Private Client Tax Jurisdictional comparisons Third edition 2015 Foreword John Rhodes Stonehage Law Ltd Australia Clayton Utz Allan Blaikie & Andrew Sommer Austria Dorda Brugger Jordis Rechtsanwaelte GmbH Paul Doralt & Martina Znidaric Bermuda Conyers Dill & Pearman Alec R. Anderson Canada Miller Thomson LLP Martin J. Rochwerg, Mary Anne Bueschkens & Rahul Sharma Cayman Islands Collas Crill & CARD Antony Duckworth & Wendy Stenning Cyprus Andreas Neocleous & Co LLC Elias Neocleous & Philippos Aristotelous England & Wales Macfarlanes LLP Jonathan Conder & Oliver Court France UGGC Avocats Line-Alexa Glotin Germany Flick Gocke Schaumburg Dr. Christian von Oertzen Gibraltar Isolas Peter A. Isola & Adrian Pilcher Greece Elias Paraskevas Attorneys 1933 Dimitris E. Paraskevas, John G. Mazarakos, Ioanna A. Kombou & Ioannis A. Sarakinos Guernsey Carey Olsen Laila Arstall India Khaitan & Co Bijal Ajinkya & Shabnam Shaikh Ireland Matheson John Gill & Allison Dey Israel Alon Kaplan Advocate, Herzog Fox & Neeman Law Office Meir Linzen, Guy Katz & Eran Lempert, Aronson, Ronkin-Noor, Eyal Law Firm Lyat Eyal Italy Carnelutti Studio Legale Associato Luca Arnaboldi & Gilberto Comi Jersey Carey Olsen Paul Matthams & Keith Dixon Malta Fenech & Fenech Advocates Rosanne Bonnici & Paul Gonzi Mexico Jáuregui y Del Valle, S.C. Miguel Jáuregui Rojas Monaco Donald Manasse Law Office Donald Manasse The Netherlands Arcagna Arnold van der Smeede New Zealand TGT Legal Pravir Tesiram Portugal Cuatrecasas, Gonçalves Pereira Diogo Ortigão Ramos & Maria João Ricou Singapore Allen & Gledhill LLP Sunit Chhabra & Mark Li South Africa HR Levin Attorneys Hymie Reuvin Levin & Gwynneth Louise Rowe Spain Cuatrecasas, Gonçalves Pereira Florentino Carreño & Carlos Ferrer Switzerland Lenz & Staehelin Jean-Blaise Eckert United States Kozusko Harris Duncan Stephen K. Vetter & Eric M. Dorsch General Editor: John Rhodes Stonehage Law Ltd
General Editor John Rhodes, Stonehage Commissioning Editor Emily Kyriacou emily.kyriacou@thomsonreuters.com Commercial Director Katie Burrington katie.burrington@thomsonreuters.com Publishing Editor Dawn McGovern dawn.mcgovern@thomsonreuters.com Senior Editor Lisa Naylor lisa.naylor@thomsonreuters.com Editorial Publishing Co-ordinator Nicola Pender nicola.pender@thomsonreuters.com Published in April 2015 by Thomson Reuters (Professional) UK Limited trading as European Lawyer Reference Series Friars House, 160 Blackfriars Road, London, SE1 8EZ (Registered in England & Wales, Company No 1679046. Registered Office and address for service: 2nd floor, Aldgate House, 33 Aldgate High Street, London EC3N 1DL) A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN:9780414039483 Thomson Reuters and the Thomson Reuters logo are trade marks of Thomson Reuters. Crown copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen s Printer for Scotland. While all reasonable care has been taken to ensure the accuracy of the publication, the publishers cannot accept responsibility for any errors or omissions. This publication is protected by international copyright law. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, or stored in any retrieval system of any nature without prior written permission, except for permitted fair dealing under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or in accordance with the terms of a licence issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency in respect of photocopying and/or reprographic reproduction. Application for permission for other use of copyright material including permission to reproduce extracts in other published works shall be made to the publishers. Full acknowledgement of author, publisher and source must be given. 2015 Thomson Reuters (Professional) UK Limited
Private Client Tax Contents Foreword John Rhodes Stonehage Law Ltd Australia Clayton Utz Allan Blaikie & Andrew Sommer 1 Austria Dorda Brugger Jordis Rechtsanwaelte GmbH 21 Paul Doralt & Martina Znidaric Bermuda Conyers Dill & Pearman Alec R. Anderson 33 Canada Miller Thomson LLP Martin J. Rochwerg, Mary Anne Bueschkens & 49 Rahul Sharma Cayman Islands Collas Crill & CARD Antony Duckworth & Wendy Stenning 69 Cyprus Andreas Neocleous & Co LLC Elias Neocleous & Philippos Aristotelous 81 England & Wales Macfarlanes LLP Jonathan Conder & Oliver Court 101 France UGGC Avocats Line-Alexa Glotin 121 Germany Flick Gocke Schaumburg Dr. Christian von Oertzen 137 Gibraltar Isolas Peter A. Isola & Adrian Pilcher 153 Greece Elias Paraskevas Attorneys 1933 Dimitris E. Paraskevas, 173 John G. Mazarakos, Ioanna A. Kombou & Ioannis A. Sarakinos Guernsey Carey Olsen Laila Arstall 187 India Khaitan & Co Bijal Ajinkya & Shabnam Shaikh 207 Ireland Matheson John Gill & Allison Dey 221 Israel Alon Kaplan Advocate, Herzog Fox & Neeman Law Office Meir Linzen, 239 Guy Katz & Eran Lempert, Aronson, Ronkin-Noor, Eyal Law Firm Lyat Eyal Italy Carnelutti Studio Legale Associato Luca Arnaboldi & Gilberto Comi 259 Jersey Carey Olsen Paul Matthams & Keith Dixon 273 Malta Fenech & Fenech Advocates Rosanne Bonnici & Paul Gonzi 293 Mexico Jáuregui y Del Valle, S.C. Miguel Jáuregui Rojas 313 Monaco Donald Manasse Law Office Donald Manasse 329 The Netherlands Arcagna Arnold van der Smeede 341 New Zealand TGT Legal Pravir Tesiram 355 Portugal Cuatrecasas, Gonçalves Pereira Diogo Ortigão Ramos & 373 Maria João Ricou Singapore Allen & Gledhill LLP Sunit Chhabra & Mark Li 393 South Africa HR Levin Attorneys Hymie Reuvin Levin & Gwynneth Louise Rowe 411 Spain Cuatrecasas, Gonçalves Pereira Florentino Carreño & Carlos Ferrer 429 Switzerland Lenz & Staehelin Jean-Blaise Eckert 447 United States Kozusko Harris Duncan Stephen K. Vetter & Eric M. Dorsch 467 Contacts 485 v EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES iii
Foreword Foreword John Rhodes Stonehage Law Ltd Welcome to the third edition of Private Client Tax in the European Lawyer Reference Series. In the foreword to the first edition in 2010, I recounted how, against the advice of my peers, I had opted for a career on the private client side of the City of London law firm I joined after studying law at Cambridge. This proved to be an immensely stimulating choice, opening a world of challenging clients and problems with which I am still engaged some 47 years later. Anyone opening this volume needs no convincing about the relevance and excitement of acting for wealthy private clients. Amongst them we count the wealth and job creators, whose role in our societies has never been more important than today. Politicians spend at least as much time in aeroplanes as private client lawyers, but swept along in their motorcades from one meeting to another they fail to pick up the essential message that what western economies need at this stage of the cycle is less government interference, regulation and taxation and more stimulus from entrepreneurs. This is despite the clear evidence of history that countries adopting a tax-cutting, smaller government approach by and large provide more choice and a better standard of living for their citizens. In the foreword to the second edition in 2012, I questioned whether the policies advocated by François Hollande would serve his country well. The outcome is clear whatever statistics you choose the French economy, his popularity rankings, or the number of his countrymen who have recently brought their families and their ingenuity across the Channel to England. The simple truth is that western governments have become addicted to spending more than they raise in taxes. This, combined with dramatic increases in longevity, is a toxic brew, leaving them with two obvious solutions: increasing taxes or cutting expenditure, neither of which appeal to their electorates. But whatever combination of these two main policy strands governments adopt, the third weapon in their arsenal is making dramatic improvements in tax collection. In the years since our first edition was published, the focus on this last subject has been unrelenting, with the US authorities taking the lead after finally and very publicly losing patience with those who brokered the banking secrecy model. A new era of transparency has been ushered in via multiple Tax Information Exchange Agreements, complex Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act regulations and headline-grabbing penalty settlements paid by Swiss and other banks for encouraging past tax evasions. All this was predictable, and indeed predicted by me and others from the early 1990s onwards. Some banks have responded by significantly reducing EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES v
