DOCSLIB.ORG

Taxation of Partnership - Legal National Reports for the Nordic Tax Research Council´S Annual Meeting, 2015 in Aarhus

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Taxation of Partnership - Legal National Reports for the Nordic Tax Research Council´S Annual Meeting, 2015 in Aarhus Nordic Tax J. 2015; aop Report Open Access Axel Hilling (Ed.) Taxation of Partnership - Legal national reports for the Nordic Tax Research Council´s annual meeting, 2015 in Aarhus DOI 10.1515/ntaxj-2015-0007 from which to choose. Capital companies comprise of pub- Received Aug 31, 2015; accepted Sep 18, 2015 lic limited companies and private limited companies, both of which are regulated by the Danish Companies Act (selsk- Abstract: This joint report includes the five legal national absloven). Unlimited companies (such as sole trader busi- reports on the taxation of partnership in the Nordic coun- nesses or partnerships), known in Denmark as personal tries. The general contents of these reports are summa- companies (personselskaber), are an alternative to capi- rized and thoroughly analyzed in Liselotte Madsen’s Gen- tal companies. The fundamental difference between these eral report, published in this issue of the NTaxJ. For addi- two types of company is the owners’ liability. Liability is tional information, details on legislative measures etc. we limited in relation to capital companies, while in the case find it important, however, to also publish the national re- of unlimited companies at least one owner is liable for the ports in full length. We hope you will find it valuable as whole of the company’s debt Friis Hansen and Krenchel well. (2014). The respective national reports appear in alphabetic or- In Denmark, there are four common types of unlimited der, in regard to the country which regulation is presented. companies, namely partnerships, limited partnerships, Name of the country reporter and contact information are partner companies, and jointly owned shipping firms. It presented in the beginning of each report. is important to be aware of the fact that personal compa- Keywords: Partnership; shared liability partnerships; lim- nies are not regulated by company law legislation but are ited partnerships; internal partnerships; shipping partner- regulated by company law practice. Therefore, the regula- ships; Nordic taxation tion of personal companies is established by nonbinding rules of practice Friis Hansen and Krenchel (2014); Madsen (2011). 1 Denmark A partnership (interessentskab) is a cooperation that is based on an agreement between at least two partici- pants about the operation of a common business enter- By Inge Langhave Jeppesen prise (Friis Hansen and Krenchel 2014). Partnerships are defined in detail in §2(1) of the Danish Act on Undertak- 1.1 Corporate legal regulations ings Carrying on Business for Profit (lov om visse erhvervs- drivende virksomheder) as: “... a business activity, where all the participants are personally liable, unlimited and 1.1.1 Company law rules for personal companies jointly and severally, for the activity’s obligations”. In re- lation to practice, there is a modified subsidiary liability. Freedom of contract applies in the Danish company law. This means that the participants first become liable when This means that the owners can choose the form of com- a claim has been brought against the partnership and has pany that best suits the type of business they wish to op- not been paid within reasonable time Friis Hansen and erate. There are a number of different types of company Krenchel (2014). Resulting from joint liability, a partner who pays off a debt belonging to the partnership can then make a subsequent claim against the other partners. Due Axel Hilling (Ed.): Associate Professor, Department of Business to a lack of company law regulation, it can be difficult to Law, Lund University School of Economics and Management, Swe- den; Email: [email protected] determine whether a business association is a partnership Inge Langhave Jeppesen: Professor, University of Southern Den- or joint ownership. Joint ownership is recognized as exist- mark, Kolding, Denmark; Email: [email protected] © 2015 Axel Hilling et al., published by De Gruyter Open. