Importance and Effectiveness of EU Register of Beneficial Ownership

By Christina Poursanidou, Lawyer

Money laundering scandals during the last years have created much uncertainty about the effectiveness of the EU-Anti-Money Laundering Directives (AMLDs) and the presumption that transparency over the companies structure will lead to the the prevention of future similar cases. Despite the fact that World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), as well as Financial Action Task Force (FATF) were discussing the need of bringing to light the companies’ ultimate beneficial owners, the EU legislators made the creation of the Register of the Beneficial Ownership of legal entities mandatory for each Member State. More specifically, according to the Article 30 of the 4th AMLD “Member States shall ensure that corporate and other legal entities incorporated within their territory are required to obtain and hold adequate, accurate and current information on their beneficial ownership, including the details of the beneficial interests held.” Similarly, in order to enhance the transparency, 5th AMLD has made the Registers of Beneficial Ownership publicly accessible. 

Undoubtedly, the Register of Beneficial Ownership of EU companies will play a pivotal role in the attempt to combat money laundering and terrorist financing. Legal entities, payment institutions and any other person entering into a business relationship with a legal entity, may easily identify the beneficial owner of the company, without time - consuming requests for disclosure of information and investigations within complex legal structures. In the same time, the national competent authorities will have adequate, accurate and up-to-date details on the beneficial owners of legal entities during criminal investigations. Finally, criminals willing to incorporate a company in EU aiming to launder their dirty funds, knowing that their data will be recorded and publicly be available, may consider twice before taking their decision to do so. Considering the above, I will admit that in theory the Registers of Beneficial Ownership will lead to the combat of money laundering within the European Union. But, when theory is transposed into reality, usually the practical implementations of such legal structures are not the expected ones. 

First of all, the fact that a beneficial owner of the company will be recorded in the register only if he holds 25% or more of the company’s shares, shows that the legislators tried to achieve the transparency, but not the absolute transparency. “Exploiting” this threshold, the real owners of the companies will be able to divide the ownership between their family members, close associates or even nominee shareholders, in order to avoid being recorded in the Register. In the same time, the majority of the corporate service providers or accountants or auditors, which will be assigned to draft and submit the UBO Registers with the payment of the respective fee will not hesitate to follow their customers instructions to submit misleading or false information, in order not to lose this customer and his valuable funds. Even more importantly, the submission of false information concerning the beneficial ownership will not cause any problems neither to the company nor to the submitting agency any problem, simply because the competent national authorities will rarely verify the accuracy of the information received.

In the question of what can be done in order to bring the theoretical “ideal” results of the Register of Beneficial Ownership into reality, the answer is quite simple. Ensure the compliance with the Directive! Thorough verification of the information submitted to the Register by the national competent authorities, which upon the receipt of information shall review if the beneficial owner of each company has reasonable grounds to be its owner, consider why a company has a number of beneficial owners or even what is the relation between them. Moreover, the submission of fake information concerning the identity of the beneficial owners shall be subject to heavy fines both for the creator and the submitter of the information and for the Company. It shall be clear that the creation of the Register of Beneficial Ownership improperly and the pure or no verification of the information received is not what the EU legislators looked for during the drafting of the 4th and 5th AMLD. (photo:pixabay)

Read more articles by Christina Poursanidou here

Comments

Post a Comment

Editorial

Editorial
George Kazoleas, Lawyer

Top Stories

Ombudsman inquiry on Commission President’s text messages is a wake-up call for EU

Image
The European Ombudsman inquiry into the Commission’s handling of a request for text messages between its President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company is a wake-up call for all EU institutions about ensuring accountability in an era of instant messaging. One year after the initial request by a journalist, the Commission has still not clarified whether messages reported to concern major vaccine procurement deals exist and whether the public is entitled to see them. The Ombudsman had asked the Commission, in a finding of maladministration in January, to conduct a more thorough search for the text messages. The Commission’s recent response failed to say whether it had looked directly and correctly for the text messages and if not, why not. While the response recognised that work-related text messages can be EU documents, it reiterated that the Commission’s internal policy is, in effect, not to register text messages. The Ombudsman has closed  the inquiry  and upheld...
Read more

Daily Mail publisher wins case against ‘success fees’ paid to lawyers (ECtHR)

Image
Obligation on publisher of the Daily Mail to pay substantial “success fees" in defamation and breach of privacy cases was excessive. The case Associated Newspapers Limited v. the United Kingdom (application no. 37398/21) concerned the fact that Associated Newspapers Limited the publisher of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday had been obliged to pay extensive costs incurred by claimants who had successfully sued it in privacy and/or defamation proceedings following articles it had published in print or online in 2017 and 2019.  Since one of the claimants had entered into a conditional fee arrangement (CFA) with his legal representative, and both had taken out “after-the-event” (ATE) insurance, Associated Newspapers Limited had been liable not only for their base costs, but also for fee uplifts including the “success fee” in the CFA and for their ATE insurance premiums.  In Chamber judgment (12.11.2024) in the case, the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that t...
Read more

