Cayman Segregated Portfolio Companies (2022)

In ABC Company v J & Co Ltd, ABC was an open ended investment fund structured as a segregated portfolio company (“SPC”). Under Cayman Islands law, a company registered as an SPC may create segregated portfolios so as to segregate the assets and liabilities of one portfolio from other portfolios. Assets from one segregated portfolio are not available to meet liabilities of other portfolios.

J & Co was an investor in the ‘German Fund’ being one of 82 segregated portfolios of ABC. The German Fund undertook real estate investments. Due to a downturn in the property market, a decision was taken by ABC in 2008 to suspend redemptions in the German Fund for a period of three years during which time the portfolio’s assets would be realised and distributed to creditors and shareholders. This course, it was said by the fund, would enable ABC to wind down the portfolio in an orderly manner (ie: a “soft wind-down”).

ABC similarly suspended redemptions in its other portfolios holding investments in real estate, but left the remaining portfolios unaffected. The German Fund represented 0.85% of the real estate portfolios combined NAV, and the real estate portfolios in turn represented 32% of ABC’s combined NAV.

J & Co petitioned to wind up ABC on the basis that the SPC was unable to carry on the business for which it was incorporated (ie: it had lost its substratum). The petition was subsequently amended so as to apply in the alternative to wind up just the German Fund on the same grounds. ABC applied to strike out the winding up petition citing that ABC could not possibly be said to have lost its substratum in circumstances where two-thirds of its portfolios were carrying on business as usual. Jones J at first instance declined to strike out. The Court of Appeal disagreed and unanimously held that the petition was bound to fail.

In striking out the petition, President Chadwick delivering the judgment of the court stating that:

(a) the provisions of the Cayman Islands Companies Law did not give the Court jurisdiction to wind up individual segregated portfolios of an SPC. The only remedy afforded by the legislation was the appointment of a receiver, and that was only available if the portfolio was insolvent – not on the just and equitable ground;

(b) in determining whether the substratum of ABC had failed, it was necessary for J & Co to establish that ABC had ceased carrying on business according to the reasonable expectations of its shareholders. Those expectations were to be gauged from the articles of association and relevant offering documents of ABC;

(Video) What is SEGREGATED PORTFOLIO COMPANY? What does SEGREGATED PORTFOLIO COMPANY mean?

(c) ABC’s articles of association permitted the directors in their absolute discretion, and for any reason, to suspend redemptions and subscriptions. Importantly in the opinion of the court, the scope of the existing power to suspend redemptions contained in the articles was extended in 2010 by the passing of special resolutions of each class of participating shareholders. These amendments were passed some two years after redemptions in the German Fund had been suspended;

(d) ABC’s offering memorandum warned that the liquidity of some of the investments held by the segregated portfolios could not be guaranteed. Any illiquidity may prevent, in certain circumstances, redemptions of shares;

(e) it was common ground that the directors of ABC acted in good faith in resolving to suspend redemptions in the real estate portfolios in 2008;

(f) no informed investor reading the articles of association and offering memorandum could fail to appreciate that the right to redeem segregated portfolio shares might be suspended; and

(g) it was therefore impossible for the petitioner to contend that ABC had ceased to carry on business in accordance with the reasonable expectations of its shareholders or, for that matter, in accordance with the reasonable expectations of the holders of shares in the German Fund.

Interestingly, although the Court of Appeal focused on the reasonable expectations of all shareholders in the SPC and not just investors in the German Fund, it did not appear to place any significance on the fact that two-thirds of ABC’s portfolios continued to trade. Rather, emphasis was placed on ABC’s power to suspend redemptions contained in its constituent documents, the bona fide exercise of that power by ABC’s directors in 2008, and the effective ratification of the suspension two years later by a 75% majority of all classes of shareholders when they resolved to extend and clarify the power to suspend.

Although there was no language in ABC’s articles or offering documents pointing to the reasonable expectations of shareholders being for the investment manager to undertake a soft wind-down, it is nonetheless unsurprising that the Court of Appeal decided J & Co’s petition to wind up ABC was bound to fail. It would have been remarkable for the court to have contemplated liquidating ABC in circumstances where the fund itself was not being wound down, and a substantial majority of shareholders were implicitly content with the directors’ decision to suspend redemptions and had positively voted in favour of extending the power to suspend after the existing suspension had been in place for two years.