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License. Unauthenticated Download Date | 2/3/16 8:26 AM 2 Ë Axel Hilling et al. ing where a number of people jointly own a common asset own a ship together. According to §102 of the Marine Act without forming a company. If, on the other hand, in the (søloven), when a ship is owned by a number of joint own- course of regulating a business enterprise it is established ers, each joint owner only takes on personal liability for that there are business activities involving the participa- the company’s obligations that is equivalent to his or her tion of the association’s participants, then this is consid- share of the company’s capital. As the use of jointly owned ered a partnership and, thus, a company Friis Hansen and shipping firm is quite limited, it will not be discussed in Krenchel (2011). further detail here. A limited partnership (kommanditselskab) is defined in §2(1) of the Danish Act on Undertakings Carrying on Business for Profit as: “a business activity, where one or 1.1.2 Company law rules for formation, changes in more participants, the general partners, take on unlim- ownership, and selling of a business ited personal liability; and, if there are several participants who are jointly and severally liable for the business’ obli- The fact that there is no legal regulation of personal com- gations, they do so while one or more participants, the panies also means that, as a starting point, there are no limited partners, have limited personal liability for the provisions regulating, for example, the formation of per- business’ obligations”. Therefore, a limited partnership is sonal companies. Instead, activities such as establishing a characterized by the fact that not all the participants have personal company simply happen according to an agree- taken on unlimited liability because the limited partners’ ment between at least two company participants. liability is limited to the value of their deposits. This is A partnership is established when at least two peo- an indirect subsidiary liability. This means that it is only ple come together to operate a business. There will of- the limited partnership or its bankruptcy estate that may ten be an agreement that regulates the relationship be- require the limited partners to pay off the residual liabil- tween the partners, but this is not necessarily the case. ity Friis Hansen and Krenchel (2014). The general part- From the outset, there is a declaratory understanding that ner will often be a Danish private limited lability company a partner cannot withdraw from the business association with a minimum amount of capital. and, therefore, a partner’s withdrawal can only happen A partner company (partnerselskab) is an in-between by agreement with the other partner or partners. Entry option, between a limited partnership and a capital com- into and withdrawal from a partnership is based on an pany, being comprised of, on the one hand, a general part- agreement between the partners, including whether en- ner who takes on unlimited liability and, on the other, par- try or withdrawal must be accompanied by a payment. If ticipants who own shares and have limited personal liabil- consent in relation to a change of debtor is not received, ity. Under §5(1)(21) of the Danish Companies Act, a partner then the partner who is withdrawing becomes liable for the company is defined as a limited partnership, “... where partnership’s debt, as it exists immediately prior to with- the company’s limited partners have invested a particular drawal Madsen (2011). amount of capital, which is divided into shares ...“. With In the case of limited partnerships, the consequences the necessary adjustments, a partner company is regulated of withdrawal are different if it is a general partner ora by the provisions of the Danish Companies Act in accor- limited partner who seeks to withdraw from the partner- dance with §358. This means that the Danish Companies ship. A general partner cannot withdraw from a limited Act sets out the framework for a partner company’s oper- partnership without the consent of all the limited part- ation. One consequence of the Act’s regulation is that, in- ners. However, a general partner can terminate the limited ter alia, a partner company must be formed with a mini- partnership upon giving reasonable notice. On the other mum capital of DKK 500,000 of which DKK 125,000 must hand, a limited partner’s liability is limited to his or her in- be liquid. It also means that a Memorandum of Associa- vestment or share in the partnership (kommanditanparten) tion must be drafted and filed with the Danish Business and, therefore, it is assumed that he or she may freely as- Authority (Erhvervsstyrelsen), so that the partner company sign the share to another. However, the limited partner can