Foreword the services provided for wealthy international families. All such families have to rethink their objectives and their strategies depending where they and their assets are located. One function of this volume is to enable such families and those who advise them to keep abreast of developments in this respect. One general comment I would make is that, whilst it is still possible for families to organise their affairs so they quite legitimately pay well under the standard level of tax levied on permanent residents of the main western jurisdictions, it will undoubtedly become increasingly difficult to maintain such a lifestyle. This is a result not only of the greater transparency I have already mentioned, but also of hardening attitudes even in those jurisdictions which have traditionally welcomed foreign wealth, such as the UK and Switzerland. In the 2014 UK Autumn Statement, the cost of the Remittance Basis Charge for non-uk domiciled taxpayers was increased, for those who have been resident in 17 of the past 20 years to 90,000 a year. Already we see clear evidence that only the extremely rich are prepared to pay such an annual levy. In Switzerland, the November 2014 referendum on the forfait has allowed cantons to continue that regime if they so wish, but the mere fact that the question was ever put to a country-wide vote underlines a general perception that too much wealth has become concentrated in the hands of too few. This same theme was highlighted by President Obama in a recent major speech and I am told also lies behind current political unrest in Hong Kong, where wage earners can no longer afford to live centrally. Does all this mean that if the very wealthy are to head-off a concerted attack they should willingly contribute more generously towards their share of the social contract? As before, the authors of our different chapters are all experts in their own jurisdictions. One sure sign of competence is an ability to distil a complex subject down to its essentials. That you will find here. None of the chapters however is intended to provide more than an overview: any detailed case will have to be analysed on its own facts. But the list of authors here provides a ready guide to those who are well able to undertake that task, jurisdiction by jurisdiction and across jurisdictions too. The publishers and I were delighted with the enthusiastic reaction received to the first and second volumes, which has given us the confidence to move ahead with the third. I have no doubt it will be similarly well received. Thanks are due to all our contributors for making time in their busy schedules to enable us to do this. John Rhodes London March 2015 vi EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES
Ireland Matheson John Gill & Allison Dey 1. NON-TAX ISSUES 1.1 Domestic law 1.1.1 Briefly describe your legal system and its origins The legal system of the Republic of Ireland is a common law system. In order to ensure consistency, a legal principle developed whereby courts were generally required to follow earlier relevant decisions. This doctrine of precedent established the methodology by which relevant legal principles are extracted from earlier decisions. By the 17th century, the common law of England was imported into Ireland when it replaced the Irish system of laws known as the Brehon laws. Given the origin of the Irish legal system and the traditional links between the two jurisdictions, it is not surprising to find UK decisions are the most frequently cited foreign decisions. 1.1.2 What is the scope of your succession law? Statute law including the Administration of Estates Act 1959 and primarily, the Succession Act 1965 govern succession law, together with rules of procedure enshrined in the rules of the Superior Courts. Freedom of testation applies but is subject to two principal exceptions relating to spouses and children. Spouses Where a person dies wholly or partially testate, the surviving spouse shall be entitled to: One-half of the estate where there are no children. One-third of the estate where there are children (section 111 Succession Act 1965). The legal right taken by the spouse in these circumstances is known as the legal right share. Children Children do not have a formal right to an entitlement to the estate. At best, their right could be described as a right to apply. Upon an application to a court, the court has the authority to make proper provision for that child where it believes that the testator has failed in his or her moral duty to make such proper provision for that child in accordance with his means (section 117 Succession Act 1965). Lawfully adopted children and children born outside of marriage are entitled to make an application. EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES 221
Civil partners Under the Civil Partners and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010 (CROC Act), civil partners have rights almost identical to those of spouses, with one important exception. The legal right share of a surviving spouse cannot be decreased by a successful section 117 application by a child of the deceased. There is no such protection of the legal right share of a surviving civil partner. A referendum on the subject of full marriage equality is planned for 2015. There are no other statutory provisions under which disappointed heirs can seek relief save those in favour of the deceased s spouse and children outlined above and general part performance and estoppel principles. 1.1.3 When are individuals and their property subject to succession rules? See 1.1.2 above. 1.2 Private international law 1.2.1 What is the jurisdiction of local courts in international disputes? Ireland applies the Brussels Regime which consists of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (Brussels Convention), Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Brussels I) and the 1988 Lugano Convention and the 2007 Lugano Convention (Lugano Convention). The Brussels Convention determines which member states courts have jurisdiction and how the judgments of a court of one member state acting under the Convention must be recognised and enforced in another member state. The Brussels Convention also formed the basis of the Lugano Convention which extended the rules on jurisdiction and enforcement of judgments to the European Free Trade Association countries. For all member states except Denmark, the Brussels Convention was replaced from 1 March 2002 by Brussels I. Brussels I is directly applicable and forms part of the body of EU law. Also applicable is Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility. Matrimonial matters include divorce, annulment and legal separation but do not include, for example, the property consequences of marriage and the grounds for divorce. The basic rule of the Brussels regime is that a defendant must be sued in the courts of his domicile. However when attempting to determine which court will have jurisdiction to hear a particular matter, the first step should always be to determine the type of dispute at hand as there are some exceptions to the basic rule. For example disputes as to rights in rem on immoveable property, the jurisdiction to hear the dispute is conferred on the member state in which the property is situated. It is possible that the courts of more than one member state may have jurisdiction over a matter. In such situations it is generally the court in which proceedings were commenced first which takes priority. 222 EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES
