tiistai 5. marraskuuta 2013

Mergers and acquisitions in Finland; lawyer's role and costs

Lawyer’s role in an acquisition in Finland

It goes without saying that the extent of a lawyer’s involvement in an acquisition depends on the instructions of the client and consequently varies a lot. I have recently been involved in a couple of acquisitions which were very different from each other both in structure and the size of the deal. Yet, these two acquisitions highlighted the role of the lawyer and made me realize that different clients may have totally opposite needs when choosing their legal advisers.

1.      Client’s objective

The objective which the parties’ lawyers will be expected to achieve is the legal transfer of ownership from seller to buyer of the shares of the target company. The client will also expect his lawyer to identify risks of a legal nature and to seek to protect him from those risks as far as possible. As the objective is so clear it’s worth considering why the instructions of clients vary so much. The first idea that crosses your mind is that the client would simply like to achieve this objective at the lowest possible cost. This is not, however, always the case.

2.      Client’s motives

Many clients, in particular owners of family owned companies, are straightforward and seek to make the acquisition process as simple as possible and at the lowest possible costs. This is possible in Finland as we belong to the continental legal tradition with written laws based originally on Swedish law. So if you want to make the paper work lighter it can be done as much of the  contractual relationship will be covered by the law anyway. So why pay for something that you get for free?

Having said that you may still have valid grounds to make the documents more extensive. An international company often has a protocol for mergers and acquisitions and always does the documentation exactly the same way. This may be due to the corporate policy or their bankers’ requirements. This approach should not be taken to the extreme. I once had a German multinational as counterpart and they had pushed the corporate requirements so far that they did not care about the laws of the object company. It was most unfortunate – for them.

For a multinational company it is important that all acquisitions are done more or less the same way irrespective of the country. This makes the management of the subsidiaries and affiliates easier. One of the reasons to make a very extensive documentation may be a corporate one: once the decision maker uses one of the largest law firms in the country he cannot be blamed if the deal goes sour. After all the decisionmaker in question has done everything within his power. Fair enough but this approach can be counter productive, and now I am not talking about the legal fees. I have in the past seen cases where the documentation has been so extensive that not even the drafting lawyer could make sense of it. This risk is enhanced by the fact that legal teams dealing with acquisitions seem to become larger and larger by the day and produce more and more documentation. A skilled client should be specific about what he expects. One is sometimes surprised how much material is produced with very little or no analysis.

3.      Commercial Issues

The lawyer’s input into the commercial aspects of the transaction varies a lot in practice. The stage at which the client instructs the lawyer seems to be equally as variable. These two factors often go hand in hand. Unfortunately the client sometimes sees the lawyer’s role as excluding the commercial side of the transaction, and then instructs the lawyer at a relatively late stage in proceedings. There are sad stories about due diligences made and substance of the deal having been  negotiated without the advice of the lawyer.

The reality is, however, that it is nearly impossible to isolate the legal aspects from the commercial aspects and therefore we prefer to be involved as early as possible in the parties’ negotiations. This is vital if the lawyer is expected to give taxation advice in relation to the acquisition. The way the acquisition is structured has substantial impact on the client’s tax position; if the client makes contact too late, it may be impossible to choose the most tax-effective method. We do not wish to see that our client enters into any binding commitments too early and see to that all negotiations are subject to formal contract.

4.      Coordination

A function which our clients often ask us to carry out is to coordinate the various professional advisers involved in the proposed acquisition. The acquisition “team” most typically includes feasibility study makers, accountants, surveyors and environmental auditors and patent agents. If  a publicly  listed company is involved, the team will be much larger and enhanced with corporate finance and merchant bankers.

You simply cannot exaggerate the significance of the coordination and this concerns also the legal advisors. The team leader or the coordinator should be totally committed to the case: we have in the past seen mediocre results by large reputed firms due to bad coordination. A legal team often consists of a group of lawyers, some of them with less experience than the others. If the team leader has not time enough to meticulously coordinate the case, you will get outstanding individual performances and the total outcome will at its best be mediocre. 

Time is of essence so the earlier we get involved the easier and less costly the process will be. Equally important for the client is to have a strategy: i..e. a clear and outspoken vision of what he expects to be done, to what extent and at what cost.        

tiistai 3. syyskuuta 2013

Can foreigners own shares in Finland and be directors of a Finnish Company?

1         Can a foreign citizen own shares in a Finnish company?

In regular businesses there are no restrictions based on the place of residence or domicile, or nationality, regarding the right to own shares.

2          Can a foreign resident be a board member in a Finnish limited liability company?

The nationality of the person is not a decisive factor. What is essential is in which country he or she lives permanently. In certain cases a person residing outside the European Economic Area (EEA) needs a permit from the NBPR.

If at least one Board member is a resident of the EEA, no permit is needed. So  for instance in  a Finnish-Chinese joint venture, no permit from the NBPR is required, as long as at least one of both the ordinary and the deputy members are residents of the EEA. Should none of the ordinary members live in the EEA, all of them would need a permit granted by the NBPR.

