLLC, the DAO has an official legal status that allows it to enter into contractual agreements and offer liability protection to participants. The BBLLC enables full governance via the blockchain and using smart contracts.

 

OpenLaw in the U.S. state of Delaware is also taking a similar approach by establishing the LAO (Legal DAO). The LAO provides a legal structure to allow members to invest in blockchain-based projects in exchange for tokenized shares or utility tokens.  This structure is called a “legal wrapper,” which is created by structuring the DAO as an LLC to hold the company responsible for contracts, taxes, and violations of law, but not the individuals acting on behalf of that company. The goal of the LAO is to limit the liability of the participants, provide clarity on the applicable law, and provide tax benefits (flowthrough/single taxation).

 

Option 3: Model Wyoming Decentralized Autonomous Organization Supplement DAO LLC

 

On April 21, 2021, Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon signed Bill 38, which allows Wyoming to recognize decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) as Limited Liability Companies (LLCs). The new law is essentially an amendment to the current Wyoming Limited Liability Company Act. Under the provisions of the Act, a DAO is defined as a limited liability company whose articles of incorporation include a statement that the company is a DAO. Concerning decision-making in a DAO, the notion of a majority of members is also concretized. Namely as the approval of more than fifty percent (50%) of the participating member interests in a vote in which a quorum of 4 members participates.

 

It is also interesting to note that a membership interest is determined as a member’s ownership share in a member-led decentralized autonomous organization, which may be defined in the entity’s charter, smart contract, or operating agreement. The use of the term “ownership share” indicates a corporate reference and thus also suggests a classification as a security, even though this is not explicitly addressed in the bill.

 

The second part then determines the scope of application of the Wyoming Limited Liability Company Act to DAOs.  In addition to a new formation, an existing LLC may also be converted into a DAO by amending its articles of organization to include the same statement. The DAO’s registered name would also have to include the appropriate designation, such as “DAO,” “LAO” (Limited Liability Autonomous Organization), or “DAO LLC”.20

 

Additionally, all Wyoming DAO LLCs must have a disclaimer in their articles of incorporation that the rights within this form of organization may differ materially from the rights in traditional LLCs, particularly for membership rights. The articles of organization filed with the Secretary of State for registration must also describe the structure of the DAO as either a member-managed DAO or an algorithmically managed DAO.  If this is not specified, it is assumed to be a member-managed DAO; This shows that the Wyoming legislature also distinguishes between different levels of automation of DAOs and their design.

 

Furthermore, the Wyoming DAO LLC law specifies that an algorithmically managed DAO may only be formed “if the underlying smart contracts can be updated, modified, or otherwise upgraded”. This is presumably intended to guarantee the controllability of DAOs in light of future technological advances.26

 

For the DAO formation process, the law states that any person may form a decentralized autonomous organization, which shall have one or more members, by signing and submitting an original and an exact or adapted copy of the articles of incorporation to the Secretary of State for filing.  Each such DAO must have and continuously maintain a registered agent in this state of Wyoming, as also provided in the Wyoming Company Act.28

 

In addition to the requirements above, the articles of incorporation must include a publicly available identifier of each smart contract used directly to manage, facilitate, or operate the DAO. A DAO may be established and operated for any lawful purpose, regardless of whether it is for profit.

 

Moreover, it specifies what, at a minimum, must be regulated in the DAO’s bylaws, namely the relationships among its members and between the members and the DAO as a society itself.

 

While this formal legal framework is a step forward for the crypto industry and solves the problem of member liability, the new law does not address other fundamental issues. For example it is unclear whether DAO members are granted the right to act on behalf of the DAO and legally bind it; rather, it requires that this be clarified in the bylaws. Concerning necessary legal certainty, a statutory regulation would be desirable, at least for those cases in which this is unclear. It is also not clear who is responsible for updating the underlying smart contracts in the case of algorithmically managed DAOs.

 

Finally, fundamental questions regarding the regulatory classification of DAOs and DAO Tokens are unclear. Firstly, depending on its activity, a DAO could be considered an “investment company” meaning (depending on where its members are located) it would then have to comply with the disclosure requirements and investment restrictions set forth by law in the Member’s home jurisdiction.