In respect of the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments, in order to be enforceable a judgment must meet certain criteria. Firstly, it must be for a definite monetary sum. Secondly, the foreign judgment must be final and conclusive. Finally, the judgment must have been given by a court of competent jurisdiction. A recast Brussels I regulation became effective from January 2015. The recast regulation now also applies to jurisdiction in respect of non-eu residents. It abolishes formalities for the recognition of judgments and simplifies the procedure for a court chosen by the parties to commence proceedings (even if proceedings have started in another member state already). For disputes falling outside of the scope of the Brussels and Lugano regimes, the common law rules apply. The procedural rules in respect of service outside of the state and the appropriate forum to hear disputes are set out in the Irish Rules of the Superior Courts and are laid down in case law. Irish courts will apply the doctrine of forum non conveniens whereby they may refuse jurisdiction to hear a dispute where they are of the opinion that there is a more appropriate forum. 1.2.2 What approach do local courts take to conflict of laws? Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I Regulation) and Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II Regulation) determine the correct law to be applied to cross-border disputes arising between parties from different EU member states. These Regulations replaced the Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations 1980 (Rome Convention). The Rome I Regulation deals with the proper law to be applied to contractual disputes and provides that typically, the law to be applied in relation to breaches of contract should be the law of the country with which the contract is most closely connected. The Rome II Regulation deals with non-contractual disputes such as torts and delicts (civil wrongs). It provides broadly that the law to be applied is that of the member state in which the wrong was committed or the injury sustained. There are however a series of exceptions to the general rules. The Irish Common Law rules will apply where one or more of the parties to the dispute are not within the scope of the Rome regime. The Irish courts apply the doctrine of renvoi whereby disputes can be referred back to courts in the jurisdiction where the proper law of the dispute should be applied. These rules are notoriously complex. Where there are foreign elements to a will or succession matter, and a conflict of law arises, the connecting factor used by the Irish courts is the domicile of the deceased and the lex domicili (law of the domicile) is applied. However in respect of immovable property it is the lex situs (law of the place where the property is situated) which is applied. Ireland did not exercise its right to opt in to the Regulation 650/2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES 223
succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession (Succession Regulation) pursuant to Title V under Protocol 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The regulation may still have relevance however for Irish clients where they die habitually resident in a participating member state or if a valid professio juris (election for the law of the individual s nationality to be applied to his estate in will) in favour of a participating member state has been made. In such cases there may be a conflict of laws with regard to the law of the domicile of the individual and the law of the state in which he was habitually resident. Another practical concern is the fact that there is no distinction between member states and participating member states in the final text of the Succession Regulation and so there exists some ambiguity in respect of the position of Ireland, the UK and Denmark. 2. TAXATION 2.1 What are the criteria for liability to main taxes? The tax treatment of an individual in Ireland will depend on whether they are Irish resident, ordinarily resident or domiciled. There is no statutory definition of domicile. Domicile is a legal concept and can be broadly defined as a person s natural home. Every individual is born with a domicile of origin. It is possible for a person to lose their domicile of origin and acquire a domicile of choice. Likewise it is possible for an individual to lose their domicile of choice and revive their domicile of origin. Domicile is an important concept under Irish law as it is relevant not only for tax purposes but also for determining the rules of succession. There is a statutory definition of tax residence in Ireland (noted below). Where an individual is resident and domiciled in Ireland, they will be taxable on their worldwide income, regardless of its source. If a person is resident or ordinarily resident but not domiciled, then liability to income tax and capital gains is limited to Irish source income and Irish gains and other income and gains to the extent they are remitted to Ireland. The residence test A person will be regarded as Irish resident if they are: Present in the state for a period of 183 days or more in the tax year (which is a calendar year). Present in the state for a period of 280 days or more in the current and previous tax year, subject to the provision that where a person is present here for 30 days or less, he will not be regarded as resident for that tax year. If a person is present during any part of the day, he or she is considered resident for that full day for the purpose of the residency rules. The final issue is that of ordinary residence. Under section 820 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997, an individual becomes ordinarily resident in Ireland for a tax year after he has been resident in the state for three consecutive tax years. The individual continues to be treated as ordinarily resident for the subsequent tax years. 224 EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES
The legislation further provides that an individual who has become ordinarily resident in Ireland for a tax year shall not cease to be so ordinarily resident until after an individual has had three consecutive years in which he was not resident in the state. Notwithstanding that an individual may not be resident for a particular tax year, ordinary residence is sufficient to bring an Irish domiciled individual within the Irish charge to capital gains tax on worldwide disposals. A person who is ordinarily resident and domiciled but nonresident is liable to income tax on their worldwide income, with the exception of (i) income from a trade or profession, no part of which is exercised in the state; or (ii) an office or employment all the duties of which are exercised outside the state. Such a person is liable in respect of all other income (investment income) in excess of EUR3,810 and capital gains. 2.2 What are the relevant main taxes in your jurisdiction? The following taxes apply: Income tax. Corporation tax. Capital acquisitions tax (CAT) (gift/inheritance tax). Capital gains tax (CGT). Stamp duty. Local property tax (LPT). VAT. 2.3 Enforcement/collection of taxes 2.3.1 What are the basic procedures for collection and enforcement? The Irish tax system is largely based on self-assessment, with income tax, corporation tax, CGT, CAT, stamp duty, LPT and VAT all being collected in this manner. For the self-assessment system to work, there are deterrents to noncompliance. The Collector General s Office of the Revenue Commissioners has responsibility for collecting the taxes due and for pursuing tax payers when they fail to comply with their tax obligations. Revenue powers The main methods used by the Revenue Commissioners to encourage the timely payment of taxes are: Interest and penalties Interest may be charged at 0.0219% per day (or part of a day) on the late payment of income tax, corporation tax, CGT, CAT and stamp duty and 8% per annum for the late payment of LPT. In addition, penalties or surcharges may apply for incorrect or late payments. Issuing demands The Revenue Commissioners may issue various types of demands for payment of outstanding tax liabilities. Audits and investigations The Revenue Commissioners may audit at random the calculation of tax liabilities and interest. Where the Revenue EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES 225
Commissioners have strong concerns of serious tax offences having occurred, an investigation into a taxpayer s affairs may be ordered. Right to information The Revenue Commissioners may seek books, documents and other information from taxpayers or third parties in respect of a liability and where necessary may apply to the High Court for an order directing compliance. Power to enter premises agents for the Revenue Commissioners may enter a business premises at any reasonable time in order to inspect records relevant to establishing or verifying any tax liability. Other measures The Revenue Commissioners may also encourage compliance by taking such measures as withholding repayments of tax due to the taxpayer or not issuing a tax clearance certificate. Enforcement The most frequently used enforcement measures are: Recovery action by the Sheriff A Sheriff may seize certain assets from the taxpayer in respect of outstanding liabilities. Notice of attachment The Revenue Commissioners may recover a tax debt by issuing a Notice of Attachment to an amount owed to the defaulting taxpayer by a third party debtor. Referral of the case to Revenue Solicitor Tax debts may be referred to Revenue appointed lawyers for the purposes of pursuing collection through the court process. The Revenue Commissioners may then seek to recover the tax debt by way of enforcement of a judgment in their favour by forced sale of an asset that is the subject of a judgment mortgage, by way of an instalment order granted by the court followed by committal to prison in the event of non-payment, or by way of a bankruptcy petition (or a petition to wind up a company in the case of a debtor company). Criminal proceedings Irish tax law provides for both civil penalties and criminal sanctions for the failure to make a return, the making of a false return, facilitating the making of a false return, or claiming tax credits, allowances or reliefs which are not due. Instalment arrangements If justifiable in the circumstances of the individual taxpayer or business, the Revenue Commissioners may, as a concession, permit a taxpayer to pay their tax debt, including interest, by way of a phased payment arrangement. 