The Court of Appeal concluded its judgment by making reference to the topical issue in the Cayman Islands of the extent (if any) to which initiating a soft wind-down of a fund will constitute or indicate a loss of substratum.

The current position in the Cayman Islands with soft wind-downs (per Jones J) is that if there has been an indefinite suspension of redemptions, then it becomes practically impossible for a mutual fund to pursue its investment objective in accordance with its shareholders’ reasonable expectations. The reasonable expectations of shareholders are to be gleaned from the fund’s constituent documents.

(Video) KYC of SPC (Segregated Portfolio Company)

However, in considering those documents, the starting point is that there are strong policy considerations in favour of a fund being liquidated by qualified insolvency practitioners rather than on an informal basis by its management: the main consideration being that investment managers are skilled in investing, and forthat, they are typically remunerated based on a percentage of NAV plus a performance fee. They are not skilled liquidators, and as a general statement of principle, should not undertake that role or be remunerated as such.

Conversely, in the British Virgin Islands (per Bannister J), the position is that fund managers are entitled to manage the wind-down of a fund and the only purpose for which liquidators should be appointed is to manage the final moments of the fund at the time when it should be put out of existence.

Because the issue on appeal was not whether it was just and equitable to wind up a fund in soft wind-down mode via an indefinite suspension of redemptions and managed realisation of assets (ie: the appeal related to ABC as a whole and not just the German Fund). Consequently, the difference of opinion between Jones J in the Cayman Islands and Bannister J in the BVI on the implications of a soft wind-down remains to be resolved. Curiously though, after noting that the point would no doubt arise in due course for adjudication at appellate level, the Court of Appeal suggested that the answer may lie somewhere between the two competing approaches.

Based on the process the court undertook in the ABC case, it would not be surprising if the “middle ground” alluded to by President Chadwick is for the court to require the presence of express soft wind-down language in the fund’s constituent documents: so if there are specific powers to suspend redemptions indefinitely and for the manager to realise assets for the benefit of investors over time, which powers are then activated, the court may determine that there is no ground to wind up the fund based on loss of substratum.

The consequences of the Court of Appeal’s judgment for investment managers are telling.

First, individual portfolios of an SPC are immune from being placed into receivership or wound up on the just and equitable ground on application by a disgruntled investor (unlike the position with feeder funds in a typical master/feeder structure). This of course is a positive outcome for managers. Conversely however, the risk is that the only remedy available to any such investor, should circumstances permit, is to petition to wind up the entire SPC rather than just one limb. That risk is mitigated to the point of remoteness if the articles and offering documents of the fund are properly drafted.

Secondly, investment managers must ensure that the terms of the constitution and offering documents of the fund, whether it be an SPC or some other vehicle, are crystal clear on the rights and consequences attached to a suspension of redemptions. In particular, the inclusion of soft wind-down language will serve as evidence of the reasonable expectations of shareholders that the manager may properly implement an indefinite suspension of redemptions in order carry out a soft wind-down of the fund. n ABC Company v J & Co Ltd, ABC was an open ended investment fund structured as a segregated portfolio company (“SPC”). Under Cayman Islands law, a company registered as an SPC may create segregated portfolios so as to segregate the assets and liabilities of one portfolio from other portfolios. Assets from one segregated portfolio are not available to meet liabilities of other portfolios.

J & Co was an investor in the ‘German Fund’ being one of 82 segregated portfolios of ABC. The German Fund undertook real estate investments. Due to a downturn in the property market, a decision was taken by ABC in 2008 to suspend redemptions in the German Fund for a period of three years during which time the portfolio’s assets would be realised and distributed to creditors and shareholders. This course, it was said by the fund, would enable ABC to wind down the portfolio in an orderly manner (ie: a “soft wind-down”).