 

Secondly, it is possible that the tokens issued by the DAO as a form of membership interest could be classified as a Security under the applicable law of the Member’s home jurisdiction/s. Certainly where American members are involved this is likely to be the case for most for-profit DAOs following the SEC’s decision in the case of the DAO. (Based on the investigation in that case, and under the facts presented, the Commission determined that The DAO Tokens are securities under the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

 

DAO LLCs Summary

 

The option of using a liability wrapper is probably the best option for most DAOs, particularly those looking for the most legal certainty and safety (and for those who are willing to comply with all the necessary regulations and provisions of the different Member jurisdictions). Also, as mentioned, if the DAO decides to give out the Token it needs to be carefully looked at, because in most cases it will be qualified as a security with the corresponding legal necessities (prospect, registration with the local SEC, etc.)

 

Within the different options in Vermont, Delaware and Wyoming, the choice depends on every individual case and the goals of the DAO and its community. While Wyoming’s law is most true to the DAO structure, it also requires the most information and paperwork. By way of comparison in Delaware, the setup of the LLC is quite fast and cheap and provides a lot of flexibility. But it also requires that every Member of the DAO needs to be a member of the LLC and each time a member changes this would need to be updated. To go into too much detail here which states fit which structure would go beyond the scope of this paper, and require legal advice in each case, but in summary, the option of a US LLC is particularly suitable for projects that want the greatest security and are willing to comply with the numerous legal requirements.

 

Option 3: Setting up a DAO as a Foundation

 

A foundation with legal capacity under private law is an organization set up by one or more founders to permanently fulfill a purpose defined by the founder with the help of the assets dedicated to the foundation.  In this respect, a Foundation format could be considered to pack DAOs into a legal construct.

 

General Structure

 

In principle, certain parallels between blockchain organizations and Foundation law can be clearly seen. The immutability principle, which is intrinsic to a Blockchain and on which trust in it is based, is similarly found in the solidification principle under Foundation law.  This principle states that it is not possible to update the founder’s intentions after the foundation has been established.  In both cases, changes are only possible under increased conditions.

 

In addition, the aspect of autonomy proves to be fundamental both in the legal form of a foundation and in a blockchain-based organization. Foundation autonomy enables the foundation to develop a life of its own over time. It can be completely detached from the founder, which is still tied to the purpose of the foundation and thus to the founder’s will, but whose existence is no longer at the disposal of the foundation’s participants.

 

This autonomous dynamic is a core component of a blockchain-based DAO, whose goal is to act independently and autonomously from the original developers according to the previously determined code. In this respect, DAOs open up the possibility of extending and permanently consolidating the degree of independence of foundations, which is limited by the legal framework.

 

That said, it is questionable whether DAOs can be established and operated without problems within the current legal limits of the typical Foundation. The general view is that the purpose, assets and organization of a foundation are the three essential elements of the concept of a foundation.

 

While the foundation purpose can be determined by an initiator given the diverse possibilities of DAOs, some issues open up with regard to the foundation assets and the legal structure. Firstly, in some jurisdictions, it is questionable whether virtual goods, which will regularly be the case in the form of tokens in DAOs, are suitable foundation assets. The line is drawn insofar as, according to the requirement of proper asset management, the foundation assets cannot consist exclusively of highly speculative components.

 

In addition, in many jurisdictions, the organization of foundations raises practical challenges for a DAO. In almost all jurisdictions, the organization of a foundation requires a board of Councillors (the Foundation equivalent of a board of Directors in the case of a Company), which represents the foundation as a management body in legal transactions (most jurisdictions will allow for a Foundation to be established with as little as one Councillor). Finding a board of Councillors can be difficult for DAOs with the goal of full decentralization. However, if this requirement can be fulfilled, there are some good possibilities to structure a DAO as a foundation and it has already been used by different projects in the past.

 

Swiss Foundation and the Cayman Islands Foundation Company

 

The most used jurisdictions are Switzerland and the Cayman Islands. Switzerland provides in comparison to other European jurisdictions a more flexible foundation model with a relatively easy setup and a quite moderate taxation.

 

Regarding the Cayman Islands, this is also a jurisdiction, which a lot of crypto projects choose, with reasonable reasons behind it. Especially the legal structure of a so-called “Foundation company” is very interesting, which was introduced as a new structure by law 2017.

 

The Caymans foundation company is a remarkably flexible vehicle that operates like an incorporated trust, allowing it to function like a civil-law foundation or common-law trust while retaining the separate legal personality and limited liability of a company and tax neutrality. The foundation company also can designate beneficiaries, which will not be treated as a beneficiary under a legal or common-law trust arrangement.  The reason is, that the starting position under the Law is that a designated beneficiary has no rights or powers against the foundation company, only those expressly stated by the foundation company. Moreover, a foundation company does not need to maintain a register of its beneficiaries with their legal names under the Law. It can designate beneficiaries by class of persons for example as “token holders” or “node operators “and also reward those beneficiaries according to that class. Although anti-money laundering considerations always need to be kept in mind this could be useful for DAOs where the DAO intends to undertake distributions, airdrops of tokens, or other rewards to the DAO community.