2.3.2 To what extent is non-compliance an issue? Tax compliance rates have improved markedly over the years due to significant deterrents and a robust enforcement framework. In 2014, compliance interventions including audits yielded EUR610 million including interest and penalties. A total of 1,199 tax defaulters names were published and there were 25 successful prosecutions for serious tax evasion and fraud offences. The compliance rate for large cases (EUR500,000+ annual tax liability) was 99%; the compliance rate for medium cases (EUR75,000 226 EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES
EUR500,000 annual tax liability) was 97%; and the compliance rate for small cases (all other cases) was 83%. The compliance rate for local property tax of 95% was much higher than expected considering the level of resistance upon its introduction. 2.3.3 Describe circumstances in which default can lead to imprisonment Once a court judgment has been obtained, the Revenue Commissioners can apply to have the court examine the taxpayer s means and make an instalment order for payment of the tax debt based on the taxpayer s ability to pay. If a taxpayer fails to honour an instalment order, the Revenue Commissioners can apply to the court for a committal order. Furthermore if convicted of certain tax evasion offences, a significant jail term could ensue. 2.3.4 Any recent law on extradition for tax offences? Extradition between EU member states is governed by the European Arrest Warrant Framework Decision. This was implemented in Ireland by the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003. Extradition to other countries from Ireland is governed by the Extradition Act 1965, as amended. In addition, Ireland is party to several multilateral treaties on extradition, the most notable of which are the 1957 European Convention on Extradition and extradition treaties with the US and Australia. Section 13 of the Extradition Act 1965 follows the well-established principle of international law that one state will not enforce directly or indirectly the revenue laws of a foreign country. Prior to amendment by the Extradition (European Union Convention) Act 2001, section 13 provided that extradition would not be granted for revenue offences. This exception was diluted by a 2001 Act and section 13 now provides that extradition will not be granted for revenue offences unless the relevant extradition provisions otherwise provide. This amendment gives effect to Article 6 of the European Union Convention on Extradition of 1996 which makes revenue offences extraditable between EU member states. This allows for extradition for revenue offences to be included in any future agreements that may be negotiated. More changes were brought about by the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003. The Act is silent on the issue of whether there is an exception from extradition for revenue offences. It may therefore be assumed that there is no statutory revenue offence exception to extradition between EU member states. 2.3.5 Have there been any recent changes of behaviour by tax authorities? The Revenue Commissioners are currently undergoing a consultation process on their 2015-2017 statement of strategy. The focus in the last number of years has been the issue of the cash-based black economy and the seizure of cigarettes, fuel and other items which have not been cleared through customs. There has also been a renewed focus on the collection of vehicle registration tax. There will be an emphasis on the efficient collection and processing of the impending water charges. EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES 227
On the international level, the Revenue Commissioners are engaging with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Base Erosion and Profit Shifting project in order to come up with a framework to prevent the reduction of tax by multi-national corporations through jurisdictional arbitrage. 2.3.6 Are there any voluntary disclosure or amnesty programmes? There is currently no formal amnesty procedure in Ireland. The Revenue Commissioners Code of Practice for Revenue Audit and other Compliance Interventions does, however, allow for prompted and unprompted disclosures which may have the effect of mitigating penalties that would otherwise apply. In recent years, the Revenue Commissioners have announced a series of voluntary disclosure initiatives which allow taxpayers to come forward and make a disclosure as to previously undisclosed tax liabilities. The disclosure must state the amounts of all liabilities to tax, interest and penalties with regard to all relevant tax heads and must be accompanied by payment of the total liability. The benefit to the taxpayer of making such a disclosure is that it entitles the taxpayer to significant mitigation of penalties. Furthermore, cases are not published where a qualifying disclosure is accepted. 3. EXEMPTIONS AND/OR EXIT TAXES FOR NEW IMMIGRANTS AND EMIGRANTS 3.1 Which taxes are relevant in your jurisdiction? As outlined above under question 2.1, the liability of a person to taxation in Ireland will depend on whether they are Irish resident or domiciled. The majority of new immigrants will be non-domiciled and thus may avail of the remittance basis of taxation. Remittance basis of taxation Since the introduction of the Finance Act 2010, the remittance basis of taxation is only available for one class of tax resident individuals (individuals who are resident but not domiciled in Ireland in any given tax year). These individuals are liable to income tax and CGT on Irish source income and on foreign income and capital gains to the extent that such foreign income and gains are actually remitted to the state (as opposed to on an arising basis). It is also worthwhile in this context to review the anti-avoidance provisions that may apply to Irish resident individuals in respect of offshore structures in the form of companies or trusts. Anti-avoidance provisions Section 806 TCA 1997 contains anti-avoidance legislation in relation to the transfers of assets abroad and specifically imposes a tax charge on Irish resident or ordinarily resident and domiciled persons who have power to enjoy income arising to persons resident or domiciled out of the state. 228 EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES
Section 807A TCA 1997 was introduced to bolster section 806. It operates where income becomes payable to a person who is resident or domiciled out of the state as a result of the transfer of assets abroad either alone or in conjunction with associated operations and subsequently an individual who is resident or ordinarily resident and domiciled in the state (not liable under section 806 TCA 1997) receives a benefit provided out of the assets which are available for that purpose by virtue of the transfer or any associated operations. CGT anti-avoidance provisions for trusts and corporates Section 590 TCA 1997 operates to apportion gains within a non-resident close company to Irish resident or ordinarily resident and domiciled individuals who are participators in the company (in other words, the shareholders in the company). Section 579 TCA 1997 applies to attribute gains in an offshore trust to an Irish resident or ordinarily resident. Section 579A TCA 1997 attributes gains arising to offshore trustees to capital distributions made to resident or ordinarily resident beneficiaries, but the Irish position is that it only applies to such resident persons if domiciled in Ireland at the relevant time. CGT is currently taxed at 33% The Irish position is favourable as compared to the UK and it is possible for Irish resident/non-domiciled beneficiaries of an offshore trust to receive a distribution in Ireland tax free. Where an Irish domiciled individual is no longer resident but still ordinarily resident, they may avail of the remittance basis in relation to income, but the individual would still be liable to CGT on worldwide gains until they lose both their Irish residence and their Irish ordinary residence. 