3          Managing Director

The Managing Director (and his/her deputy, if any) must have a place of residence in the EEA. This is quite logical as the managing director is running the business and is normally “at site”. N.B. The laws talk about residence not the nationality. So a Chinese national residing in Finland can be the Managing Director.

keskiviikko 14. elokuuta 2013

Poison pills of all kinds

                                Poison pills of all kinds            
Many of us would associate poison pills with articles of an association and their special clauses that limit voting rights. But the expression poison pill is just perfect and its usage has expanded to many other             unpleasant surprises as well. Due diligence in particular is designed to detect those pills and to protect the buyer so that the content of the pill does not puff on the vendor’s eyes.
Employment or labor section of a due diligence can appear really boring and killing when the material comes from a foreign jurisdiction. On surface labor risk analysis in the form of a due diligence appears local and possible issues would be handled locally, so why bother. However, one observation just might have global relevance for an international   operation.
Employees’ rights to IPR or their inventions is handled slightly differently from one country to another. In Finland the key point to understand is that it is not possible for the employee to waive his/her                       rights to the invention in advance. Such agreement may exist but it cannot be enforced. It is null and void. A standard solution would be to agree with the employee on compensation as early as possible, i.e. when the very first signs of an invention have been identified. For an MA transaction this is an issue for drafting and calculus, although with a local origin.

Tina Taivaloja, LLM

Helsinki, Finland                                                      

perjantai 7. kesäkuuta 2013

Due Diligence or risk analysis

Due Diligence or risk analysis

How to handle it in a minority language country

Due diligence investigation can be life saving in a cross border MA transaction. The trick is not to overdo it and at the same time to dig out all information relevant to the transaction. Well, this is how things look from the parties’ perspective. The performers’ point of view  i.e. the attorneys’ or accountants’, is somewhat different. It is in their billing and professional interest to suggest a due diligence investigation that is as thorough as possible. Which carries with it the risk of losing focus and the due diligence investigation becoming worthless and very expensive.

Finland is a minority language country meaning that many official documents are drafted in Finnish. It is a language that is barely known outside of the country. Although English is well mastered in Finland it does not change the fact that you need to know Finnish as well. For a transaction a typical solution would be to hire a local law firm and accountants for the due diligence. The issue is then handled from a technical perspective assuming that google translation method would work. Most of us have noticed that it does not. Many reports will be prepared but the information is not there. The due diligence thus performed did not help our drafting of agreements.

A solution could be to include a member of the drafting team in the due diligence team. That link between the teams should be in a position to make sure that questions of the drafting team are correctly understood and, also, that answers provided by the due diligence team can be understood by the drafters. Obviously, in real life, things would not go this smoothly. Operation of a due diligence team can be a business secret and, therefore, a new temporary member would not be welcome.

by Tina Taivaloja

lecturer, doctoral student at University of Helsinki

maanantai 13. toukokuuta 2013

Finskt dotterbolags beskattning; ränteavdrag



Minimal bolagsbeskattning av utländska företags dotterbolag i Finland

Finland har varit ett ”skatteparadis” för multinationella bolag, men framöver blir det slut på det goda – eller åtminstone krävs det skickligare planering.  Den finska regeringen har nämligen  föreslagit en begränsning i företagens rätt att avdra räntekostnader. Finland har sen gammalt inte uppburit någon källskatt på räntebetalningar. Regeln har funnits i inhemsk skattelagstiftning och gällt betalningar till alla länder (även lågskatteländer och skatteparadis). Dessutom har vi inte haft begränsningar av s.k. tunn kapitalisering. Detta har möjliggjort kapitaliseringen av det finländska dotterbolaget med stora lån, vars räntor har varit avdragsgilla i Finland. Dessutom har utbetalningen av räntorna inte genererat finsk källskatt.

Förändringar fr.o.m. 2014

Rätten att avdra räntor kommer att förändras fr.o.m. skatteåret 2014. Räntebetalningarna till ett svensk moder-/systerbolag  förblir avdragsgilla  med följande begränsningar:

* Om nettoränteutgifterna för skatteåret (= den del av ränteutgifterna som är större än ränteintäkterna) uppgår till högst 500 000 euro kan bolaget också dra av dem till fullt belopp.

* När nettoränteutgifterna överstiger 500 000 euro får de dras av till den del som de uppgår till högst 30 procent av justerat resultat av näringsverksamheten. Det maximala beloppet av icke avdragbara nettoränteutgifter är dock högst lika stort som beloppet av nettoränteutgifter mellan bolagen i intressegemenskap.

Begränsningarna gäller endast de bolag som betalar räntor till parter som är i intressegemenskap med det finländska dotterbolaget. Däremot räntebetalningarna t.ex. till en svensk bank förblir helt och hållet avdragsilla. Regeln gäller dock inte om det svenska moderbolaget har givit t.ex. en deposition som säkerhet.