achieve legal capacity. In addition, company rules cannot terminate the limited partnership Madsen (2011). (vedtægter) and rules about minority protection must be drawn up. Further, it is a requirement that a partner com- pany has a management structure that corresponds to a public limited company Madsen (2011). A jointly owned shipping firmpartrederi ( ) is the only form of company that may be used when several persons Unauthenticated Download Date | 2/3/16 8:26 AM Taxation reports for the Nordic Tax Research Council´s annual meeting Ë 3 1.2 Tax law regulation In cases of a specific liability limitation, depending on the agreements in existence, the number of creditors and 1.2.1 Qualification of companies the size of the creditors’ claim in relation to the associa- tion’s total debt, it can mean that the association is not a Under Danish tax law, a company’s liability to tax is pro- personal company Madsen (2011). vided for in §1 of the Corporation Tax Act (selskabsskat- In Danish tax law, particularly in relation to limited teloven).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Merverdiavgiften Og Kommunene
    NOU Norges offentlige utredninger 2003: 3 Merverdiavgiften og kommunene Konkurransevridninger mellom kommuner og private Utredning fra et utvalg oppnevnt ved kongelig resolusjon 11. januar 2002. Avgitt til Finansdepartementet 18. desember 2002. Statens forvaltningstjeneste Informasjonsforvaltning Oslo 2003 ISSN 0333-2306 ISBN 82-583-0683-9 Sats/Trykk: AIT Trondheim AS/AIT Otta AS Til Finansdepartementet Ved kongelig resolusjon 11. januar 2002 ble det oppnevnt et utvalg for å vurdere ulike løsninger som gjør at merverdiavgiften virker nøytral for kommunenes beslutninger. Utvalget legger med dette fram sin utredning. Oslo, 18. desember 2002 Jørn Rattsø leder Brita Bye Trond Christensen Trine Beate Groven Liv Kristine Hammer Tor S. Kildal Tor Lande Gerd Leira Torill Lønningdal Tom Rådahl Ole Jørgen Wilberg Erik Vassnes Erik Mæhlen Larsen Lars Einar Legernes Jan Erik Mardal Åsne Hana Torgersen Innhold 1 Utvalgets mandat og konkurransevridning – Merverdi- sammensetning ............................. 11 avgiftsloven § 11 tredje ledd ........... 32 1.1 Utvalgets mandat ............................. 11 3.5.5 Avgiftsfritaket for offentlig vei – 1.2 Utvalgets sammensetning ............... 12 Merverdiavgiftsloven § 16 første 1.3 Utvalgets tolkning av mandatet ...... 12 ledd nr. 13 ......................................... 32 1.4 Utvalgets arbeid ............................... 13 1.5 Leserveiledning ................................ 13 4 Kommunal tjenesteproduksjon 33 4.1 Innledning ......................................... 33 2 Sammendrag og konklusjoner
    [Show full text]
  • To: the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. 360 Madison Avenue, 16Th Floor New York, NY 10017 United States of America
    To: The International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. 360 Madison Avenue, 16th floor New York, NY 10017 United States of America 803591 MSJ/the Copenhagen, 13 May 2016 [email protected] Doc. no. 1365342 Dear Sirs Validity and Enforceability under Danish law of Close-out Netting under the ISDA Master Agreements In this opinion we consider the validity and enforceability under Danish law of the termination, bilateral close-out netting and multibranch netting provi- sions of the 1987, 1992 and 2002 ISDA Master Agreements1 (each an “ISDA Master Agreement” and collectively, the “ISDA Master Agreements”) published by the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (“ISDA”). Our opinion also includes certain advice on the following standard form doc- uments published by ISDA: (i) the 2001 ISDA Cross-Agreement Bridge (the “2001 Bridge”); and (ii) the 2002 ISDA Energy Agreement Bridge (the “2002 Bridge”). Capitalised terms used herein that are not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the ISDA Master Agreement. 1 The 1987 ISDA Interest Rate and Currency Exchange Agreement and the 1987 ISDA Interest Rate Swap Agreement (collectively referred to as the “1987 ISDA Master Agreements”) pub- lished in March 1987 by ISDA, the 1992 ISDA Master Agreement (Multicurrency – Cross Bor- der) (the “Cross Border Agreement”) and the 1992 ISDA Master Agreement (Local Currency – Single Jurisdiction) (the “Single Jurisdiction Agreement”) and, together with the Cross Border Agreement, the “1992 ISDA Master Agreements”) published in June 1992 by ISDA and the 2002 ISDA Master Agreement, published in January 2003 by ISDA (the “2002 ISDA Master Agreement”).