4. USE OF ASSET HOLDING VEHICLES 4.1 Which vehicles are available in your jurisdiction and how are they treated by the courts? Trusts Trusts are commonly used to protect wealth and assets for beneficiaries and can be used for legitimate tax planning. The most common type of trusts in Ireland are either fixed or discretionary trusts. Under a fixed trust, the purpose is defined and the beneficiaries are known. Alternatively, a discretionary trust holds specific property on behalf of a class or group of beneficiaries, each of whom have no defined right to any specific share until such share has been allocated by the trustees. Partnerships In Ireland, the two main types of partnership used to hold assets are general partnerships and limited partnerships. A general partnership features two or more partners in which each partner is liable for any debts taken on by the partnership. A limited partnership consists of two or more persons, with at least one general partner and one limited partner. While a general partner EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES 229
in a limited partnership has unlimited personal liability, a limited partner s liability is limited to the amount of his/her investment. Companies Company law in Ireland will undergo an overhaul in 2015 due to the implementation of the Companies Act 2014. Generally, there are two types of companies in Ireland, a private company and a public company. However, the majority of companies registered in Ireland are private companies and, of those, most are small with only one or two members. A private company can be limited or unlimited. A company is regarded as a separate legal entity and is separate and distinct from the shareholders. Limited company: In a limited liability company, the shareholder s liability (should the company fail) is limited to the amount, if any, remaining unpaid on the shares held by them. The personal assets of directors/shareholders cannot be used to pay off company debts. The Companies Act 2014 introduces a new form of private limited company known as a designated activity company (DAC). The DAC will have a bespoke set of internal constitutional rules while the model limited company will have a standard uniform constitution. Unlimited company: In an unlimited company, there is no limit on the liability of the members. In other words, the shareholders accept personal and unlimited liability for all the debts of the company. The Companies Act 2014 introduces some changes to Irish unlimited companies such as requiring that they be designated with the words Unlimited Company or the letters UC after their name and that the rules in respect of distributions may be disapplied. Foundations Foundations are not recognised by Irish law. If a foundation was established outside of Ireland, the relevant law of the civil law jurisdiction where the foundation was established would need to be examined. Irish courts In relation to the above vehicles, the Irish courts will apply well-known common law principles in relation to these vehicles when dealing with vehicles within the jurisdiction. If the applicable law is that of a third jurisdiction, the Irish courts will procure expert foreign opinions either by affidavit or oral evidence to appraise the position. 5. PHILANTHROPIC AND CHARITABLE OPTIONS 5.1 Is there a compulsory registration system for charities? Regulation is pursuant to the Charities Act 2009, which was passed into law in February 2009 and became effective by ministerial order on 16 October 2014. For the first time, a single, independent body regulates the charities sector in Ireland. The Charities Regulatory Authority (the Authority) carries out administrative functions. 230 EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES
A conclusive and up-to-date register of charitable bodies (the Register) is maintained by the Authority. All charities carrying out activities in the state are required to be included on the Register, which is available to the public. It is the first time that there is a compulsory registration and regulatory system for charities in the state. This is independent of the separate registration requirements on charities seeking to be afforded charitable relief status from the Revenue Commissioners. 5.2 Are there any tax reliefs available? Irish tax legislation provides exemptions for charitable bodies in respect of certain taxes in certain circumstances. Charitable status will only be granted where the objects and powers of the charitable body provide that its income may only be applied for purposes that are legally charitable. Broadly, in order to qualify as charitable, a two tier test must be satisfied. Firstly, the objects of the charitable body must be one or more of the following: The relief of poverty. The advancement of education. The advancement of religion. Other works of charitable nature beneficial to the community. Secondly, in conjunction with satisfying the above, the charitable body must possess sufficient public benefit (it must benefit the community as a whole or an appreciable section of the community) and its purpose must be exclusively charitable. The taxes from which charities may receive certain exemption in certain circumstances include income tax, corporation tax, CGT, deposit interest retention tax, gift and inheritance tax, stamp duty and dividend withholding tax. There are also certain tax reliefs available for corporate donors to charitable bodies, such as relief from CGT on the disposal of an asset to a charitable body in certain circumstances and corporation tax relief. In order for a charity to avail of tax relief on donations, the donation must, be made to an eligible charity, being a charitable body which was granted tax exempt status for a period of at least two years. The minimum donation upon which tax relief may be obtained is EUR250 to any one charitable body in the year of assessment. The relief accrues to the charity and is effected by the claiming of 31% of donations made as an added benefit to the charity. This replaces the old system whereby charitable donations acted as a deduction against the income tax/cgt of the donor. 5.3 Are there any particular distribution requirements and can domestic charities apply funds outside your jurisdiction? In order to obtain charitable tax status, the Office of the Revenue Commissioners will seek to ensure that the income, assets or profits of a charitable body are applied solely in furtherance of its charitable purposes and that no portion is paid or distributed to the members of the charitable body, either directly or indirectly, by way of dividend, bonus or otherwise. EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES 231
The Office of the Revenue Commissioners will also seek to ensure that no fees and/or salaries (other than out-of-pocket expenses) are paid to trustees or directors of the charitable body for services rendered in that capacity. Finally, in the event that the charitable body is wound up, the surplus assets must be transferred to a charitable body having similar objects to itself, or failing that, to some other charitable body. There is no restriction on Irish charitable bodies which have been granted charitable tax status applying funds outside of Ireland, provided that those funds are being applied solely towards the promotion of the charitable objects (as defined by Irish law) of the body. 6. REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT 6.1 What is the financial environment like for funds and other investment vehicles? Ireland is recognised as one of the world s most advantageous jurisdictions in which to establish international investment funds and, with a 350% growth in assets under management between 2003 and November 2014, it is the fastest growing European jurisdiction for internationally domiciled funds. Fund vehicles can be established in Ireland as investment companies, unit trusts, common contractual funds or investment limited partnerships and Ireland is recognised as the leading European domicile for exchange traded funds and money market funds. Ireland is also a leading jurisdiction for the administration of international hedge funds, with over 40% of the world s hedge funds administered in Ireland. Ireland is a mature funds jurisdiction, having over 20 years of experience dealing