Självfallet får  ränteutgifter fortfarande dras av till fullt belopp till de delar som motsvarar ränteinkomsternas belopp.


Det är uppenbart att de multinationella storbolagen kommer att kunna dra nytta av räntornas avdragbarhet eftersom de kan operera genom bankerna och p.g.a. deras intrikata system går det inte att öronmärka säkerheterna.

Mindre företag får lov att anpassa sina strukturer till att motsvara de nya reglerna. Tunn kapitalisering av det finländska dotterbolaget ger inte mera den beskattningsmässiga fördelen som man haft. Å andra sidan kommer bolagsskatten i Finland att sänkas till 20% vilket gör landet beskattningsmässigt konkurrenskraftigt för utländska företag.

sunnuntai 24. maaliskuuta 2013

Fusion-acquisition en Finlande:

Achat d’une société en Finlande


Une fusion-acquisition en Finlande n’est pas forcement compliquée. La Finlande appartient au système juridique continental donc il y a peu de surprises pour un acheteur francais. Bien entendu il y a des particularités nationales surtout sur les domaines de droit immobilier, droit de travail et droit fiscal. Nous trouvons que l’ assistance et le conseil dans la structuration de l’opération en matière juridique, fiscale et sociale dans sa préparation est d’importance.  La réalisation des audits de pré-acquisition (Due Diligence) et organisation de data-rooms suit, mais bon conseil au debut du processus vaut beaucoup.

Les négotiations concernant la rédaction et négociation de la documentation juridique d’acquisition (lettre d’intention, contrat d’acquisition, convention de garantie) et de financement (contrats de crédit et sûretés ) sont plus faciles si on a commencé de bonne heure et formé une strategie.


Le système juridique finlandais  permet la libération du capital mais il faut être prudent: le vendeur peut obtenir des dividends supplementaires, la société objet peut être diffusion, la société peut rachter des actions. Les mécanismes sont divers.


 Nous devons vérifier que  les terrains constructibles ont obtenu  un permis de construire de la municipalité. L’acheteur devra vérifier que tous les actes d'achats ont bien été transcrits au bureau des registrations. L'acquéreur pourra par ailleurs vérifier à ce bureau la situation réelle des immeubles et s'assurer qu'il n'existe pas de hypothèques antérieures sur les immeubles de l'actif.

Dans une acquisition en Finlande nous  vérifions le respect des normes et règlements en vigueur en Finlande. Finalement ce n’est pas souvent que nous rencontrons des cas de non respect de règles et lois qui  peuvent engendrer de conséquences financières. Bien entendu  les règles environnementales peuvent être très lourdes de conséquences pour la société et de plus les consequences peuvent se realiser trés tard.

Qu’est-ce que cela coûte?

Les coûts de conseil juridique sont souvent élevés, mais il ne doit  pas être ainsi! Le système finlandais nous permet  de rédiger des contrats plus courts sans risque. Beaucoup de grands cabinets font des audits de pré-acquisition (Due Diligence) en grand style sans analyser trop et les contrats d’acquisition sont plutôt du style américain que finlandais. Cela n’est pas toujours nécessaire dans un système de droit continental ; nous préférons adapter le travail aux vrais besoins du client et trouvons qu’une  analyse vaut mieux  que beaucoup de  documents  photocopiés et traduits.

Visitez nos pages à www.salvelex.com

lauantai 23. maaliskuuta 2013

Corporate tax reform in Finland

Corporate tax rate in Finland to 20 per cent - great news for foreign shareholders

Positive news for businesses as Finland intends to cut its corporate tax to 20 per cent. Foreign owned companies are the real winners.
The Finnish Government announced the  contemplated reform at a press conference on March 23rd, 2013  at which the Prime Minister also disclosed measures aimed at reducing Finland’s budget deficit.

The tax cut would be partially financed by higher taxes on stock dividends which naturally does not affect an international owner as he is liable to any such taxes in his home country but not in Finland.  

All good seems to have a price tag: Finnish resident shareholders’ dividend taxation gets harder: shareholders of non-quoted companies will pay tax on the dividends depending of the net value of the company. This means an aggregate tax burden of 26,4 per cent (corporate tax + dividend tax) for the Finnish resident shareholders.

The reform is in line with the changes made in other Nordic countries. A similar tax cut was announced Sweden  and Denmark resulting in a 22 per cent  tax rate.

More about mergers and acquisitions in Finland  at my website http://www.salvelex.com/ 
You can also acquaint yourself with my previously published article about taxation aspects in mergers and acquisitions at www.isnare.com/?aid=1815709&ca=Legal
Bolagsskatten i Finland  till 20 %
Bolagsskatten i Finalnd  sänks från 24,5 procent till 20 procent. Sänkningen kompenseras genom en hårdare beskattning av dividender. Detta drabbar förståss inte svenska aktieägare (allmänt skattskyldiga i Sverige)  eftersom de inte betalar  källskatt på dividender.