 

The Foundation Option – Conclusion

 

Fully decentralized DAOs may have difficulties setting up as a Foundation given the legal boundaries. But attention should also be drawn to the many parallels between DAOs and the foundation structure, such as the high degree of autonomy and the permanent perpetuation so that corresponding considerations by legislators to adapt the foundation would be desirable. Until then, the structure is suitable for DAOs, which are willing to give up some decentralization and can designate trusted representatives. In particular a Foundation structured as a Purpose Foundation could have strong potential as a model DAO (For details as to what a Purpose Foundation is click on this Link: https://offshoreincorporate.com/what-is-a-purpose-foundation/ )

 

Combinations of the different options

 

A lot of projects combine a Foundation with a Company incorporated in low regulation (eg an IBC or an LLC), business-friendly jurisdiction. In this structure The Foundation owns the Company. The Company typically employs the developers/management team and or runs the commercial side (ie the money making objectives) of the organization. Mostly, the foundation will hold the treasury and will have an agreement with the IBC/LLC in which it states, that the DAO Treasury will pay for the expenses of the IBC/LLC. Although this option can use the benefits of options two and three, it also comes with additional requirements and certain centralization aspects, which need to be considered regarding the structure.

 

Summary

 

As shown, there is no “perfect” and no onefitsall solution for DAOs. Until a proper legal framework for DAOs is created, which enables them to operate fully decentralized with limited liability legal recognition and easy taxation, every current legal setup comes with its benefits and downsides and each DAO should seek individual legal advice, which option fits the best for its needs. Especially when a DAO Token is involved, the legal setup can get even more complicated, as a Token can often be qualified as a security42 and create additional legal requirements, such as prospects or registration with the legal authorities.

 

Concerns

 

DAO’s are still a relatively new concept, built on the relatively new technology of the blockchain. With the advantages of this innovation also come some growing pains, namely those of security flaws and a higher potential for future changes in government regulation.

 

Within a stakeholder-voting structure, security flaws are far more difficult to address in DAO systems than in traditional LLC’s, a result of the sluggishness when implementing changes compared to traditional management structures . Even for obvious flaws, a DAO still requires all issues to be voted on by its stakeholders. This can lead to delays when fixing flaws in the structure behind a DAO’s operations, which in the context of security breaches can be detrimental to stakeholders and their holdings within the DAO.

 

Algorithmic management structures are also subject to security flaws, but in a slightly different way. Flaws in algorithmic decision making may be harder to catch than flaws in the decision making of humans, and as such have a higher potential to be exploited by malicious parties.

 

Potential for Legal Changes

 

Decentralized autonomous organizations are completely legal, however as with all new technologies, DAO’s are subject to significant changes in regulation. Current Wyoming legislation under Bill-SF0038 (effective 07/01/2021) dictates that the management of DAO LLC’s has many of the same requirements of traditional LLC’s, with some additional criteria for the more complex management structure and backend required for its operation.

 

Conclusion

 

Whilst the Private Foundation will have attraction to certain DAO Founders (particularly those forming more for altruistic purposes) by treating DAOs as a distinct legal entity with the same limited liability protections as traditional LLCs, Wyoming has become an attractive place to form a DAO. A DAO LLC can provide all the advantages of an LLC with additional capabilities to fulfill a wide variety of possible needs that a traditional LLC is not capable of.

 

Would you like to know more? Then please Contact Us:

 

www.offshoreincorporate.com

 

info@offshorecompaniesinternational.com

 

ocil@protonmail.com

 

oci@tutanota.com

 

oci@safe-mail.net

 

ociceo@hushmail.com

 

DISCLAIMER: OCI is a Company/Trust/LLC/LP/Foundation Formation Agency. We are not tax advisers or legal advisers. You are advised to seek local legal/tax/financial advice in regards to your local reporting/tax requirements before committing to set up or use an Offshore Company or other entity.

How To Launch an ITO (Initial Token Offering) in Mauritius

The Mauritius Virtual Asset and Initial Token Offering Services Act 2021 (the “Act”) came  into force on the 7th of February 2022.

 

The Act delivers a regulatory framework for new and developing activities regarding Virtual Assets (“VAs”) and Initial Token Offerings (“ITOs”) in Mauritius.

 

What are the different licences available under the VASP regime?

