Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Group Structure

  • 30-08-2012 8:25am
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,724 ✭✭✭


    Thoughts on whether this constitutes a group:

    3 couples, lets call them A+B, C+D, E+F. All husband and wife. Not related to each other.

    Each own a holding company. 50% for husband, 50% for wife.

    Each of the companies owned by A+B, C+D and E+F own 33.33% of another company.

    - so old holding company doesn't hold 50% or more .

    Thoughts?


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,611 ✭✭✭Valetta


    kennyb3 wrote: »
    Thoughts on whether this constitutes a group:

    3 couples, lets call them A+B, C+D, E+F. All husband and wife. Not related to each other.

    Each own a holding company. 50% for husband, 50% for wife.

    Each of A+B, C+D and E+F own 33.33% of another company.

    - so old holding company doesn't hold 50% or more .

    Thoughts?

    I presume, where I have bolded, that you mean "each of the companies owned by A+B, C+D etc. own 33% of another company?

    I would say it definitley is not a group, as the "other" company does not have a 50%+ shareholder.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,724 ✭✭✭kennyb3


    Valetta wrote: »
    I presume, where I have bolded, that you mean "each of the companies owned by A+B, C+D etc. own 33% of another company?

    Yes - sorry thats what i meant
    Valetta wrote: »
    I would say it definitley is not a group, as the "other" company does not have a 50%+ shareholder.

    Thanks


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,724 ✭✭✭kennyb3


    ...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,611 ✭✭✭Valetta


    Unfortunately this is now getting well beyond my expertise, such as it is. :)

    I would be reluctant to give an opinion that could well be wrong.

    Perhaps there are some others here that would be more competent.

    Sorry.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,094 ✭✭✭dbran


    No

    The group structure has not changed. Only the shareholding of the holding companies has changed. Presumably each holding company still only has a 33.3% holding in the subsidiary (or rather its associate company).

    Company is still audit exempt although you will need to ensure the related party/control is adequately disclosed.

    Best regards

    dbran


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 300 ✭✭smeharg


    For tax purposes it could be a consortium (provided other requirements are met) allowing the tax benefits of a group structure to be available.

    The meaning of subsidiary for audit exemption is quite wide. The tests include a control test, so although one company may not hold more than 50% of the voting shares it may still be possible for one of the holding companies to have overall control. If that was the case then audit exemption might not be available.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 735 ✭✭✭Alan Shore


    Ok say A & B own AB LTD and C & D own CD LTD. AB LTD & CD LTD own 50% each in EF LTD. No special powers attaching to shares.

    Audit exemption available?

    A & B are individuals and not connected to C & D who are also individuals.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,094 ✭✭✭dbran


    Yes

    Its not a group as neither company has control.

    Regards

    dbran


Advertisement