ECtHR elects a new Vice-President of the Court and two new Section Presidents

Image
The European Court of Human Rights has elected on 23.9.2024 a new Vice-President of the Court – Judge Ivana Jelić (elected in respect of Montenegro). She will take up her duties on 1 November 2024.  The Court has also elected at the same date two new Section Presidents – Judges Lado Chanturia (elected in respect of Georgia) and Ioannis Ktistakis (elected in respect of Greece). They will also take up their duties on 1 November 2024. Ivana Jelić was born on 17 March 1975 in Podgorica, Montenegro and was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 12 July 2018. Lado Chanturia was born on 14 April 1963 in Tsalenjikha, Georgia, was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 8 January 2018 and is Vice-President of Section since 18 May 2023. Ioannis Ktistakis was born on 3 January 1971 in Thebes, Greece and was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 8 March 2021. (source/photo: echr.coe.int) Read more here
Read more

Intellectual property: the figurative sign consisting of the phrase ‘RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F* *K yourself’ in Russian and English cannot be registered as an EU trade mark

Image
In its Judgment in Case T-82/24 (Administration of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine v EUIPO) (RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F**K YOURSELF) the General Court ruled that the figurative sign consisting of the phrase ‘RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F* *K yourself’ in Russian and English cannot be registered as an EU trade mark. That phrase, which has become a symbol of Ukraine’s fight against Russian aggression, is not perceived as an indication of a commercial origin.  The Administration of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine (Kyiv, Ukraine) requests the General Court of the European Union to annul the decision of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 1 st December 2023, which refused registration of the following figurative sign as an EU trade mark: ‘RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F* *K yourself’ That mark is a war cry uttered by the Ukrainian border guard on Snake Island on 24th February 2022, the first day of the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine. Registration was sou...
Read more

The banks Crédit agricole and Credit Suisse participated in a cartel in the sector for suprasovereign bonds, sovereign bonds and public agency bonds denominated in US dollars

Image
According to the Judgment of the General Court in Cases T-386/21 (Crédit agricole and Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank v Commission) and T-406/21 (UBS Group and Credit Suisse Securities (Europe) v Commission), the banks Crédit agricole and Credit Suisse participated in a cartel in the sector for suprasovereign bonds, sovereign bonds and public agency bonds denominated in US dollars (‘SSA Bonds’).  The General Court of the European Union confirms the Commission’s finding of an infringement and maintains the amount of the fines imposed in 2021. In 2018, the European Commission initiated proceedings for infringement of the competition rules involving Deutsche Bank, Bank of America, Crédit agricole and Credit Suisse (now UBS Group [1] ).  In 2021, the Commission found that those banks had entered into an agreement on the secondary market for suprasovereign, sovereign and agency bonds denominated in dollars (SSA bonds). According to the Commission, traders employed by ...
Read more

European Ombudsman asks Commission to publish details of its handling of senior staff move to law firm

Image
The European Ombudsman has asked the European Commission to publish details about how it has handled the planned move by a former director in its competition department to the Brussels office of a US corporate law firm as a partner. Any restrictions that have been placed on the activities of the former director to mitigate potential conflicts of interest should be made public without delay, said the Ombudsman. She noted that public information about the move came from the law firm and gives the impression that the Commission has allowed a senior official to work for a company that anticipates major benefits from their inside knowledge.  The Ombudsman also noted that the Commission declined to give details about the individual’s professional experience despite the fact that the law firm itself has put out a press release detailing it. The Ombudsman has previously criticised a tendency in the EU administration to underestimate the potential negative effects of staff moves to th...
Read more

A national court is not required to apply a decision of its constitutional court that infringes EU law (ECJ)

Image
In its Judgment of 26.9.2024 in Case C-792/22 (Energotehnica) the Court of Justice ruled as regards the right to an effective remedy that a national court is not required to apply a decision of its constitutional court that infringes EU law. In such a case, the national court may not be penalised.  Following the death of an electrician by electrocution during a maintenance operation, an administrative procedure was initiated against his employer. At the same time, criminal proceedings for negligence and manslaughter were initiated against the supervisor. The victim’s next of kin also became civil parties to the criminal proceedings.  The administrative court hearing the dispute concluded that the present case did not involve an ‘accident at work’. It annulled the administrative penalties imposed on the employer. According to national legislation, as interpreted by the Romanian Constitutional Court, that administrative decision prevents the criminal court from reconsidering whe...
Read more