 

VASP consists of several sub-categories of licences as follows:

 

  • Holders of Class M (Virtual Asset Broker-Dealer) licences carry out activities such as exchange between VAs and fiat currencies; or exchange between one or more forms of VAs.
  • Class O (Virtual Asset Wallet Services) licences pertain to the transfer of VAs.
  • Class R (Virtual Asset Custodian) licensees are responsible for safekeeping of VAs or instruments enabling control over VAs; administration of VAs or instruments enabling control over VAs.
  • Class I (Virtual Asset Advisory Services) licence is required for the participation in and provision of financial services related to an issuer’s offer and/or sale of VAs.
  • Virtual asset exchanges must apply for a Class S (Virtual Asset Market Place) licence. A Virtual Asset Exchange is a centralised or decentralised virtual platform, whether in Mauritius or in another jurisdiction which facilitates the exchange of VAs for fiat currency or other VAs on behalf of third parties for a fee, a commission, a spread or other benefit and which:

 

  1. holds custody, or controls VAs, on behalf of its clients to facilitate an exchange or
  2. purchases VAs from a seller when transactions or bids and offers are matched in order to sell them to a buyer.

 

The definition of Virtual Asset Exchange also includes the owner or operator of the virtual platform, but excludes a platform only providing a forum where sellers and buyers may post bids and offers and a forum where the parties trade in a separate platform or in a peer-to-peer manner.

 

For more details check this link: https://www.fscmauritius.org/media/119933/faqs-vaitos-act-2021-final.pdf

 

Would you like to know more? Then please Contact Us:

 

www.offshoreincorporate.com

 

info@offshorecompaniesinternational.com

 

ocil@protonmail.com

 

oci@tutanota.com

 

oci@safe-mail.net

 

ociceo@hushmail.com

 

DISCLAIMER: OCI is a Company/Trust/LLC/LP/Foundation Formation Agency. We are not tax advisers or legal advisers. You are advised to seek local legal/tax/financial advice in regards to your local reporting/tax requirements before committing to set up or use an Offshore Company or other entity.

 

 

 

What is the difference between a Trust and a Foundation?

 

We are often asked “What is the difference between a Trust and a Private Foundation?”

 

Trusts and Foundations are very similar ie they are both, in effect, 3 headed creatures.

 

A Trust is set up by a person called a Settlor, is managed day to day by a person called a Trustee and typically has beneficiaries ie persons who are designed to benefit financially from the set-up of the Trust. (For more details on what a Trust is click on this Link: https://offshoreincorporate.com/offshore-trusts/  )

 

A Foundation is set up by a person called a Founder, is managed day to day by a person called a Councillor and (like a Trust) typically has beneficiaries ie persons who are designed to benefit financially from the set-up of the Foundation. (For more details on what a Foundation is click on this Link: https://offshoreincorporate.com/private-interest-foundations/ )

 

In short you can achieve the same result with a Foundation as with a Trust but have more control (and you can get potentially get around CFC rules, see below).

 

Foundations are a creature of (European) Common Law.

 

Under Common Law a Foundation is presumed at law to be both the legal owner AND the beneficial owner of any asset it holds.

 

One jurisdiction ie Seychelles has taken this a step further and enshrined this aspect of Common Law into statute ie in section 71 of the Seychelles Foundations Act, (see Links to the Act below) it specially provides that the legal AND beneficial owner of any asset held by a Seychelles Foundation is the Foundation itself. Moreover, the beneficiaries of a Seychelles Foundation are not entitled receive any income or capital from the Foundation and have no legal or beneficial interest in Foundation assets until such time as the asset is actually transferred by/from the Foundation to the Beneficiary {See section 71 (c)}.

 

Given the explicit wording of these provisions it’s hard to see how one’s local revenue authority could argue differently. As such you could be a beneficiary of a Seychelles Foundation and potentially not have to report income/pay tax on any profits made by the Foundation (or any Company it owns) unless or until such time as the Foundation actually resolves to pay you a Distribution (or until such time as you receive income – eg Consulting fees/salary – from any Company owned by the Foundation).

 

In the case of a Trust all actions must take place under the hand of the Trustee. If not, the Trust could be rendered/declared void for being impotent at law (also known as a Sham Trust). If a Trust is declared a sham all income and reporting/tax payable obligations revert back to the Settlor of the Trust.

 

In the case of a Foundation, day to day control lies in the hands of the Foundation Council/Councillor; Unlike a Trust, the Councillor’s powers can be reserved to the Founder of the Foundation and (eg where a “Nominee” Founder is deployed) then assigned confidentially to any third party (eg you) without effecting the legal integrity of the Foundation!

