|
|
|
|
|
Thursday, September 02, 2010
|
Login |
|
|
Please click on the left hand icons to expand the relevant faq list.
Anti-Money Laundering
|
Is there a requirement in the BVI for service providers to report suspicious financial transactions?
|
|
Under Section 28 and 29 of the Proceeds of Criminal Conduct Act,1997 (which deal with the offences of assisting another to retain the benefit of criminal conduct, and acquiring, possessing or using the proceeds of criminal conduct, respectively) it is a defence if a person can show he made a disclosure to the Reporting Authority before the fact, or that he made a disclosure after the fact but on his own initiative and as soon as it was reasonable for him to make it. The Proceeds of Criminal Conduct Act applies to all persons (not only service providers) and, accordingly, all persons are urged to make disclosures to the Reporting Authority. In addition, service providers covered by the AntiMoney Laundering Code of Practice, 1999 are required by paragraph 14(1)(f) to have internal procedures designed to ensure, inter alia, that such suspicious transactions are reported.
|
|
Banking
|
What are the capital adequacy guidelines for bank licensees?
|
|
Under the Banks and Trust Companies Act, 1990 General Banking Licence holders are required to have a minimum fully paid up capital of not less than US$2,000,000 or its equivalent in foreign currencies, or such sum as the Commission, by order determines, and has deposited or invested the sum of $500,000 in such manner as the Commission by order, prescribes.
Under the Banks and Trust Companies Act, 1990 Restricted Class I and Restricted Class II Banking Licence holders are required to have a minimum fully paid up capital of not less than US$1,000,000 or its equivalent in foreign currencies, or such sum as the Commission, by order determines, and has deposited or invested the sum of $500,000 in such manner as the Commission by order, prescribes.
The Financial Services Commission adopts the guidelines as set by the Basel Committee for bank regulation and supervisory practices for the calculation of the capital adequacy ratio. The Basel Committee recommends a minimum capital adequacy ratio based on risk weighted assets of 8%.
|
What is the requirement for seeking approval for the change of a shareholder(s)/beneficial interest?
|
|
When changing a shareholder/beneficial interest of a bank, the Commission must be presented with a breakdown of the bank's proposed shareholding (which must indicate the number and percentage of shares held by each proposed shareholder). Additionally, information on the new shareholder must include the following:
-
Two professional character references (plus one financial reference)
-
A police certificate or notarized affidavit as to non- criminal record
-
A completed personal questionnaire
-
Notarized copy of individual passport identification page(s).
-
Detailed resume
|
|
Insurance
|
Is there a minimum margin of solvency?
|
|
The amount by which the total value of an insurer’s assets must exceed the total amount of its liabilities, in these Regulations referred 1o as the "minimum margin of solvency" is hereby prescribed :
In the case of an insurer carrying on general business only :
Where the net retained annual premium of the insurer does not exceed $1,000,000 the prescribed amount is $200,000;
Where the net retained annual premium of the insurer exceeds $1,000,000 but does not exceed $5,000,000 the prescribed amount is twenty percent of the said net retained annual premium;
Where the net retained annual premium of the insurer exceeds $5,000,000 the prescribed amount is $1,200,000 plus ten percent of the amount by which the said net retained annual premium exceeds $5,000,000; and
In the case of an insurer carrying on long-term business only two hundred fifty Thousand dollars; and
In the case of an insurer carrying on both general business and long-term business two hundred fifty thousand dollars plus the amounts required for general business.
|
|
Investment Business - SIBA
|
Are existing professional funds, required to amend their memorandum and articles of association (M&A) to specify that i) the fund interests of the fund shall be issued only to professional investors; and ii) the initial investment of each investor in the fund, other than exempted investors, shall be not less than such sum as may be prescribed in the Mutual Funds Regulations? If so, in what time frame must this be completed?
|
Under paragraph 10 of Schedule 8 to SIBA, all existing professional funds are deemed to be recognised under section 55. Existing professional funds must therefore satisfy the criteria for such recognition, including the requirements of section 55(2)(c) that their constitutional documents should specify that i) the fund interest of the fund shall be issued only to professional investors; and ii) the initial investment of each investor in the fund, other than exempted investors, shall be not less that $100,000 (as prescribed in the Mutual Funds Regulations). In order to comply with this requirement, existing professional funds should amend their constitutional documents and provide evidence of same to the Commission before the second transition date of 12 October 2010.