    [Show full text]
  • Del 1 – Hovedblankett
    Samordnet registermelding Del 1 – Hovedblankett for registrering i Enhetsregisteret, Foretaksregisteret, Merverdiavgiftsregisteret, NAV Aa-registeret, SSBs Bedrifts- og foretaksregister, Stiftelsesregisteret og Skattedirektoratets register over upersonlige skattytere 1. Navn/foretaksnavn 1.1 Enhetens fullstendige navn/foretaksnavn (fylles alltid ut) Organisasjonsnummer: ı ı ı ı ı ı ı ı ı ı 1.2 Eventuelt nytt navn/foretaksnavn. For enheter registrert i Foretaksregisteret er navne-/foretaksnavneendringen gebyrbelagt 1.3 Eget navn på virksomheten (oppgis bare hvis selve virksomheten drives under et annet navn enn enhetens fullstendige navn/foretaksnavn) 2. Meldingen gjelder 2.1 Enhet som ikke er registrert tidligere 2.3 Beslutning om (enhet som ikke har eget organisasjonsnummer) oppløsning av enhet Ved kjøp, salg eller nedleggelse > av virksomhet må felt 9 og 10 2.2 Endringer/nye opplysninger 2.4 Sletting av enhet fylles ut. (fyll bare ut de felt endringen gjelder) 3. Registrering i andre registre (i tillegg til registrering i Enhetsregisteret) 3.1 Skal enheten registreres i Foretaksregisteret? Nei Ja > Se veiledningen om registrerings- Det er gebyr på registreringen. rett/-plikt i Foretaksregisteret. 3.2 Har virksomheten omsetning som kommer inn under Nei Ja > Hvis ja, sender du inn blankettens merverdiavgiftslovens bestemmelser? del 2 når beløpsgrensen er nådd. Se egen veiledning for del 2. 3.3 Enheten - har eller venter å få arbeidstakere Nei Ja - betaler/skal betale andre enn arbeidstakere Nei Ja vederlag som det skal betales arbeidsgiveravgift > Hvis ja, får du nærmere informasjon av etter folketrygdloven § 23-2 tilsendt. 3.4 Har eller venter enheten å få virksomhet på flere adresser? Nei Ja 4. Hovedkontorets adresse (forretningsadresse/besøksadresse) Gate, husnummer eller sted Postnummer Poststed Kommune Land Telefonnummer Telefaksnummer Mobiltelefonnummer Hjemmeside 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Norskregistrert Utenlandsk Foretak (NUF)
    Norskregistrert utenlandsk foretak (NUF) som alternativ til AS En analyse av sentrale rettslige og faktiske problemstillinger knyttet til NUF som alternativ til norsk aksjeselskap i kjølvannet av endringer i aksjeloven mv. Kandidatnummer: 731 Leveringsfrist: 25.11.2014 Antall ord: 16 672 Innholdsfortegnelse 1 INNLEDNING .................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Innledning og problemstilling ........................................................................................... 1 1.2 Avgrensning og videre fremstilling ................................................................................... 2 1.3 Begrepsavklaringer ............................................................................................................ 3 1.3.1 Norskregistrert utenlandsk foretak (NUF) ........................................................... 3 1.4 Metode og rettskilder ........................................................................................................ 4 1.4.1 Norsk rett.............................................................................................................. 4 1.4.2 Engelsk rett .......................................................................................................... 4 2 GENERELLE UTGANGSPUNKT .................................................................................. 6 2.1 Selkapsdeltakernes ansvar for selskapets forpliktelser ..................................................... 6 2.1.1 Aksjeselskap........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Den Norske Advokatforening (PDF, 237KB)
    Finansdepartementet Sendt elektronisk Deres ref.: 15/2550 SL AEI/KR Dato: 19. juni 2017 Vår ref.: 243776 Høring - Forslag om endring av skatteloven § 2-2 første ledd 1. Innledning Vi viser til departementets høringsbrev av 16.3.2017 vedrørende ovennevnte høring. Det er en prioritert oppgave for Advokatforeningen å drive rettspolitisk arbeid gjennom høringsuttalelser. Advokatforeningen har derfor en rekke lovutvalg inndelt etter fagområder. I våre lovutvalg sitter advokater med særskilte kunnskaper innenfor det aktuelle fagfelt og hvert lovutvalg består av advokater med ulik erfaringsbakgrunn og kompetanse innenfor fagområdet. Arbeidet i lovutvalgene er frivillig og ulønnet. Advokatforeningen ser det som sin oppgave å være en uavhengig høringsinstans med fokus på rettssikkerhet og på kvaliteten av den foreslåtte lovgivningen. I saker som angår advokaters rammevilkår vil imidlertid regelendringen også bli vurdert opp mot advokatbransjens interesser. Det vil i disse tilfellene bli opplyst at vi uttaler oss som en berørt bransjeorganisasjon og ikke som et uavhengig ekspertorgan. Årsaken til at vi sondrer mellom disse rollene er at vi ønsker å opprettholde og videreutvikle den troverdighet Advokatforeningen har som et uavhengig og upolitisk ekspertorgan i lovgivningsprosessen. I den foreliggende sak uttaler Advokatforeningen seg som ekspertorgan. Saken er forelagt lovutvalget for skatterett. Lovutvalget består av Hanne Kristin Skaarberg Holen (elder), Cecilie Amdahl. Andreas Bullen, Thor Leegaard, Stine Lettrem-Eliassen, Amund Noss. Advokatforeningen avgir følgende høringsuttalelse: 2. Sakens bakgrunn Finansdepartementet foreslår i høringsnotatet en regel om at selskaper som er stiftet i Norge er hjemmehørende i Norge for skatteformål. I tillegg foreslås at selskaper som har reell ledelse i Norge er hjemmehørende her. Unntak fra dette skal etter forslaget gjelde der hvor et selskap er hjemmehørende i en annen stat etter skatteavtale.