 

Again, unlike a Trust, a Foundation is a separate legal entity and is typically used as a vehicle by which to potentially avoid the application of CFC (Controlled Foreign Corporation) rules. We used to use Offshore Trusts for such purposes back in the noughties but the problem with a Trust is that you have someone (ie a Trustee) holding property for the benefit of 3rd parties who are inarguably beneficial owners of that property and probably/potentially entitled to the income/capital of the Trust… which, these days in many countries, often carries with it, reporting/tax consequences onshore (ie if you’re entitled to receive a Trust distribution, even if you haven’t actually received a distribution, you can be taxed on it) especially countries which have CFT (Controlled Foreign Trust) rules.

 

A Foundation is very similar to a Trust in that it’s set up by a Founder (like a Settlor in the case of a Trust) and managed day to day by a Councillor (like a Trustee in the case of a Trust) who manages the Foundation property for the benefit of the beneficiaries of the Foundation. A key advantage of a Foundation is that it’s a separate legal entity in its own right (ie the Foundation actually owns the assets held by the Foundation – unlike a Trustee who holds property for someone else ie the beneficiaries) and generally speaking the beneficiaries are not entitled to receive any distribution of income or capital from the Foundation unless or until such time as the Foundation Council actually resolves to pay a distribution.

 

What this means as a beneficiary, in the case of a Foundation, is that you may be able to defer paying tax at home on the income of any investments held by a Foundation enabling you to reinvest 100% of that income not just the after-tax component. With the power of compounding this can assist you to achieve your Capital/Net worth target/s in as little as 10 years as opposed to 30 years +!

 

Day to day responsibility for managing a Foundation lies in the hands of a Councillor. All Foundations allow for the Councillor’s rights to be reserved to the Founder on record of the Foundation. Most jurisdictions allow you to use a Nominee Founder. What typically happens there is, at registration, the Councillors key rights and powers are reserved in the Foundation’s Regulations to the Founder. On day 2 the (Nominee) Founder assigns those powers to you via a Deed of Assignment. Gifting you more control if you want it.

 

Note the ability to use (and reporting obligations in respect of) an Offshore Trust or Private Foundation for such purposes as generically described varies greatly from country to country. You should seek out local legal advice and local financial/tax advice before committing to set up or deploy an Offshore Trust or Private Foundation.

 

To view the Seychelles Foundations Act 2009 click on this link:  https://seylii.org/sc/legislation/act/2009/32

To view the 2020 Amendments to the Seychelles Foundations Act click here: https://seylii.org/sc/legislation/act/2020/7

To view a consolidated version of the Act (current at 2021) click on this link: https://fsaseychelles.sc/legal-framework/legislations Then click on the Button on that page that says “Foundations” That button provides access to downloadable copies of the original Seychelles Foundations Act and all subsequent amendments

 

Would you like to know more? Then please Contact Us:

 

www.offshoreincorporate.com

 

info@offshorecompaniesinternational.com

 

ocil@protonmail.com

 

oci@tutanota.com

 

oci@safe-mail.net

 

ociceo@hushmail.com

 

DISCLAIMER: OCI is a Company/Trust/LLC/LP/Foundation Formation Agency. We are not tax advisers or legal advisers. You are advised to seek local legal/tax/financial advice in regards to your local reporting/tax requirements before committing to set up or use an Offshore Company or other entity.

 

Seychelles Foundations (Amendment) Act, 2021

On the 6th of August 2021 amendments to the Foundations Act (Cap 270) were published in the Seychelles Official Gazette and enacted as and from the same date.

 

Amendments mainly addressed two areas:

1) Improvement and modernizing existing Foundations Act provisions, and

2) Ensuring OECD and EU Code of Conduct Group requirements related to exchange of

information are efficiently addressed in the local legal framework

 

Accounting Records Keeping

The obligation to keep accounting records have been in place since the first Foundations

Act, 2009. Foundations were requested to keep accounting records for at least 7 years

after the end of the period to which it relates. Foundations were given the option to keep

accounting records outside Seychelles, while notifying the Registered Agent of the

address, where the originals are kept.