ABC similarly suspended redemptions in its other portfolios holding investments in real estate, but left the remaining portfolios unaffected. The German Fund represented 0.85% of the real estate portfolios combined NAV, and the real estate portfolios in turn represented 32% of ABC’s combined NAV.

(Video) Charltons and Stuarts | Fundamentals of funds in Cayman and Hong Kong | 31 March 2021

J & Co petitioned to wind up ABC on the basis that the SPC was unable to carry on the business for which it was incorporated (ie: it had lost its substratum). The petition was subsequently amended so as to apply in the alternative to wind up just the German Fund on the same grounds. ABC applied to strike out the winding up petition citing that ABC could not possibly be said to have lost its substratum in circumstances where two-thirds of its portfolios were carrying on business as usual. Jones J at first instance declined to strike out. The Court of Appeal disagreed and unanimously held that the petition was bound to fail.

In striking out the petition, President Chadwick delivering the judgment of the court stating that:

(a) the provisions of the Cayman Islands Companies Law did not give the Court jurisdiction to wind up individual segregated portfolios of an SPC. The only remedy afforded by the legislation was the appointment of a receiver, and that was only available if the portfolio was insolvent – not on the just and equitable ground;

(b) in determining whether the substratum of ABC had failed, it was necessary for J & Co to establish that ABC had ceased carrying on business according to the reasonable expectations of its shareholders. Those expectations were to be gauged from the articles of association and relevant offering documents of ABC;

(c) ABC’s articles of association permitted the directors in their absolute discretion, and for any reason, to suspend redemptions and subscriptions. Importantly in the opinion of the court, the scope of the existing power to suspend redemptions contained in the articles was extended in 2010 by the passing of special resolutions of each class of participating shareholders. These amendments were passed some two years after redemptions in the German Fund had been suspended;

(d) ABC’s offering memorandum warned that the liquidity of some of the investments held by the segregated portfolios could not be guaranteed. Any illiquidity may prevent, in certain circumstances, redemptions of shares;

(e) it was common ground that the directors of ABC acted in good faith in resolving to suspend redemptions in the real estate portfolios in 2008;

(f) no informed investor reading the articles of association and offering memorandum could fail to appreciate that the right to redeem segregated portfolio shares might be suspended; and

(g) it was therefore impossible for the petitioner to contend that ABC had ceased to carry on business in accordance with the reasonable expectations of its shareholders or, for that matter, in accordance with the reasonable expectations of the holders of shares in the German Fund.

(Video) Cayman Islands Investment Funds: The latest updates for managers in Asia

Interestingly, although the Court of Appeal focused on the reasonable expectations of all shareholders in the SPC and not just investors in the German Fund, it did not appear to place any significance on the fact that two-thirds of ABC’s portfolios continued to trade. Rather, emphasis was placed on ABC’s power to suspend redemptions contained in its constituent documents, the bona fide exercise of that power by ABC’s directors in 2008, and the effective ratification of the suspension two years later by a 75% majority of all classes of shareholders when they resolved to extend and clarify the power to suspend.

Although there was no language in ABC’s articles or offering documents pointing to the reasonable expectations of shareholders being for the investment manager to undertake a soft wind-down, it is nonetheless unsurprising that the Court of Appeal decided J & Co’s petition to wind up ABC was bound to fail. It would have been remarkable for the court to have contemplated liquidating ABC in circumstances where the fund itself was not being wound down, and a substantial majority of shareholders were implicitly content with the directors’ decision to suspend redemptions and had positively voted in favour of extending the power to suspend after the existing suspension had been in place for two years.

The Court of Appeal concluded its judgment by making reference to the topical issue in the Cayman Islands of the extent (if any) to which initiating a soft wind-down of a fund will constitute or indicate a loss of substratum.

The current position in the Cayman Islands with soft wind-downs (per Jones J) is that if there has been an indefinite suspension of redemptions, then it becomes practically impossible for a mutual fund to pursue its investment objective in accordance with its shareholders’ reasonable expectations. The reasonable expectations of shareholders are to be gleaned from the fund’s constituent documents.