    [Show full text]
  • GUIDE to GOING GLOBAL CORPORATE Norway
    GUIDE TO GOING GLOBAL CORPORATE Norway Downloaded: 01 Oct 2021 INTRODUCTION GUIDE TO GOING GLOBAL | CORPORATE INTRODUCTION Welcome to the 2021 edition of DLA Piper’s Guide to Going Global – Corporate. GUIDE TO GOING GLOBAL SERIES To compete and be successful today, companies need to develop and scale their businesses globally. Each country presents its own set of unique laws, rules and regulations and business practices that companies must understand to be successful. In order to help clients meet the opportunities and challenges of expanding internationally, we have created a handy set of global guides that cover the basics companies need to know when going into and doing business in new countries. The Guide to Going Global series reviews business-relevant corporate, employment, intellectual property and technology, executive compensation, and tax laws in key jurisdictions around the world. CORPORATE The Guide to Going Global – Corporate has been created based on our research, our experience and feedback we have received from clients in both established and emerging businesses that have expanded internationally. We hope it will be a helpful resource for you. The Guide to Going Global – Corporate covers corporate basics in 54 key jurisdictions across the Americas, Asia Pacific, Europe and the Middle East. We touch on a wide range of corporate issues for companies expanding internationally, including establishing a corporate presence and choice of entity, liability considerations, tax presence and tax filings, capital requirements, the formation process, director, officer and shareholder requirements, registration processes, office lease processes and possible exit strategies. With more than 600 lawyers, DLA Piper’s global Corporate group is one of the largest in the world, with one of the widest geographical footprints of any global law firm and experience across the legal areas companies need as they expand internationally.
    [Show full text]
  • Organisering Av Norske Havner Fra Kommunal Etat Til Selskap
    rapport av adv. Vibeke Resch-Knudsen Organisering av norske havner Fra kommunal etat til selskap 4. april 2013 Innhold 1. ORGANISASJONSMULIGHETER FOR KOMMUNALE HAVNER 4 1.1. Utpekte havner 4 1.2. Stamnetthavner 5 2. KoMMUNERS MYNDIGHETSUTØVELSE ETTER HFL 8 3. ORGANISERING 9 3.1. Kommunal etat 11 3.2. Kommunale foretak (KF) 12 3.3. Interkommunale samarbeidsløsninger 12 3.3.1. Interkommunale samarbeid etter kml. § 27 13 3.3.2. Vertskommunesamarbeid med nemnd 14 3.4. Havnen organisert i et selskap 14 3.4.1. Interkommunale selskaper etter kml. § 27 15 3.4.2. Interkommunale selskaper (IKS) 16 3.4.3. Aksjeselskaper 17 3.4.4. Samvirkeforetak 19 3.4.5. Allmennaksjeselskap 19 3.5. Vurdering av de ulike organisasjonsformene (tabell) 20 4. STYRING AV HAVNESELSKAP 24 4.1. Operative eierorgan i selskaper 24 4.2. Styrets sammensetning og rolle 24 4.3. Selskapets formål 25 4.4. Konsernhavnen 26 5. SKATTEPLIKT 27 6. UTBYTTE AV HAVNESELSKAP 29 7. GARANTIER OG OFFENTLIG STØTTE 31 8. MVA 33 9. OFFENTLEGLOVA OG FORVALTNINGSLOVEN 33 10. ETABLERING AV SELSKAP/OMDANNING 35 10.1. Regnskapsmessige forhold 35 10.2. Skatte og avgiftsmessige forhold ved omdanning 35 10.3. Dokumentavgift 36 10.4. Ansattes rettigheter og plikter 36 11. OPPSUMMERING 37 Fotnoter finner du i margene under denne lilla streken. 1. ORGANISASJONSMULIGHETER betegnelse for lokale havner, fiskeri- FOR KOMMUNALE HAVNER havner, fritidsbåthavner eller lignende. I dag består havnestrukturen i Norge av Begrepet havn er definert i havne- og 5 utpekte havner og 31 stamnetthavner. farvannsloven (HFL) § 4: 1.1. Utpekte havner «Med havn menes i denne loven områder som er Transportpolitikken legger opp til at til bruk for fartøy; transport bør flyttes over fra vei til sjø så langt det lar seg gjøre, gjennom å • som skal laste eller losse gods eller trans- portere passasjerer som ledd i sjøtransport legge opp til at sjøtransport skal være en eller annen næringsvirksomhet, foretrukket transportform for transport av gods over lange avstander.
    [Show full text]