 

The new amendments require each Foundation

(a) to prepare an annual financial summary to be kept at its registered office in Seychelles

within 6 months from the end of the Foundation’s financial year; and

(b) where its accounting records are kept outside Seychelles, lodge, not less than on a biannual basis, the accounting records at the company’s registered office in Seychelles, provided that any accounting records, whether outside Seychelles or not, shall be presented to the Seychelles authorities on request. Key points to note:

 

  • Electronic records are acceptable, while the Foundation shall inform its Registered Agent of the address where the originals are kept.
  • “Bi-annual basis” means January and July of every year.
  • Financial year” is the calendar year, unless it is changed by the resolution of councillors.
  • A Financial Summary is required to be kept at registered office. It is NOT required to submit the Financial Summary to any authority, unless there is legal request received from the Seychelles competent authorities.
  • A grace period for every Foundation to keep their accounting records in Seychelles within 6 months from the date of enactment of the 2021 Amendments (IE by 6th February 2022).

 

Penalties for non-compliance with requirement to keep accounting records are up to $USD10,000 on the Foundation and its councillor, who knowingly permit a contravention. It is not yet, however clear, if all the accounting records (for the past 7 years) must be delivered by 6th February 2022. (There is currently a dispute between the Regulator and the industry on that matter, which we hope will be resolved shortly).

 

The law does not have retrospective effect when it comes to lodging accounting records with a Foundation’s Seychelles registered agent, but it clearly states that the records must be presented on authority’s request.

 

The Regulator also is yet to come up with form of Financial Summary, as well as written guidelines regarding the implementation of the obligations relating to accounting records.

 

Required actions if you have formed or are managing a Seychelles Foundation:

1) To arrange and organize your foundations’ accounting records for the past 7 years. To be

prepared to furnish accounting records to the Registered Agent upon request, if not already

done so.

2) To mark 2 important deadlines for each calendar year: 31st of July (for furnishing the

accounting records for transactions of the first half of a year); and 31st of January (for

furnishing the accounting records of the second half of a year).

3) To prepare accounting records for the past 7 years for a foundation that goes into voluntary dissolution / striking-off / de-registration/ discontinuation and provide them to OCI

before such procedures are completed.

 

Registered Agent records preservation obligations

Registered agents must preserve the following records of foundations (including dissolved,

struck-off, continued outside Seychelles) under the administration, for at least 7 years:

registers of councillors, beneficiaries, founders, registered agents, supervisory persons,

attorneys (agents), and accounting records in the possession of the registered agent. When a registered agent ceases business, such records shall be provided to the FSA or to any other person approved by the FSA (preferably in digital format).

 

Deemed Dissolution period

Automatic dissolution (for non-payment of annual fees and failure to satisfy the requirements of the Foundations Act) reduced from 10 / 3 years to 1 year from date of striking-off.

 

Court Restoration

An application to restore the name of a struck off or dissolved foundation to the Register may be made to the Court within one year of the date of the striking off and within five years of the date of dissolution.

 

The above application can be made to the Court by:

(a) a creditor, councillor, founder, protector or liquidator of the Foundation; or

(b) any person who can establish an interest in the Foundation to be restored to the Register.

 

The court shall not make an order restoring a Foundation to the Register, unless it is satisfied that:

(a) the foundation will have a registered agent (a licensed ICSP has agreed to act as registered agent of the Foundation); and

(b) the Foundation is in compliance with its obligations (i) under the Foundations Act relating to accounting records, registers of councillors, beneficiaries, founders, registered agents, supervisory persons, attorneys (agents); and (ii) under the Beneficial Ownership Act, 2020 relating to register of beneficial owners.

 

Administrative Restoration

An application to restore the name of a struck off or dissolved foundation to the Register may be made to the Registrar within one year of the date of the striking off and within five years of the date of dissolution.

 

The above application can be made to the Registrar by the Foundation itself or by its

councillor, beneficiary, founder, supervisory person.

 

The Registrar shall not restore the name of a foundation if the Registrar is not satisfied that

the foundation is in compliance with its obligations:

(a) under the Foundations Act relating to accounting records, registers of councillors,

beneficiaries, founders, registered agents, supervisory persons, attorneys (agents); &

(b) under the Beneficial Ownership Act, 2020 relating to register of beneficial owners.

 

Introduction of certain fees and penalties increase

The following Government fees have been introduced by the Foundations (Amendment) Act, 2021 with effect from 1st January 2022:

1) Court restoration: for filing with the Registrar of a sealed copy of an order of the court for

the restoration of the name of a Foundation to the Register: US$500

2) Administrative restoration by Registrar:

  • $US300 (if the application for restoration is made within 6 months after striking off

the Register);

  • US$500 (if the application for restoration is made more than 6 months after striking

off )

 

The majority of penalty fees for non-compliance have been increased to a penalty not

exceeding US$10,000.