However, in considering those documents, the starting point is that there are strong policy considerations in favour of a fund being liquidated by qualified insolvency practitioners rather than on an informal basis by its management: the main consideration being that investment managers are skilled in investing, and for that, they are typically remunerated based on a percentage of NAV plus a performance fee. They are not skilled liquidators, and as a general statement of principle, should not undertake that role or be remunerated as such.

Conversely, in the British Virgin Islands (per Bannister J), the position is that fund managers are entitled to manage the wind-down of a fund and the only purpose for which liquidators should be appointed is to manage the final moments of the fund at the time when it should be put out of existence.

Because the issue on appeal was not whether it was just and equitable to wind up a fund in soft wind-down mode via an indefinite suspension of redemptions and managed realisation of assets (ie: the appeal related to ABC as a whole and not just the German Fund). Consequently, the difference of opinion between Jones J in the Cayman Islands and Bannister J in the BVI on the implications of a soft wind-down remains to be resolved. Curiously though, after noting that the point would no doubt arise in due course for adjudication at appellate level, the Court of Appeal suggested that the answer may lie somewhere between the two competing approaches.

Based on the process the court undertook in the ABC case, it would not be surprising if the “middle ground” alluded to by President Chadwick is for the court to require the presence of express soft wind-down language in the fund’s constituent documents: so if there are specific powers to suspend redemptions indefinitely and for the manager to realise assets for the benefit of investors over time, which powers are then activated, the court may determine that there is no ground to wind up the fund based on loss of substratum.

The consequences of the Court of Appeal’s judgment for investment managers are telling.

(Video) Segregated portfolio company | Wikipedia audio article

First, individual portfolios of an SPC are immune from being placed into receivership or wound up on the just and equitable ground on application by a disgruntled investor (unlike the position with feeder funds in a typical master/feeder structure). This of course is a positive outcome for managers. Conversely however, the risk is that the only remedy available to any such investor, should circumstances permit, is to petition to wind up the entire SPC rather than just one limb. That risk is mitigated to the point of remoteness if the articles and offering documents of the fund are properly drafted.

Secondly, investment managers must ensure that the terms of the constitution and offering documents of the fund, whether it be an SPC or some other vehicle, are crystal clear on the rights and consequences attached to a suspension of redemptions. In particular, the inclusion of soft wind-down language will serve as evidence of the reasonable expectations of shareholders that the manager may properly implement an indefinite suspension of redemptions in order carry out a soft wind-down of the fund.

FAQs

What is a segregated portfolio company Cayman? ›

The concept of an SPC is that a company, which remains a single legal entity, may create segregated portfolios (Portfolios) such that the assets and liabilities of each Portfolio are legally separate from the assets and liabilities of any other Portfolio and from the SPC's general assets and liabilities.

What is an exempted segregated portfolio company Cayman? ›

(i) Under Cayman Companies Act, an SPC is an exempted company which has been registered as a segregated portfolio company. It has full capacity to undertake any object or purpose subject to any restrictions imposed on the SPC in its Memorandum of Association (“Memorandum”).

What is the purpose of a segregated portfolio company? ›

A Segregated Portfolio Company (SPC) is a company limited by shares. The SPC may create up to ten segregated portfolios for the purpose of segregating the assets and liabilities of the company, held within or on behalf of a segregated portfolio from other assets and liabilities of the company.

What does segregated portfolio mean? ›

Segregated Portfolio: The term 'segregated portfolio' shall mean a portfolio, comprising of debt or money market instrument affected by a credit event, that has been segregated in a mutual fund scheme. 2. Main Portfolio: The term 'main portfolio' shall mean the scheme portfolio excluding the segregated portfolio.

What is segregated mandate? ›

A segregated mandate is a fund run exclusively for a client, typically an institution (such as SJP or True Potential). But asset managers typically earn far lower fees on segregated mandates than for pooled funds. At NextWealth we call this 'wealth managers as manufacturers'.

What is segregated mutual fund? ›

A segregated fund policy is similar – like mutual funds, there's a pooling of investments. But unlike mutual funds, a segregated fund policy includes insurance guarantees that can protect much or even all your original investment.

