British Virgin Islands: The IBC Act – The Building Of A Nation

Last Updated: 20 July 2014
Article by Colin Riegels

Harneys Partner Colin Riegels tells the story of the development of the BVI's landmark IBC Act of 1984. His father Michael Riegels, one of the firm's founding partners, was among those who authored it.

Although nobody knew it at the time, the inception of the BVI's International Business Company Act occurred at some point during the year 1976. Nobody now recalls the exact date, except that it was during the summer. It is reasonable to assume that it was a hot day, and in most of the offices in Road Town, Tortola the overhead fans would have been turning lazily to avoid creating enough breeze to disrupt the piles of paper on assorted desks. Amongst those offices there was only one law practice in the Territory at the time, and that was the firm of Harney Westwood & Riegels. Within their offices on Russell Hill there were just two lawyers: Neville Westwood, a veteran of the Second World War who had settled in the Caribbean with his wife and daughter in search of a more peaceful life, and Michael Riegels, who had recently come to the BVI with his family from Tanzania after a period of civil unrest. Harold Harney had by this time passed away.

On this otherwise unremarkable day, the rotary telephone rang with a deafening jangle, and the receptionist would have answered. On the other end of the line was a Wall Street lawyer by the name of Paul Butler from renowned New York law firm, Shearman & Sterling. Like so many Wall Street lawyers Mr Butler was a highly capable and astute businessman. He also had characteristic American friendliness and charm in abundance. He could anticipate immediate attention because international telephone calls were uncommon in those times. Cable & Wireless had laid the necessary undersea cables only a few years before. Mr Butler asked politely if he could speak to either Mr Westwood or Mr Riegels, and in the end he was connected with Michael Riegels. There would have been few pleasantries – telephone calls were extremely expensive under the Cable & Wireless monopoly – and Mr Butler got down to explaining the purpose of his call. He was an American corporate lawyer, and there were double taxation treaties between the USA and various "micro-states" in the Caribbean which off ered the potential for generous US tax relief. He had been dealing with lawyers in the Netherlands Antilles, but had been having trouble with the language barrier, and he was interested in trying to use the BVI going forward. Mr Riegels said they would be very happy to assist and he would start looking into it right away.

The transaction went well. Undoubtedly issues would have arisen, but nothing which proved insurmountable. The transaction was then followed by another, and then another, until there was a steady stream of US tax related work going through the offices of Harneys. Mr Butler would later remark that he had been rather lucky selecting the BVI and Harneys. Although he had anticipated having to closely supervise inexperienced local lawyers, he had accidentally stumbled across two very able men. Neville Westwood was a Cambridge graduate who, after spending time at the English bar, had worked extensively in industry. Michael Riegels was an Oxford man who had come fifth in the entire country when he sat for the English bar. The relationship between the three men became very warm. Shortly thereafter the two Harneys partners hired a third man to join them: Richard Peters, a brilliant young tax barrister from London and a former Cambridge organ scholar. The future seemed spectacularly bright at this stage.

But even in the days before Edward Snowden had been born, the all-seeing eye of the American Government fell upon the BVI soon enough. The success of the double tax treaty was causing concern in Washington, and the American authorities summoned a delegation from the BVI to discuss the treaty. The delegation was led by McWelling Todman QC - "Mac" to his friends - a native Tortolan lawyer of exceptional ability. The delegation was not especially successful. Mac Todman would later joke grimly that their meetings had been not so much a case of "negotiation" as "plea gotiation". In any event, the Americans unceremoniously cancelled the double taxation treaty in 1982.

The situation looked potentially grim. Up until the mid-1970s the BVI had been something of an economic backwater. There was little infrastructure or industry, but the increasing economic traction that the incorporation work had brought had injected a certain degree of prosperity into the islands. People were anxious that the momentum should continue. The Attorney General of the day was a man named Lewis Hunte. A man of infectious charm and good humour, Mr Hunte was a native of Barbados who had come to the BVI and proved himself a skilled draftsman during the much needed modernisation process which was underway in relation to the BVI's legislation. Mr Butler suggested that the best way to respond to the cancellation of the double tax treaty was to try and offer a new corporate product in the market. Instead of promoting a structure which would create tax leakage in powerful states such as the USA, the BVI should seek to create a tax-neutral company using up to date legislation which would provide a user friendly flexible modern corporate vehicle for multiple commercial purposes in any country in the world. The idea enjoyed the encouragement and support of Ken Bain, the Financial Secretary of the BVI at that time.