  • Norway: Assessment by the EITI International Secretariat
    EITI International Secretariat 15 April 2021 Validation of Requirement 2.5 – Norway: Assessment by the EITI International Secretariat EITI International Secretariat 1 Phone: +47 222 00 800 E-mail: [email protected] Twitter: @EITIorg www.eiti.org Address: Rådhusgata 26, 0151 Oslo, Norway Validation of Requirement 2.5 – Norway Assessment by the EITI International Secretariat Validation of Requirement 2.5 – Norway: Assessment by the EITI International Secretariat Contents 1. Summary ................................................................................................................................................. 2 2. Background ............................................................................................................................................. 2 3. Assessment of Requirement 2.5 on beneficial ownership .................................................................. 4 Annex A: Technical assessment ................................................................................................................ 6 1. Summary The International Secretariat’s assessment is that Norway has made “inadequate progress” in meeting the initial criteria for implementing Requirement 2.5 on beneficial ownership. Norway has enacted legislation to establish a publicly accessible ultimate beneficial ownership (UBO) registry. It will apply to all companies that apply for or hold a participating interest in exploration or production oil, gas or mining licenses. Regulations supplementing the act were subject to public
    [Show full text]
  • Institutt for Offentlig Retts Bibliografi 1957-2006
    Institutt for offentlig retts bibliografi 1957-2006 Utarbeidet ved Det juridiske fakultetsbibliotek av Lars Finholt Jansen Randi Halveg Iversby (red.) Bård Sverre Tuseth (red.) I forbindelse med Institutt for offentlig retts 50-årsjubileum har Det juridiske fakultetsbibliotek utarbeidet instituttets bibliografi, det vil si en oversikt over skriftlige arbeider av instituttansatte i løpet av IORs første femti år. Bibliografien er begrenset til juridiske arbeider produsert ved Institutt for offentlig rett eller de instituttene som er innlemmet i Institutt for offentlig rett innenfor den enkeltes ansettelsesperiode. Forord til den elektroniske utgaven: Bibliografien foreligger hovedsakelig slik den ble publisert i Institutt for offentlig retts skriftserie nr 9 2007. Noen mindre feil er rettet og blanke sider er fjernet for å tilpasse dokumentet til det elektroniske formatet. Redaktørene, 15. mars 2012. Shaheen Sardar Ali ........................................................................................................... 10 Ivar Alvik .......................................................................................................................... 10 Johs. Andenæs................................................................................................................... 11 Kjell V. Andorsen ............................................................................................................. 31 Ole Rasmus Asbjørnsen ...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Eierskapsmelding 2014
    EIERSKAP SM ELDING Haugfoss kraftstasjon ved Blaafarveværket. Eier er Modum Kraftprod 2014 Inntaksdammen i Ramfoss, Ramfoss Kraftlag Eierskapsmelding, vedtatt i Kommunestyret 20.6.11, sak 51/11. Oppdatert august 2012 (K-sak 70/12), 1 oppdatert august 2013 (K-sak 66/13), sist oppdatert august 2014. Innhold Del I Eierstyring ........................................................................................................................ 4 1.1 Innledning ......................................................................................................................... 4 1.1.1 Bakgrunn for eierskapsmeldingen ................................................................................. 4 1.1.2 Oppbygning av eierskapsmeldingen .............................................................................. 