 

Would you like to know more? Then please Contact Us:

 

www.offshoreincorporate.com

 

info@offshorecompaniesinternational.com

 

ocil@protonmail.com

 

oci@tutanota.com

 

oci@safe-mail.net

 

ociceo@hushmail.com

 

DISCLAIMER: OCI is a Company/Trust/LLC/LP/Foundation Formation Agency. We are not tax advisers or legal advisers. You are advised to seek local legal/tax/financial advice in regards to your local reporting/tax requirements before committing to set up or use an Offshore Company or other entity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crypto Business & The Seychelles Regulatory Sandbox License

In a bid to try and cash in on the Crypto start up boom key IOFC Seychelles has in place a little-known law that purports to encourage Fintech businesses (that may otherwise be considered licenseable activities) to incorporate in Seychelles without needing to apply for any form of Special License.

 

This article examines the juxtaposition as between the fine print of the regulations as worded versus how it might work in practice for any prospective applicant.

 

The legal provision in question is known as the Seychelles Financial Services Authority (Regulatory Sandbox Exemption) Regulations, 2019. You can view a copy of the Regulations here: https://seylii.org/sc/legislation/si/2019/36/SI%2036%202019%20-%20Financial%20Services%20Authority%20%28Regulatory%20Sandbox%20Exemption%29.pdf

 

The key takeouts are these:

 

  • An eligible person may obtain from the Authority, exemptions from the — (a) licensing; (b) disclosure; (c) reporting, requirements under the Securities Act to offer different eligible financial services for testing purposes.

 

  • Eligible financial service “means — (a) providing a financial product advice in relation to a particular kind of financial product; or (b) applying for or acquiring a particular kind of financial product; or (c) issuing, varying or disposing of a non-cash payment facility; or (d) arranging for the issuing, varying or disposing of a particular kind of financial product.

 

  • The exemption applies for a maximum period of 24 months or until such time as specific legislation comes into play which regulates that particular activity. As such there is no certainty.

 

Interestingly as far as can be ascertained at the time of writing (21 November 2021), only one Company has successfully applied for this exemption.

 

We can also reveal that a very senior (genius) Australian/UK/Seychelles qualified Lawyer hitherto has drafted almost all the Seychelles Financial Services Industry laws since 2003 (including the Seychelles Mutual Funds Act, the Securities Act, the Foundations Act, The new Trusts Act and more). Interestingly, notwithstanding that he has also (as of 2 years ago) drafted legislation that will enable Crypto related enterprises to apply for specific licenses under Seychelles law (sadly this act hasn’t yet been circulated for feedback from stakeholders… meaning its 1-2 years away from being passed into law) the gent in question had no involvement with the drafting of these Regs.

 

A considered view of these Regs is that they are clumsy and unworkable. Which would probably explain why only one business has successfully applied for such an exemption. To quote a very senior Consultant who was asked (in confidence) to review the Seychelles Financial Services Authority (Regulatory Sandbox Exemption) Regulations, 2019 “the thing that the key players inside the Seychelles FSA (ie the Financial Services Authority) don’t understand is that the Regs are an adjunct to the Securities Act and as such an exemption can only be given for an activity that would otherwise be a licenseable activity under the Securities Act eg a Securities Dealers License, a Money Exchange License, a Financial Advisers License etc”. Most Crypto related activities wouldn’t fall under these categories. Moreover, the Authority itself doesn’t have a clear set of guidelines in terms of what kind of businesses they will grant exemptions for.”

 

Why is this so? The unfortunate reality is that (notwithstanding that the jurisdiction has been gift-wrapped and hand delivered some of the cleverest and most market friendly “Offshore” laws/products of the past 20 years) there is a VERY small talent pool inside the Seychelles FSA/Govt (the entire population of the country is only 100,000). The key decision makers inside the FSA are mostly recent University graduates with little understanding of complex areas of law such as this. The easy thing for them to do is to procrastinate hoping that the applicant will lose interest and or eventually (after much to and fro) decline to approve the application. To put in the vernacular if you do decide to apply for such a license you can expect to be messed about royally…. You could spend 6 months and thousands of dollars in legal etc fees and get nowhere… These Regs were very rushed and not at all thought-through. In short, in practice, it would seem that the Seychelles FSA doesn’t have the brain power and/or the staff and/or the wherewithal to deal with applications arising from these Regs…

 

Moreover, it is our understanding that if you do get approved in principal for the exemption you would need to provide proof that either (a) you have the requisite license to sell and or manufacture this product/service in the jurisdictions in which you intend to operate or (b) that such a license is not necessary in the places where you intend to do business.