with the broadest possible spectrum of fund structures. The Irish funds industry services EUR3.2 trillion in over 13,000 funds (as at September 2014). It is a global hub for fund promoters, with over 440 promoters from more than 50 countries having set up Irish domiciled funds. Furthermore, Ireland has a wide-ranging expertise in all aspects of the industry and is the largest global centre for hedge fund administration. The Central Bank of Ireland is the regulatory authority responsible for the authorisation and supervision of Irish fund vehicles. The Central Bank has worked closely with the mutual funds industry to tailor its regulations to accommodate a range of investment products with different structural features. The Central Bank s due consideration of developing industry practice, whilst having regard to its duties to protect shareholders, has been characteristic of the robust and energetic regulatory environment for financial services in Ireland. One of the key factors to the success of the Irish funds industry is the taxation treatment of regulated funds in Ireland. The majority of Irish fund structures are exempt from Irish tax on income and gains derived from their investment portfolios and are not subject to any Irish tax based on their net asset value. Irish residents may invest in a fund without affecting the tax-exempt nature of the fund (although they cannot invest in a common contractual fund structure, which is limited to institutional investors and companies). The tax treatment of income and gains received by a non-irish 232 EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES
resident investor in an Irish domiciled fund is a matter for the tax laws of the country of residence of the investor. All Irish funds have access to Ireland s large and expanding network of double taxation treaties. At present, Ireland has signed comprehensive double taxation agreements with 72 countries, of which 68 are currently in effect. The agreements cover income tax, corporation tax and CGT. If an investor is Irish resident and not an exempt Irish investor, tax at 41% will be required to be deducted by the fund on and on any other distribution or gain arising to the investor on an encashment, redemption, and so on of units/shares by an investor who is Irish resident or an ordinary resident in Ireland. While this tax will be a tax liability of the fund, it is effectively incurred by investors out of their investment proceeds. A disposal of units is also deemed to occur at the end of an eight-year period following the acquisition of the units and as such Irish resident investors will be subject to tax on the total gains over that eight-year period. 6.2 What is the impact of anti-money-laundering legislation on professional/banking confidentiality? The Directive 2001/97/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 December 2001 amending Council Directive 91/308/EEC on prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering was implemented in 2003 and introduced new anti-money laundering regulations in Ireland. The Third EU Money Laundering Directive (Directive 2005/60/EC) was transposed into Irish law by the Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Act 2010 on 5 May 2010 (the Money Laundering Act). The aim of the Money Laundering Act is to widen the scope of previous anti money laundering and terrorist financing legislation. Money laundering and the financing of terrorism are criminal offences. Furthermore, there is a statutory obligation on all financial services firms such as banks as well as professionals such as accountants, auditors, tax advisors and solicitors, so-called designated persons to report suspicions of money laundering. Section 42 of the Money Laundering Act requires that agents, employees, partners, directors, other officers or persons engaged under a contract for services with a designated person must report to the Garda Síochána and the Revenue Commissioners where they suspect that an offence under section 7 or 8 of the Money Laundering Act has been or is being committed in relation to the business of the designated person. However, the disclosure of information that is subject to legal privilege is not required. Therefore, communications between a legal adviser and client are not to be disclosed without the consent of the client. In addition, the Money Laundering Act has introduced some important changes for designated persons and has widened the definition of money laundering to include the proceeds of any criminal conduct, however, minor. The Money Laundering Act provides that the level of client due diligence required will now be determined using a risk-based approach ranging from simplified to enhanced. This risk-based approach to client due diligence gives rise to extended obligations for the designated person. EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES 233
Furthermore, there are increased obligations to identify the beneficial owner meaning that necessary enquiries must be made to understand the ownership and control structure of the client. In addition, there is a new requirement on designated persons to identify persons in prominent public positions and their families or close associates (non-domestic politically exposed persons). The number of offences have also been increased under the Money Laundering Act. 6.3 Is it necessary to comply with tax and other information exchanges? The European Council 2003/48/EC of 3 June 2003 on taxation of savings income in the form of interest payments (European Savings Tax Directive) was given effect in Ireland from 1 July, 2005 under the European Communities (Taxation of Savings Income in the form of Interest Payments) Regulations 2005. The European Savings Tax Directive introduced a system of information sharing between tax authorities in respect of interest payments. It obliges financial institutions to establish the identity and residence of all individuals to whom they make interest payments. This information is then either shared with the relevant tax authority of the recipient or for countries such as Austria, Belgium and Luxembourg where bank secrecy is an issue, interest withholding tax is applied to such payments. Any information regarding interest payments made by Irish paying agents to individuals resident in other EU member states will be forwarded to the Revenue Commissioners. In turn, the Revenue Commissioners will forward this information to the relevant authorities in the appropriate member state or territory. Similarly, the Revenue Commissioners will receive information from other EU tax authorities in respect of Irish residents who have received interest payments from institutions in other EU countries. The requirements of the European Savings Tax Directive apply to all payments of interest made to individuals resident in EU member states and certain dependent and associated territories of the UK and the Netherlands. In addition, Ireland has entered into tax information exchange agreements (TIEAs) with a number of countries/territories: Guernsey, the Isle of Man and Jersey, Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, the Cook Islands, Gibraltar, Granada, Lichtenstein, the Marshall lands, Samoa, San Marino, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, The Turks and Caicos Islands and Vanuatu. In addition, Ireland has been designated by the Cayman Islands as a country that may make requests for tax information under Part IV of the Tax Information Authority Law. 6.4 What is the impact of US and other FATCA rules? The Foreign Accounting Tax Compliance act (FATCA) is part of the US Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (2010) and aims to combat tax evasion by US tax residents using foreign accounts. Ireland is a signatory of a model 1 inter-governmental agreement (IGA) with the USA to implement 234 EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES
FATCA here. In this regard, it is important to recognise that FATCA potentially puts obligations on all trusts, whether or not they have any US connections, US assets or US income. In signing the model 1 IGA, Ireland has agreed to incorporate FATCA reporting requirements into its own tax code and take responsibility for enforcement. From a private client perspective, trusts (which are classified as foreign financial institutions) that are Irish resident, will have to comply with significant reporting obligations. Common reporting standard In October 2014, the OECD announced that over 50 jurisdictions had committed to the mutual exchange of information between tax authorities, termed the Common Reporting Standard (CRS). CRS involves the collection of information for tax purposes, commencing with high value accounts, by the tax authority of the jurisdiction where an account is held, and passing that information to the tax authority in the jurisdiction where the holder of the account is resident. Ireland has been one of the early adopters of the CRS. 7. KEY PLANNING POINTS FOR LONG TERM RESIDENT FAMILIES Usually, a long-term resident will be Irish resident for tax purposes but will not usually be Irish domiciled. In this regard, as previously outlined in question 3, non-domiciled, resident individuals in Ireland may claim the remittance basis of taxation in any year of assessment for which they are resident in relation to non-irish source income and gains. In addition, it is important for a non-domiciled individual to note their potential exposure to CAT. CAT is the generic name for the tax imposed on gifts and inheritances in this jurisdiction (which is charged at 33%). CAT is a beneficiary-based tax and is imposed on any Irish situated assets comprised on a gift or inheritance and where, at the time of the gift or inheritance, either the donor or beneficiary is resident in Ireland. However, there is a statutory relief for non-domiciled individuals from CAT, as they will not be deemed to be resident for CAT purposes, unless they have been resident for five consecutive tax years at the relevant time. When they have been Irish resident for five years, the non-domiciled Irish resident will be within the Irish CAT charge in relation to his worldwide assets. While an individual s domicile has important implications for tax purposes, it is also important from a legal perspective in relation to Irish succession law. As previously stated, Ireland follows the widely accepted common law succession principles which dictate that the succession law which governs the entitlement of immovable property of the deceased, is the law of the jurisdiction where the property is situated while the law which governs the entitlement to moveable property is the jurisdiction where the deceased was domiciled at their date of death. EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES 235
8. KEY POINTS FOR MIGRATING/TEMPORARILY RESIDENT FAMILIES Up until the Finance Act 2010, it was possible for Irish citizens who were resident in Ireland but not ordinarily resident, to be taxed on a remittance basis. Now, only individuals who are migrating/temporarily resident in Ireland (and non-irish domiciled) can be taxed on the remittance basis. Prior to 1 January 2006, non-irish domiciled and non-ordinarily resident individuals in Ireland could avail themselves of the remittance basis of taxation to include income from an employment exercised in Ireland. However, this basis of taxation was removed from the above date. Therefore, the general rule is that Irish resident and domiciled individuals are liable to Irish tax on worldwide income and gains. However, an individual who is Irish resident, but not Irish domiciled (which includes the majority of those coming to Ireland to work on secondment), will normally be liable to Irish income or capital gains tax on non-irish sourced income or gains only to the extent that the income or gains are remitted to Ireland and in all cases to gains arising on the sale of specified assets, which are situate in the state. If the individual is ordinarily resident in Ireland and Irish domiciled (but non Irish resident), he will be liable to income tax on his worldwide income save for the exceptions referred to in paragraph 2.1 and liable for gains arising on his worldwide assets (with no exceptions). It is possible for careful structuring in the year prior to taking up Irish tax residence for resident non-domiciled individuals to organise their affairs appropriately such that any remittances to Ireland are of clean capital. As previously discussed above, a foreign domiciled resident individual will be within the Irish CAT net if he or she is resident or ordinarily resident in Ireland and has been tax resident in Ireland for the five previous tax years. Finally, in addition to the above, prior to the year of entry, to the greatest extent possible under the law of the country where the individual is resident, without triggering a tax charge, the intending immigrant should seek to re-base such assets standing on a capital gain. The Immigrant Investor Programme The Immigrant Investor Programme is open to non-eea nationals and their families who commit to an approved investment in Ireland. Approved participants in the programme and their immediate family members are granted rights of residence in Ireland which allow them to enter the state on multi-entry visas and to remain for a defined period but with the possibility of on-going renewal. The programme facilitates participants, over time, in establishing a permanent relationship with Ireland and residency status is acquired. 9. FORTHCOMING LEGISLATION/OTHER CHANGES The Companies Act 2014 The Companies Act 2014 was signed into law on 23 December 2014. It replaces and consolidates the previous Companies Acts 1963-2013. The Act 236 EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES
consolidates and modernises Irish company law and is expected to make it easier for companies to do business in and through Ireland. As stated above, the Companies Act 2014 introduced the designated activity company (DAC) as a new form of private limited company. A key distinction between a DAC and a private limited company is the continued existence of an objects clause in the DAC constitution. A DAC may be a suitable vehicle where an objects clause is needed (for example, to restrict the corporate capacity of a joint-venture vehicle) or for companies listing debt securities on a stock exchange. A DAC requires two directors. It must convene an AGM unless it is a single member company, in which case this requirement can be dispensed with. Its name must end with designated activity company or DAC (or the Irish equivalent) which will mean changes to company stationery, websites, seals and registrations. Other significant changes are introduced to certain corporate governance rules in the areas of directors duties, director s compliance statements, the company secretary and the annual general meeting. There has also been an overhaul to the system of registering charges and debentures and a simplification of the process of granting corporate approval for financial assistance (that is, assisting with the purchase by a company of its own shares) and for certain transactions with directors and other connected persons. Local property tax Local property tax (LPT) is an annual self-assessed tax on residential properties, payable to the Revenue Commissioners. LPT was introduced in 2013 and it is calculated based on the market value of the property. Taxpayers were required to self-assess the value of their property as at 1 May 2013 (the valuation date) and this value is used to calculate the LPT due each year up to and including 2016. Thereafter the valuation will be assessed for each three year period on 1 November in the year preceding the beginning of the three year period. Property values are organised into valuation bands. The tax liability is calculated by applying the tax rate to the mid-point of the band. The national rate of LPT is 0.18% for properties up to a market value of EUR1 million. Residential properties valued over EUR1 million are assessed on the actual value (no banding applies) at 0.18% on the first EUR1 million in value and 0.25% on the portion of the value above EUR1 million. From 2015, local authorities have the power to increase or decrease the LPT rate by up to 15%. General anti-avoidance rule Significant changes have been made to bolster Ireland s general antiavoidance rule (GAAR) in the Finance Act 2014. The measures simplify the procedures to successfully withdraw a tax advantage from a taxpayer on the basis that the transaction constituted a tax avoidance transaction. The changes will apply to transactions entered into on or after 23 October 2014. The Revenue Commissioners are no longer required to issue an opinion as to why a certain transaction constitutes a tax avoidance transaction EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES 237