What is a Cayman exempted company? ›

A Cayman Islands exempted company limited by shares is a flexible and versatile vehicle that is quick to set up and easy to maintain. As such, exempted companies formed under the Companies Act (as amended, the Companies Act) are the most commonly used company for offshore vehicles in the Cayman Islands.

What is a SPC entity? ›

The Segregated Portfolio Company (SPC) is a single legal entity within which may be established various segregated portfolios. The assets and liabilities of each segregated portfolio are legally separate from those of the other segregated portfolios.

Is SPC a corporation? ›

Spc Corporation was founded in 1986. The Company's line of business includes the assembling, breaking up, sorting, and wholesale distribution of scrap and waste materials.

What is the exit option for investors from segregated portfolio? ›

Parallelly, new units of the segregated fund are credited to the holders of the mutual fund as on a specified record date. In case you have segregated mutual fund units in your portfolio, you can exit them directly through your holdings on Kite: Note : 1.

When a segregated portfolio can be created? ›

Segregated portfolio can be created in a mutual fund scheme by an asset management company in case of a credit event, which includes downgrade to below investment grade and subsequent downgrades in credit rating by a Sebi-registered credit rating agency, as per the regulator's circular issued in December 2018.

Is a Cayman SPC a corporation? ›

Under Cayman Islands law an SPC is a legal corporate entity with full capacity to undertake any object or purpose subject to any restrictions imposed on the SPC in its Memorandum of Association (“Memorandum”).

Can I withdraw money from segregated funds? ›

Yes, you can cash out of your segregated fund. Segregated funds are individual insurance contracts that invest in one or more underlying assets, such as a mutual fund but unlike mutual funds, segregated funds provide a guarantee to protect part of the money you invest.

How is segregated portfolio taxed? ›

As such, the cost of acquisition of units in the segregated portfolio is nil. For FT investors, the entire receipts from segregated portfolios are taxable as capital gains. Meanwhile, cost of acquisition for main portfolio remains at original purchase NAV.

Are segregated funds guaranteed? ›

Unlike mutual funds, segregated funds provide a guarantee to protect part of the money you invest (75% to 100%). Even if the underlying fund loses money, you are guaranteed to get back some or all of your principal. + read full definition investment.

How does a segregated fund work? ›

Commonly found in Canada, segregated funds are private contracts between insurers and customers that must be held until contract maturity. Because these products offer better guarantees than traditional insurance or annuity products, they do come with higher fees and expenses.

What is the difference between pooled and segregated funds? ›

What's the difference? Segregated investments are owned by you, the investor, directly. Pooled investments are owned jointly by many investors whose money has been “pooled” together.

Can segregated funds be transferred? ›

First, segregated funds and mutual funds are two separate types of investment products, not accounts. Because of this, there is no way to directly transfer funds from one to the other without selling the investment first.

Who sells segregated? ›

3. Who can sell segregated funds? Only life insurance representatives (financial security advisors) are authorized by the AMF to sell segregated funds.

Are segregated funds good? ›

The pros of segregated funds are that they often have principal investment guarantees up to 100%, have the option to lock your gains, offer creditor protection, and come with a death benefit. On the flipside, the cons are that they often have higher fees, lower return, and aren't very liquid.

Are segregated funds expensive? ›

According to Globefund.com, many segregated funds charge a fee (MER) above 4 percent of the total value of the investment every year. Part of that goes to the advisor who sold the fund. In most cases the advisor can also get a fee when the fund is bought or sold.

Why do companies incorporate in Cayman Islands? ›

Benefits to incorporating in the Cayman Islands

The incorporation of a Cayman Islands Exempted Company is easy, fast, confidential, and above all is tax efficient. The Caymans have become a popular tax haven among entrepreneurs, and they are being constantly listed among the top ten world's largest tax havens.

How much money do you need to open a bank account in the Cayman Islands? ›

What Is the Minimum Investment You Need When Setting Up a Bank Account in the Cayman Islands? Like interest rates, the minimum deposit rules for Cayman Islands bank accounts vary. Residents in the territory will typically need only 80 Cayman Island Dollars (KYD) to open a bank account which is about $100 (USD).