 

All that said it should also be noted that, in any event, the Securities Act only purports to regulate activity that takes place in or from Seychelles. As such you could form a Seychelles IBC and, provided you have no Directors/Shareholders inside Seychelles, – and have no clients or staff inside Seychelles – you would not be in breach of the Securities Act and as such you would not need to apply for any form of exemption.

 

The proof of that pudding is in the eating… FYI for the past 18 months and more, every other week we have managed to incorporate a new Defi related enterprise in Seychelles including Cryptocurrency Exchanges (we actually incorporated the Bitmex group of Companies), Token Offering Companies and ICOs/etc without needing to apply for licenses or exemptions.

 

That said if you are (or one of your clients is) insistent on applying for an RSL (Regulatory Sandbox License) we’d suggest you take a close look at the Mauritius Regulatory Sandbox License Regs which are also aimed at Fintech entrepreneurs but eminently more thought through. Check this link for details: https://offshoreincorporate.com/setting-up-an-ico-in-mauritius/

 

Would you like to know more? Then please Contact Us:

 

www.offshoreincorporate.com

 

info@offshorecompaniesinternational.com

 

ocil@protonmail.com

 

oci@tutanota.com

 

oci@safe-mail.net

 

ociceo@hushmail.com

 

DISCLAIMER: OCI is a Company/Trust/LLC/LP/Foundation Formation Agency. We are not tax advisers or legal advisers. You are advised to seek local legal/tax/financial advice in regards to your local reporting/tax requirements before committing to set up or use an Offshore Company or other entity.

 

What is the global minimum corporate tax rate proposal?

The “global minimum corporate tax rate deal”, is an International Tax Harmonization Initiative driven by the G7 and OECD and, for individual/SME clients looking for International Tax Planning Solutions, all but non applicable.

 

Some quick background for those not in the know…

 

In October 2021, some 136 countries approved the rolling out of the OECD’s Pillar Two global minimum corporate tax rate deal, which will establish a global minimum tax regime (agreed at 15%) through a series of interlocking rules which will reallocate certain taxing rights over multinational enterprises (MNEs) from their home countries to the markets where they have business activities and earn profits, regardless whether the MNEs have a physical presence there.

 

Thankfully, we understand that the global minimum tax rate deal will have little, if any, impact on IBC jurisdictions such as Seychelles Belize, BVI, Nevis, the BVI, Panama, St Vincent, Samoa etc because: (i) it ONLY APPLIES TO MNEs with a GLOBAL TURNOVER in excess of EURO 750 MILLION per annum, and (ii) the deal does NOT force a nil tax country (or any country that does not tax foreign income) to impose a 15% minimum tax.

 

While the new global minimum corporate tax regime will disrupt some offshore business and is about the West staying rich, we see no problem with it to the extent that it forces the likes of Google, Amazon and Starbucks to pay their fair share of global tax, i.e. by bestowing taxing rights to the countries where they make large sales, etc. No doubt you will have heard that the likes of Amazon, for example, currently pay very little UK/US/Onshore tax despite making billions in UK/US/Onshore sales (as they sell out of low-tax places like Dublin or Luxembourg).

 

We believe there will be continuing demand for IBCs because:

 

  • Non-applicability of the global minimum tax rate deal to companies with an annual turnover of less than Euro 750 Million;
  • Non-taxing of foreign-sourced income will always be an attractive feature for businesses and individuals residing, owning assets and carrying on business in multiple countries and providing continued scope for legitimate tax planning and reduction;
  • While paperwork and cost have grown in recent years, offshore companies are still cost-effective compared to most onshore Companies;
  • There is still less red tape and admin in respect of offshore companies than most onshore Companies;
  • IBCs provide Asset Protection; and
  • Despite some dilution in privacy, IBCs continue to offer significantly more privacy than onshore companies (and where IBC director, shareholder and beneficial owner has to be filed with the IBC Authorities, such information is not publicly-accessible).

 

Would you like to know more? Then please Contact Us:

 

www.offshoreincorporate.com

 

info@offshorecompaniesinternational.com

 

ocil@protonmail.com

 

oci@tutanota.com

 

oci@safe-mail.net

 

ociceo@hushmail.com

 

DISCLAIMER: OCI is a Company/Trust/LLC/LP/Foundation Formation Agency. We are not tax advisers or legal advisers. You are advised to seek local legal/tax/financial advice in regards to your local reporting/tax requirements before committing to set up or use an Offshore Company or other entity.