ARTICLE
22 July 2016

UK Ahead Of The Curve On Transparency

WB
Wedlake Bell

Contributor

Wedlake Bell logo
We are a contemporary London law firm, rooted in tradition with a lasting legacy of client service. Founded in 1780, we recognise the long-standing relationships we have with our clients and how they have helped shape our past and provide a platform for our future. With 76 partners supported by over 300 lawyers and support staff, we operate on a four practice group model: private client, business services, real estate and dispute resolution. Our driving force is to empower our clients by providing quality legal advice, insight and intelligence that enables them to achieve their goals whether personal or business. We are large enough to advise on the most complex matters, but small enough to ensure that our people and our work remain exceptional and dynamic. Building relationships is at the heart of everything we do.
Before the Fourth EU Anti-Money Laundering Directive comes into force and shortly after the UK referendum vote, the European Commission has made a proposal to amend the directive...
United Kingdom Corporate/Commercial Law

Before the Fourth EU Anti-Money Laundering Directive comes into force and shortly after the UK referendum vote, the European Commission has made a proposal to amend the directive and accelerate its implementation.

Notwithstanding, the recent UK referendum vote, the changes to company law introduced under Part 21A Companies Act 2006 (registers of persons with significant control), in force since 6 April 2016 already go a very long way to implement these new requirements.

The key additional requirements are:

  • to put in place central publicly available registers of beneficial ownership;
  • to further amend the very cumbersome definition of beneficial ownership, setting a 10% materiality threshold in some cases, rather than more than 25% in all other cases; and
  • to accelerate the transposition date of the Fourth Money Laundering Directive by seven months to 1 January 2017.

We wait to see if this proposal is then adopted by the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament.  If it is, companies will have a very short time to adjust to the new regime.

In addition, readers may also be interested to learn that Guernsey has recently closed its consultation on its proposals for a central register.  The notable difference between the Guernsey approach and that espoused by the UK government is that Guernsey proposes for the register to be closed, available to regulators but not open to public access.

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.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More