However, as a matter of policy, where the Commission has granted approval under the BVI Business Companies Act, 2004, to an existing fund to voluntarily liquidate or where a liquidator has been appointed under the Insolvency Act, 2003, the fund would not be required to amend its constitutional documents to comply with section 55(2)(c).
In addition, where an existing fund is closed to new investors, or is otherwise winding down its business, it need not immediately amend its constitutional documents to comply with the requirement. However, the fund would be required to provide written confirmation to the Commission from its directors (supported by a board resolution) that it is closed to new investors or is winding down its business. Where the fund subsequently proposes to make an offer to new or existing investors it must, prior to the offering, amend its constitutional documents to comply with the requirements of section 55(2)(c)and file a copy of same with the Commission.
|
Are existing private and professional funds required to update their offering documents to contain the investment warning in accordance with Regulation 9(1) of the Mutual Fund Regulations?
|
Where the offering document of an existing private or professional fund does not contain an investment warning, the offering document must be amended to include same before the fund makes an offer or invitation to an investor or potential investor to purchase or subscribe for shares. This requirement is prescribed by Regulation 9 and takes effect on the first transition date of 3 August 2010.
The investment warning should be included in a prominent place in the fund’s offering document. Where no offering document is issued the investment warning should be provided to each investor as a separate document. The requirement to issue an investment warning is therefore a prerequisite to the making of an offer or invitation to purchase or subscribe for shares.
Existing funds that are not making an offer or invitation need not amend their offering documents unless and until they make an offer or invitation to investors or potential investors.
|
Are existing private or professional funds that do not currently have a custodian or fund manager required to appoint a custodian and fund manager?
|
|
Yes. All private and professional funds, including existing funds, are required to have a custodian and fund manager at all times, unless they are exempted from this requirement by the Commission. Where an existing private or professional fund has not appointed a custodian or a fund manager it should take steps to do so before the first transition date of August 3, 2010, or apply to the Commission for an exemption.
As regards the application process for exemptions, a single application may be made by or on behalf of two or more funds stating the names of the funds for which the exemption is sought and the reasons for the exemption.
|
|
ROCA - Bearer Shares
|
BACKGROUND STATEMENT
|
|
What is the effect of transitional provisions in an enactment? How do they relate to the other provisions in the same enactment?
Essentially, transitional provisions in an enactment (principal or subsidiary) outline precisely when and how specified operative parts in the enactment are to take effect. They are designed to facilitate a transition from an existing regime to a new regime.
As Thornton (in his book titled “Legislative Drafting”) outlines, “The function of a transitional provision is to make special provision for the application of legislation to the circumstances which exist at the time when that legislation comes into force”. Transitional provisions in an enactment therefore give effect to existing scenarios/matters by outlining how (and when) they should be treated and modify the application of the substantive provisions in the enactment. They must therefore not be read in isolation and, unless they are specifically excluded with respect to existing scenarios/matters, they must be given effect.
Section 248 of the BVI Business Companies Act, 2004, (“BVIBCA”) specifically provides that “the transitional provisions set out in Schedule 2 apply” and that Schedule has the heading “Transitional Provisions”. The effect of the Schedule is to outline how companies under the old regimes (CapCo and IBC) would be treated or transitioned into the BVIBCA and, unless otherwise specifically excluded, the transitional provisions apply to those companies and matters relative to them to the exclusion of any other provision in the Act. Division 5 of Part IV of Schedule 2 of the Act is headed “Bearer Shares in Grandfathered Bearer Share Companies” and thus all bearer shares within the scope of a company which qualifies as a grandfathered bearer share company would fall to be treated in accordance with the terms of that Division as opposed to any other provision of the Act (unless specifically stated otherwise).
Consequently, a grandfathered bearer share company whose memorandum is amended by virtue of the operation of law in accordance with the terms of paragraph 34A (1) of Division 5 of Part IV of Schedule 2 would effectively have its bearer shares disabled (unless “revived” by a court order under paragraph 35 (4)).
Indeed paragraph 35 outlines how an existing bearer share of a grandfathered bearer share company is to be treated and the consequences flowing therefrom.
In this context, the provisions of sections 38 (2) and Division 5 of Part III of the Act relate only to bearer shares that are not the subject of transition; they cannot be read to override the transitional provisions relative to bearer shares in a grandfathered bearer share company. To read this subject differently would be negating the purpose and effect of the transitional provisions and the whole purpose and intent of a transitional provision in an enactment.
|
|
Submit New F.A.Q.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|