4 1.2 Å eie er å ville, motiver for selskapsdannelse................................................................... 4 1.2.1 Finansielt motivert ......................................................................................................... 5 1.2.2 Politisk motivert ............................................................................................................. 5 1.2.3 Effektivisering................................................................................................................ 5 1.2.4 Samfunnsøkonomisk motivert ....................................................................................... 5 1.2.5 Regionalpolitisk motivert..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ROBERT M. JARVIS Nova Southeastern University Shepard
    ROBERT M. JARVIS Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad College of Law 3305 College Avenue Fort Lauderdale, FL 33314-7721 Telephone: (954) 873-9173 Telefax: (954) 262-3835 E-mail: [email protected] Web page: https://www.law.nova.edu/faculty/full-time-faculty/jarvis-robert.html Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=nSfes2IAAAAJ Current to September 1, 2021 ________________________________________________________________________ EDUCATION LL.M., New York University, 1986 J.D., University of Pennsylvania, 1983 B.A. with distinction, Northwestern University, 1980 (elected to Phi Beta Kappa) EMPLOYMENT Assistant, then Associate, now Professor of Law, Nova Southeastern University Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 1987 to present (tenured since 1992) Current Courses: American Legal History (S); Florida Constitutional Law; Gambling Law; International Litigation; Maritime Law; Professional Responsibility Current Faculty Committee: Ad Hoc Disciplinary Rules Committee (chair) Past Courses: Advanced Professional Responsibility; AIDS and the Law (S); Arbitration; Art Law; Aviation Law; Baseball and the Law; Contracts; Current Constitutional Problems (S); Higher Education Law (S); International Arbitration; International Business Transactions; International Law; Law and Society (S); Patents; Sports Law; Theater Law; Travel Law 2 Past Faculty Committees: Academic Disciplinary Board (chair); Adjuncts; Admissions; Appointments; Bar Examination; Bar Gift Award; Career Services (chair); Copyright/Fair Use; Faculty-Administration Interface
    [Show full text]
  • Taxation of Partnerships - Legal General Report for the Nordic Tax Research Council´S Annual Meeting on 22 May 2015 in Aarhus
    Nordic Tax J. 2015 2:47–56 Report Open Access Liselotte Madsen Taxation of Partnerships - Legal general report for the Nordic Tax Research Council´s annual meeting on 22 May 2015 in Aarhus DOI 10.1515/ntaxj-2015-0005 though the similar Norwegian word is “utdeling”, and so Received Sep 08, 2015; accepted Sep 18, 2015 on. In English translation, the word “distribution” is used. I hope that it does not provide any linguistic challenges. The term partnership is used to the extent that it is not found necessary to indicate the national name, and ex- 1 Introduction and terminology presses only that it is a transparent business. First, a short review of the company law rules regard- This report has been written on the basis of a number of ing the establishment of partnerships will be carried out, Nordic national reports on the subject: Taxation of part- after which, the tax rules will be reviewed. nerships. The contributions from Denmark, Norway, Swe- den, and Iceland have been incorporated in the report to the best of my ability and by relevance. 2 Company law matters The term "partnership" is a general term for a num- ber of companies that have a common characteristic - First, it is relevant to relate to the company law rules ap- namely that they are not taxable entities, but rather trans- plicable to partnerships. A description of this has been parent for tax purposes. The company type, partnership, deemed important for the understanding of the civil law which is not a separate tax subject, can be found in all rules for partnerships, both in relation to the third parties the Nordic countries.
    [Show full text]