Why have a bank account in the Cayman Islands? ›

Cayman Islands has one the largest and most respected financial sectors and is home to more than 600 banks and 100,000 companies. Because of its tax-free status on incomes, the country is famous as a host of offshore bank accounts.

Is SPC a private company? ›

SPC was incorporated as a public listed company in 1912, and Ardmona opened in 1921. SPC Ardmona was bought by Coca-Cola Amatil in 2005 for A$520 million. It sold it in 2019 for A$40 million to Shepparton Partners Collective.

Is an SPC an LLC? ›

Also, of course, an SPC is a type of LLC, and hence generally not a per se corporation for tax purposes. The business reasons for using SPCs in structured finance transactions are humble: administrative conve- nience and cost savings.

What is SPC legal? ›

It is the role of the Supreme People's Court (SPC) to give guidance to the People's Courts on how to interpret the laws. The SPC does it through promulgating “judicial interpretations” and other documents to address the application of laws.

Who owns Swander Pace? ›

Swander Pace Capital was acquired by Glo Skin Beauty for $35.1M on Apr 2, 2013 .

What is the benefit of social purpose corporation? ›

The social purpose corporation structure specifically allows corporations to pursue goals other than profits. While “regular” for-profit companies, of course, engage in community activities, the fundamental legal obligations of the board and management are, generally speaking, to generate profits for shareholders.

How do protected cell companies work? ›

What is a Protected Cell Company? A PCC is an insurance vehicle whereby multiple 'cells' are connected to a core; creating a single legal entity. A 'cell' is an insurance facility that can be rented by a single company to underwrite its specific risks – a form of risk retention vehicle.

How do you calculate the cost of segregated portfolio? ›

The cost of acquisition of units in segregated portfolio will be the ratio of value of defaulted units and total value of the main portfolio. Simultaneously, the cost of acquisition of units in the main portfolio will be reduced to the extent of cost of acquisition in the segregated portfolio.

What is the difference between Sid and Kim? ›

What is the difference between Scheme Information Document (SID) and Key Information Memorandum (KIM)? SID is the primary scheme-related document issued by the Asset Management Company (AMC). KIM is the abridged version of the SID.

What is the legal status of the units of a segregated fund? ›

Segregated funds do not issue units or shares; therefore, a segregated fund investor is not referred to as a unitholder. Instead, the investor is the holder of a segregated fund contract. Contracts can be registered (held inside an RRSP or TFSA) or non-registered (not held inside an RRSP or TFSA).

Are Segregated funds taxable? ›

A segregated fund is deemed to be a trust for tax purposes. The investment policy of each fund is to allocate its income and capital gains and losses realized in the year to policyholders, so that no income tax will be payable by the fund (after taking into account any applicable losses of the fund).

Does TD have segregated funds? ›

TD Canada Trust - Investment Lending Services offers investment loans with the ability to purchase Segregated or Mutual Funds and CSV loans.

What is a segregated trust? ›

A trust that has segregated amounts must separately account for the income, deductions, and other items attributable to each segregated amount in the books of account and separately account to each of the beneficiaries of the trust.

What is a SPC entity? ›

The Segregated Portfolio Company (SPC) is a single legal entity within which may be established various segregated portfolios. The assets and liabilities of each segregated portfolio are legally separate from those of the other segregated portfolios.

What is an SPC in finance? ›

A segregated portfolio company (or SPC), sometimes referred to as a protected cell company, is a company which segregates the assets and liabilities of different classes (or sometimes series) of shares from each other and from the general assets of the SPC.

What is a Cayman exempted company? ›

A Cayman Islands exempted company limited by shares is a flexible and versatile vehicle that is quick to set up and easy to maintain. As such, exempted companies formed under the Companies Act (as amended, the Companies Act) are the most commonly used company for offshore vehicles in the Cayman Islands.

Is SPC a corporation? ›

Spc Corporation was founded in 1986. The Company's line of business includes the assembling, breaking up, sorting, and wholesale distribution of scrap and waste materials.