In the end a committee of five people: Paul Butler, Lewis Hunte, Richard Peters, Michael Riegels and Neville Westwood were tasked with developing the legislation to create this new type of corporate vehicle. Paul Butler in New York and Richard Peters, Michael Riegels and Neville Westwood in the British Virgin Islands worked on producing a first draft of the proposed new legislation. This draft was then gone over section by section in minute detail with Lewis Hunte in the Attorney General's Chambers on a daily basis to work the draft into a suitable legislative format for the BVI. Although later they would sometimes be referred to as the "gang of fi ve" who were responsible for the drafting of the IBC Act, in truth the majority of the work was done by Richard Peters, the youngest member of the group. At the suggestion of Mr Butler, the legislation was based upon Delaware corporation law, which was thought to be the most modern in the world at the time, but incorporating additions from innovative company legislation in other jurisdictions as well. At points this led to some grating jurisprudence – using American legal terminology within an English common law system – but after eighteen months the task was completed and on 15 August 1984 the Legislative Council of the British Virgin Islands passed the new Act into law.

Looking back at the International Business Companies Act now, it is easy to overlook how radical it was at the time. It streamlined the incorporation procedure and removed the requirement of corporate capacity. It abolished the need for corporate benefit, recognised that companies could exist without members, and permitted companies to provide financial assistance for the acquisition of their own shares. It provided for true statutory mergers, and created new statutory tools for restructuring and reorganisation. Most of these innovations would not appear in English company law until the Companies Act 1986, and some did not appear until the Companies Act 2006. It is not mere hyperbole to say that the IBC Act was ahead of its time.

However the Government and private sector of the British Virgin Islands were not really concerned with how radical the new statute was. What they were really concerned about was whether accountants and lawyers in other jurisdictions would use these new International Business Companies, or IBCs. So they waited. At fi rst it was slow. Very slow. Very few new companies were incorporated under the Act. People were tempted to write the whole endeavour off as a failure. And then all of a sudden, like a desert after the rains come, it all started to bloom. From about 1989 to about 1997 the incorporation numbers exploded, growing exponentially at the almost unmanageable rate of nearly 50% growth year-on-year. The infrastructure at the Companies Registry struggled to keep pace with the sheer volume of incorporations. Lawyers, accountants and trust companies poured into the sleepy capital of Road Town like miners in the California gold rush. New offices had to be built. House prices surged. Infrastructure was upgraded. For better or worse the BVI experienced rapid economic growth on a scale it had not contemplated at the outset. In 1999, after a study on behalf of the British Government, the accountancy firm KPMG estimated that the BVI had amassed a 41% global market share for off shore vehicles. By 2004 the BVI would have the 12th highest GDP per head of population in the entire world.

During the 1990s it became a popular topic of conversation at business lunches in the BVI to try and identify what had happened to "flip the switch" on the IBC Act. For many years the popular theory was that it was the invasion of Panama by the USA. There was a neat symmetry to the theory. The USA had killed off the first incarnation of the off shore industry, so it was fitting that an American geopolitical event should give birth to the second. The broad premise was that Panama was a leading player in the off shore industry until the Americans invaded Panama in December 1989 to arrest the Panamanian dictator, General Manuel Noriega, on charges of drugs running. The unrest arising from the invasion caused business to fl ee, and the BVI was one of the main beneficiaries. However, the theory is probably over simplistic. Incorporation numbers had already begun to balloon before the Americans loaded their rifl es and boarded their warships. There is nothing about the period immediately following the invasion which shows a particularly large spike as against the year before or the year after, although undeniably the US invasion of Panama was beneficial to the growth of the BVI's financial services industry.

Another popular theory was that much of the popularity of BVI companies can be attributed to just one man: Sir Li Kai-shing, a Hong Kong business magnate and now Asia's wealthiest man. Back in the late 1980s the businessman – then simply known as Mr Li – was reorganising his highly successful shipping business, Hutchison Whampoa. Mr Li made the fateful decision that he would use British Virgin Islands IBCs as the holding companies in his new reorganisation of the group. Such was the regard that Mr Li was held in that other businessmen and young entrepreneurs rapidly followed his example.

Whilst the theory regarding Hutchison Whampoa may or may not be more accurate than the Panama theory, there is little doubt that the IBC proved to be extraordinarily popular in Hong Kong. In fact they became so ubiquitous that even today Hong Kong businessmen will often refer to using "a BVI" as a shorthand reference for an off shore company, regardless of its jurisdiction of incorporation. Professionals in the BVI used to joke that when a man turns 18 in Hong Kong his father would hand him a mobile phone and a BVI company and tell him to go and make his way in the world. Whilst both of these events indubitably had an impact, the man who may well have done the most to kick-start the sales of IBCs was an energetic chartered secretary from Liverpool by the name of Ted Powell. Mr Powell is an extremely astute businessman and entrepreneur with a larger than life personality, who never really accepts "no" as a final answer. Living in Hong Kong Mr Powell recognised the talismanic power of the number eight in Chinese culture. Being in the business of selling off shore companies, Mr Powell thought that there would be a huge demand in Hong Kong for companies which had the unfathomably lucky providence of being incorporated on 8 August 1988, or 8/8/88 if you prefer – the luckiest day of the Chinese century. And so he set about trying to organise the incorporation of a large number of IBCs on that day. However there was a serious problem. In the BVI, the first Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday of August are public holidays, celebrating the emancipation of slavery in 1834. All Government offices would be closed on the fateful day, including the Companies Registry. A lesser man may have given up, but not Ted Powell. He enlisted the support of a highly capable local lawyer named Richard Parsons and between them they begged, bullied or cajoled (history does not record which) the Registrar of Companies prepare all of the relevant company incorporations ahead of time, and then briefly to open the Registry for a limited period on that special day to officially incorporate the companies on that date. Those lucky companies proved to be just as popular as Mr Powell had predicted and sold at an incredible rate, and the rest, some might say, is history.