before raising an assessment on the taxpayer for the withdrawal of the tax advantage. Further, the time limits for raising such assessments have been removed. Civil partnerships and cohabitants The Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010 entered into force in Ireland on 1 January 2011. It deals with both the civil registration of same sex unions and the rights and duties of cohabitants. Civil partners: The tax provisions introduced puts civil partners on the same footing as spouses in relation to tax matters such as CGT, CAT, discretionary trust tax and stamp duty. The succession rights introduced by the Act are very similar to those afforded to spouses and apply both to the legal right share in testate cases and the distribution rules on intestacy. The Taxation and the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010 was enacted on 27 July 2011 and provides that similar tax provisions that apply to married couples are now available to civil partners. Cohabitants: The Act created a redress scheme for both same sex and opposite sex cohabiting couples affording protection to a financially dependent party at the termination of a long-term cohabiting relationship. The tax provisions for cohabiting couples relate to relief for maintenance payments and property transfers made to a financially dependent former cohabitant as ordered by the court on the ending of a long-term cohabitant relationship. 10. USEFUL REFERENCES The Charity Commissioners www.charitycommissioners.ie. Revenue Commissioners www.revenue.ie. Irish government website www.gov.ie. The Department of Justice and Equality www.justice.ie. The Property Registration Authority www.prai.ie. The Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners Ireland www.step.ie. The Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners International www.step.org. 238 EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES
Contact details Contact details GENERAL EDITOR John Rhodes Stonehage Law Ltd 15 Suffolk Street London SW1Y 4HG United Kingdom T: +44 20 7087 0087 F: +44 20 7087 0004 E: john.rhodes@stonehage.com W: www.stonehage.com AUSTRALIA Allan Blaikie & Andrew Sommer Clayton Utz 1 Bligh Street Sydney NSW 2000 Australia T: +61 2 9353 4201 F: +61 2 8220 6700 E: ablaikie@claytonutz.com E: asommer@claytonutz.com W: www.claytonutz.com AUSTRIA Paul Doralt, Martina Znidaric Dorda Brugger Jordis Universitätsring 10 A-1010 Vienna T: +43 1 533 4795 101 F: +43 1 533 4797 E: paul.doralt@dbj.at W: www.dbj.at BERMUDA Alec Anderson Conyers Dill & Pearman Limited Clarendon House 2 Church Street PO Box HM 666 Hamilton HM CX Bermuda T: +1 441 295 1422 F: +1 441 292 4720 E: alec.anderson@conyersdill.com W: www.conyersdill.com CANADA Martin J. Rochwerg, Mary Anne Bueschkens & Rahul Sharma Miller Thomson LLP Scotia Plaza, 40 King Street West, Suite 5800, P.O. Box 1011 Toronto M5H 3S1 Ontario, Canada T: +1 416 595-8500 F: +1 416 595-8695 E: mrochwerg@millerthomson.com E: mbueschkens@millerthomson.com E: rsharma@millerthomson.com W: www.millerthomson.com CAYMAN ISLANDS Antony Duckworth Collas Crill & CARD Zephyr House 122 Mary Street, Box 709 George Town Grand Cayman KY1-1107 T: +345 949 4544 F: +345 949 8460 E: antony.duckworth@ collascrillcad.com W: www.collascrillcard.com CYPRUS Elias Neocleous & Philippos Aristotelous Andreas Neocleous & Co LLC Neocleous House 195 Makarios Avenue, PO Box 50613 Limassol CY-3608 Cyprus T: +357 25 110000 F: +357 25 110001 EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES 485
Contact details E: info@neocleous.com W: www.neocleous.com ENGLAND & WALES Jonathan Conder & Oliver Court Macfarlanes LLP 20 Cursitor Street London EC4A 1LT United Kingdom T: +44 20 7831 9222 F: +44 20 7831 9607 E: aj.conder@macfarlanes.com E: oliver.court@macfarlanes.com W: www.macfarlanes.com FRANCE Line-Alexa Glotin UGGC Avocats 47 rue de Monceau 75008 Paris, France T: +33 1 56 69 70 00 F: +33 1 56 69 70 71 E: la.glotin@uggc.com W: www.uggc.com GERMANY Dr. Christian von Oertzen Flick Gocke Schaumburg Messe Turm, Friedrich-Ebert-Anlage 49 60308 Frankfurt A.M. Germany T: +49 69 717 03 0 F: +49 69 717 03 100 E: christian.von-oertzen@fgs.de W: www.fgs.de GIBRALTAR Peter A. Isola & Adrian Pilcher Isolas Portland House Glacis Road, PO Box 204 Gibraltar T: +350 200 78363 F: +350 200 76651 E: peter.isola@isolas.gi E: adrian.pilcher@isolas.gi W: www.gibraltarlawyers.com GREECE Dimitris E. Paraskevas, John G. Mazarakos, Ioanna A. Kombou & Ioannis A. Sarakinos Elias Paraskevas Attorneys 1933 7 Asklepiou Street Athens 10679 Greece T: +30 210 36 10 333 F: +30 210 36 45 329 E: info@paraskevaslaw.com W: www.paraskevaslaw.com GUERNSEY Laila Arstall Carey Olsen Carey House Les Banques St Peter Port GY1 4BZ Guernsey T: +1481 741544 F: +1481 739044 E: laila.arstall@careyolsen.com W: www.careyolsen.com INDIA Bijal Ajinkya & Shabnam Shaikh Khaitan & Co One Indiabulls Centre 13th Floor, Tower 1 841 Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai 400 013, India T: +91 22 6636 5000 F: +91 22 6636 5050 E: bijal.ajinkya@khaitanco.com E: shabnam.shaikh@khaitanco.com W: www.khaitanco.com IRELAND John Gill & Allison Dey Matheson 70 Sir John Rogerson s Quay Dublin 2 Ireland T: +353 1 232 2000 F: +353 1 232 3333 E: dublin@matheson.com W: www.matheson.com 486 EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES
Contact details ISRAEL Alon Kaplan, Advocate; Lyat Eyal (Aronson, Ronkin-Noor, Eyal Law Firm) 1 King David Boulevard Tel Aviv 64953 Israel T: +972 3 6954463 F: +972 3 6955575 E: alon@alonkaplan-law.com E: lyat@are-legal.com W: www.alonkaplan-law.com (Alon Kaplan) W: www.are-legal.com (Lyat Eyal) Meir Linzen, Guy Katz & Eran Lempert Herzog Fox & Neeman Asia House 4 Weizmann Street Tel Aviv 6423904 T: +972 3 692 2020 F: +972 3 696 6464 E: linzen@hfn.co.il E: lemperte@hfn.co.il E: katzg@hfn.co.il W: www.hfn.co.il ITALY Luca Arnaboldi & Gilberto Comi Carnelutti Studio Legale Associato Via Principe Amedeo 3 20121 Milan Italy T: +39 02 65585 1 F: +39 02 65585 585 E: larnaboldi@carnelutti.com E: gcomi@carnelutti.com W: www.carnelutti.com JERSEY Paul Matthams & Keith Dixon Carey Olsen 47 Esplanade St Helier Jersey JE1 0BD T: +44 1534 888900 F: +44 1534 887744 E: paul.matthams@careyolsen.com E: keith.dixon@careyolsen.com W: www.careyolsen.com MALTA Rosanne Bonnici & Paul Gonzi Fenech & Fenech Advocates 198 Old Bakery Street Valletta VLT1455 Malta T: +356 2124 1232 F: +356 2599 0644 E: rosanne.bonnici@fenlex.com E: paul.gonzi@fenlex.com W: www.fenechlaw.com MEXICO Miguel Jáuregui Rojas Jáuregui y Navarrete S.C. Torre Arcos Bosques I Paseo de los Tamarindos 400-B, Pisos 8 y 9 Bosques de las Lomas 05120 Mexico T: +52 55 52 67 45 03 F: +52 55 52 58 03 48 E: mjauregui@jnabogados.com.mx MONACO Donald Manasse Donald Manasse Law Offices Est-Ouest 24 Boulevard Princesse Charlotte MC 98000 Monaco T: +377 93 50 29 21 F: +377 93 50 82 08 E: dmm@manasselaw.com W: www.manasselaw THE NETHERLANDS Arnold van der Smeede Arcagna Museumplein 5 E & F 1071 DJ Amsterdam The Netherlands T: +31 20 305 0850 F: +31 20 305 0855 E: arnold.vandersmeede@arcagna.com W: www.arcagna.com EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES 487
Contact details NEW ZEALAND Pravir Tesiram TGT Legal Level 7, 3-13 Shortland Street PO Box 4039 Auckland 1140 New Zealand T: +649 920 8672 F: +649 920 8665 E: pravir.tesiram@tgtlegal.com W: www.tgtlegal.com PORTUGAL Diogo Ortigão Ramos & Maria João Ricou Cuatrecasas, Gonçalves Pereira Praça Marques de Pombal, 2 1250-160 Lisbon Portugal T: +351 21 355 38 00 F: +351 21 352 44 21 E: dortigaoramos@cuatrecasas.com E: mjoaoricou@cuatrecasas.com W: www.cuatrecasas.com SINGAPORE Sunit Chhabra & Mark Li Allen & Gledhill LLP 1 Marina Boulevard #28-00 Singapore 018989 T: +65 6890 7188 F: +65 6327 3800 E: sunit.chhabra@allenandgledhill.com E: mark.li@allenandgledhill.com W: www.allenandgledhill.com SOUTH AFRICA Hymie Reuvin Levin & Gwynneth Louise Rowe HR Levin Attorneys, Notaries and Conveyancers Kentgate 64 Kent Road, cnr Oxford Road Dunkeld, Johannesburg 2196 South Africa T: +2711 788 1625 F: +2711 788 1637 E: hrl@hrlevin.co.za E: gwynnethr@hrlevin.co.za SPAIN Florentino Carreño & Carlos Ferrer Cuatrecasas, Gonçalves Pereira C/ Almagro 9 28010 Madrid Spain T: +34 915 247 117 F: +34 915 247 124 E: florentino.carreno@cuatrecasas.com W: www.cuatrecasas.com SWITZERLAND Jean-Blaise Eckert Lenz & Staehelin Route de Chêne 30 1211 Geneva 17 Switzerland T: +41 58 450 70 00 F: +41 58 450 70 01 E: jean-blaise.eckert@lenzstaehelin.com W: www.lenzstaehelin.com UNITED STATES Stephen K. Vetter Kozusko Harris Vetter Wareh Duncan LLP 1666 K Street, N.W. Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006 USA T: +1 202 457 7209 F: +1 202 318 4451 E: svetter@kozlaw.com W: www.kozlaw.com Eric M. Dorsch Kozusko Harris Vetter Wareh Duncan LLP 575 Madison Avenue, Suite 7D New York, New York 10022 USA T: +1 212 405 4770 F: +1 212 214 0855 E: edorsch@kozlaw.com W: www.kozlaw.com 488 EUROPEAN LAWYER REFERENCE SERIES