Is SPC a private company? ›

SPC was incorporated as a public listed company in 1912, and Ardmona opened in 1921. SPC Ardmona was bought by Coca-Cola Amatil in 2005 for A$520 million. It sold it in 2019 for A$40 million to Shepparton Partners Collective.

When a segregated portfolio can be created? ›

Segregated portfolio can be created in a mutual fund scheme by an asset management company in case of a credit event, which includes downgrade to below investment grade and subsequent downgrades in credit rating by a Sebi-registered credit rating agency, as per the regulator's circular issued in December 2018.

Is an SPC an LLC? ›

Also, of course, an SPC is a type of LLC, and hence generally not a per se corporation for tax purposes. The business reasons for using SPCs in structured finance transactions are humble: administrative conve- nience and cost savings.

What is the exit option for investors from segregated portfolio? ›

Parallelly, new units of the segregated fund are credited to the holders of the mutual fund as on a specified record date. In case you have segregated mutual fund units in your portfolio, you can exit them directly through your holdings on Kite: Note : 1.

What does SPC stand for work? ›

SPC stands for Statistical Process Control. In the manufacturing industry, a poor product—defined as not meeting spec— is often the result of a poor process. SPC is a statistical method of quality control that collects and analyzes data from product and process measurements.

What is an SPC patent? ›

Supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) are an intellectual property right that serve as an extension to a patent right. They apply to specific pharmaceutical and plant protection products that have been authorised by regulatory authorities.

Why do companies incorporate in Cayman Islands? ›

Benefits to incorporating in the Cayman Islands

The incorporation of a Cayman Islands Exempted Company is easy, fast, confidential, and above all is tax efficient. The Caymans have become a popular tax haven among entrepreneurs, and they are being constantly listed among the top ten world's largest tax havens.

How much money do you need to open a bank account in the Cayman Islands? ›

What Is the Minimum Investment You Need When Setting Up a Bank Account in the Cayman Islands? Like interest rates, the minimum deposit rules for Cayman Islands bank accounts vary. Residents in the territory will typically need only 80 Cayman Island Dollars (KYD) to open a bank account which is about $100 (USD).

Why have a bank account in the Cayman Islands? ›

Cayman Islands has one the largest and most respected financial sectors and is home to more than 600 banks and 100,000 companies. Because of its tax-free status on incomes, the country is famous as a host of offshore bank accounts.

Is a Cayman SPC a corporation? ›

Under Cayman Islands law an SPC is a legal corporate entity with full capacity to undertake any object or purpose subject to any restrictions imposed on the SPC in its Memorandum of Association (“Memorandum”).

Who owns Swander Pace? ›

Swander Pace Capital was acquired by Glo Skin Beauty for $35.1M on Apr 2, 2013 .

What is the benefit of social purpose corporation? ›

The social purpose corporation structure specifically allows corporations to pursue goals other than profits. While “regular” for-profit companies, of course, engage in community activities, the fundamental legal obligations of the board and management are, generally speaking, to generate profits for shareholders.

Videos

1. Dynamic Corporate Services to Manage operations and streamline processes
(Hermes Offshore)
2. How the PCC structure works
(STM GROUP PLC)
3. Matthew Feargrieve: Introduction to Cayman Islands Regulated Funds
(Matthew Feargrieve)
4. PCA Spotlight: Meet Spec Cayman, the newest class in PCA Club Racing
(Porsche Club of America)
5. Cayman Islands company law | Wikipedia audio article
(wikipedia tts)
6. How to Identify Red Flags In The Offshore World
(OffshoreAlert)

Top Articles

You might also like

Latest Posts

Article information

Author: Nathanael Baumbach

Last Updated: 10/05/2022

Views: 5575

Rating: 4.4 / 5 (55 voted)

Reviews: 94% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Nathanael Baumbach

Birthday: 1998-12-02

Address: Apt. 829 751 Glover View, West Orlando, IN 22436

Phone: +901025288581

Job: Internal IT Coordinator

Hobby: Gunsmithing, Motor sports, Flying, Skiing, Hooping, Lego building, Ice skating

Introduction: My name is Nathanael Baumbach, I am a fantastic, nice, victorious, brave, healthy, cute, glorious person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.