Reputation of Seychelles company in UK

[OffInvest]

Hi all,


I plan to set up a holding company in Seychelles and use it to buy some shares in UK.


Does anyone know how Seychelles is perceived there?


Thank you


John

 

[JohnLocke]

Well, in almost any Western European country where you mention the Seychelles for banking or for incorporating they will think you are into something. That actual apply for most offshore jurisdictions / tax havens.

 

[Zqq]

For investing in the UK, you may be better off with a BVI company. BVI companies are very commonly used to invest in the UK.

 

[OffInvest]

Thank you for your answers.


Something else. Is the incorporation date important for investing? Is it better to have a company established in, say, 2009 rather than in 2013? Does it make any difference in terms of credibility?

 

[Zqq]

No, shelf companies are largely pointless. Unless you can prove trading history of the company under your ownership since the year of incorporation, it doesn't matter when it was incorporated.

 

[radolf]

Well one advantage of a shelf company is if you are planning to sell IP (e.g. trademarks, patents. copyright) from your UK company to the IBC and are planning to "backdate" the date of transferal (which obviously is a grey area to say the least). Based on my experience many nominee directors are happy to backdate if requested. Sometimes shelf-companies can also make sense if they fit into a "wider plan" of your story why and how you own your IBC.

 

[Zqq]

You are venturing into the deep end of the pool if you try to use a shelf-company to change history. There can be severe legal implications, far outweighing those of mere tax planning.

 

[radolf]

Yes I agree on this Zqq. However, this is what shelp-companies are often used for. Let's say your onshore company has valuable IP and you would like to transfer it to a offshore company. Wouldn't it cause suspicion if you would "sell" the IP for a nominal amount (e.g. 1 USD) to the offshore company at a time where the onshore company already generates hundreds of thousands dollars in revenue (also thanks to the IP). Wouldn't it be much more consistent if the IP was "sold" for a nominal amount at a time where the onshore company wasn't trading or just had very small revenue?


How else would you reasonably argue to the onshore tax inspector why you transferred/sold the IP for nominal amount (nominal because non-nominal you actually should be able to proof the bank-wire, which of course would be the cleanest but in practive just rarely happens)?

 

[Zqq]

Of course, and that is why it does happen. That doesn't change the fact that it is risky to do and if caught may have far worse repercussions than transferring the IP without using a shelf-company and backdated documents.

 

[radolf]

In the given scenario: Are you saying you would transfer the IP for the real value? If yes, the questions would be how you determine the real value of the IP and how would you perform the actual bank wire from the offshore company to the onshore company for documentation (probably the offshore bank account isn't even funded when you just register new and don't want to sell for non-nominal amount)?


I'm sure lots of people transfer their onshore IP offshore (in order to licence it out again to the onshore company) but I wonder how they actually do it in practice if not "nominal"...

 

[radolf]

Anybody thoughts to this?