In truth, no one can be certain what caused the rise in popularity of the IBC, or even if there was one single cause of the popularity. It may simply have been a combination of a good product, with good timing, and a decent slice of luck. The IBC Act itself was rarely amended during its lifetime. Most of the effort focused on managing the infrastructure of the Companies Registry to cope with the growth. But there was at least one amendment which was to have notable beneficial reception. In 1991 changes were introduced to create a simple but comprehensive system for registration of security interests created by IBCs. This proved extremely popular with lenders in terms of providing debt financing to BVI companies. The leading international finance lawyer Philip Wood QC once remarked that he thought the BVI security registration system was the "best in the world", and this was the start which later helped to cement the BVI as a market leader in the structured finance market.

Eventually in the early 2000s the industry in the BVI effectively plateaued. Incorporation numbers were high, but stable. Cynics like to suggest that the end of the period of growth coincided exactly with the creation a new regulator for the industry, the Financial Services Commission. However it is more likely that this was just a coincidence. Like any industry, there is a stage where further growth is not really possible, and the objective is then to consolidate the gains. The new regulator focused on trying to create a regulatory environment which would foster growth in higher value products such as investment funds and captive insurance.

By this time the IBC Act had been driving the BVI's economy for the better part of two decades. Almost like a quasi-religious text, the statute had rarely been amended. But all around it the world of commerce had moved on. The world where Michael Riegels had a conversation with Paul Butler over newly laid undersea cables had metamorphosed unrecognisably into a world of high speed satellite communications and electronic commerce. The time when lawyers might send carefully typewritten documents to each other by post for review and comment over the course of several weeks had been replaced by electronic versions rebounding back and forth between Blackberries several times a day. At times the IBC Act appeared increasingly out of pace with this new world, almost as if it was trying to send a telex to an e-mail address. Industry practitioners began to realise that it was time to replace the model.

There was also external pressure on the BVI to change its model company legislation. The IBC Act had been predicated on "ring fencing". Broadly speaking, so long as the company did not conduct any business in the BVI, then it was treated as tax exempt for BVI purposes. This was seen as creating "unfair tax competition" by the OECD and other international bodies. Voices which grumbled that the OECD had never seen any tax competition which it did regard as fair were largely ignored. The process of replacing the IBC Act with a modern statute began. After two years of work, this would eventually come to fruition in the form of a ponderously named new statute, the BVI Business Companies Act, which was passed into law on 24 December 2004. Some well-meaning but overpaid consultant advised that the name of the new statute would cause the resulting companies to become known as "BVIBCs" which would create some form of brand recognition with the existing "IBCs", but in the end it proved to be too much of a mouthful and lacked the simple elegance of its predecessor.

Because of the vast numbers of companies incorporated under the IBC Act, it was necessary to impose a transitional period to allow the migration of the existing companies from one corporate regime to another. Although no new companies could be formed under the older statute from 1 January 2006, the IBC Act itself was not actually repealed until 31 December 2006. However before it was repealed, Richard Parsons – the same man who was involved in the 8/8/88 incorporations - made an unusual request of the Companies Registry. He asked if he could submit a request for the incorporation of an IBC on behalf of a client, a leading Hong Kong trust company. But his special request was that the Registry staff might please wait until the very end of the day before processing the incorporation. The name of that company was, fittingly, "The Last IBC Limited".

Looking back on the transformative changes brought about in the BVI by a single piece of legislation gives rise to mixed feelings. In many ways it all seems so recent, although much of the history occurred nearly 40 years ago. In other ways it all seems so impossibly far away. The tall steel and glass offices in modern Road Town seem a million miles away from the old offices with ceiling fans and telexes chattering in the background. A generation of lawyers is now growing up in the BVI who have never seen an incorporation under the IBC Act. Although the BVI is still a small place and Tortola still has a small island feel, the prosperity brought about by the Act is evident everywhere. Mac Todman and Neville Westwood have sadly passed on, but other key players from the early days of the IBC Act are still with us, although most of them are enjoying well earned retirements. You have to wonder when those five men sat down in the Attorney General's chambers and one of them picked up a pen, whether they really had any idea at all that what they were about to do would transform the economic status of a nation.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions