This summer has brought many changes to the Commerce Act. Some of the amendments came into force on 1 June and others on 1 July. All these changes to a greater or lesser extent affect particular persons that are subject to the Commerce Act, and in this article we explore some of the effective amendments.
The amendments that came into force on 1 June mostly relate to procedures for carrying out national and cross-border reorganisations. Key changes relating to national reorganisations affect creditor protections coming into play after a reorganisation takes effect. So far national reorganisations could not be completed until the deadline set for filing and securing or satisfying creditor claims had expired. Also, when application was made to the Enterprise Registry for entering a reorganisation, the boards of the companies involved in it had to confirm that all of the creditor claims received had been secured or satisfied. This means it was illegal to complete a reorganisation before creditor claims had been secured or satisfied. In contrast, creditors now cannot file their claims until the reorganisation has taken effect. This change significantly reduces the time it takes to complete a reorganisation. A national reorganisation can now be completed in about 2.5 months (it used to take a minimum of 4.5 months). Of course, in practice each particular reorganisation may take more time depending on the level of complexity. As regards changes to procedures for protecting creditors, it’s important to note that under section 350(1) of the Commerce Act a reorganisation is considered to take effect from the date that entries have been made in the commercial register on all companies involved in the reorganisation, including any newly formed ones. Moreover, section 350(6) states that once a reorganisation takes effect, it cannot be challenged.
The amendments effective from 1 June also address dividends. Specifically, the new version of section 161(2) of the Commerce Act states that dividends will be paid to a shareholder in proportion to the sum of nominal values of his shares unless the articles of association provide for a different procedure for distributing dividends. The old Act did not expressly provide for derogating from the principle of proportionality in paying dividends, yet it was possible to set up various classes of shares that confer various rights, including dividend entitlements. One might therefore speculate that it was possible to declare and pay dividends to shareholders out of proportion to the sum of nominal values of their shares. This issue is now specifically dealt with in the Commerce Act to eliminate any doubt. The amendments make it clear that dividends may be paid without observing the principle of proportionality not only in the case of various share classes but also to shareholders holding the same class of shares (even if the company has only one class). Appropriate amendments must then be made to the company’s articles. Section 218(1) of the Commerce Act states that the decision to amend the articles has been passed if at least two-thirds of the votes represented at the meeting were cast for it, unless the articles require a greater number of votes. So, if a company has several shareholders representing the required quorum and number of votes for amending the articles, they may approve an exception to the principle of proportionality by resolving that dividends will not be paid to the shareholders, including minority shareholders, in proportion to the sum of nominal values of their shares, thereby impairing dividend entitlements of other (minority) shareholders. So it would be necessary to address ways of protecting minority shareholders’ rights.
When looking at the amendments that came into force on 1 July, we have to highlight the obligation of public limited companies (akciju sabiedrības) to file their share registers with the Enterprise Registry. Public limited companies must do this by 30 June 2024. So far public limited companies could have two types of shares – registered shares and bearer shares. In terms of form, those shares could be paper shares or dematerialised shares. The amendments have removed clauses relating to the form of shares, and a public limited company may now have registered shares or dematerialised shares. These changes mean that all public limited companies will have to amend their articles. Companies that have both registered shares and bearer shares will have to choose only one type and modify their articles and internal structures accordingly. Shareholders in these public limited companies are to make a choice and amend the articles by 30 June 2024, and clauses relating to the form of shares must be removed when other changes are made to the articles, but no later than 1 July 2026.
Also, the minimum size of share capital in public limited companies has been reduced from EUR 35,000 to 25,000.
We will keep our MindLink.lv subscribers informed about other relevant amendments that have come into force this summer.
If you have any comments on this article please email them to lv_mindlink@pwc.com
Ask questionThe crypto-asset sector has made changes to the payment and investment markets and challenged the tax authorities to trace capital gains arising on crypto-asset trades. On 16 May 2023 the EU Council supported the European Commission’s proposal to require crypto-asset service providers to report on transactions their EU customers perform in crypto-asset markets. This will help the tax authorities monitor crypto-asset trading and revenues, thereby reducing the risk of tax fraud and tax evasion. The reporting system is to be implemented with amendments to the Directive on Administrative Cooperation (“DAC”), which is the main system for exchanging data between the tax authorities. The new reporting rules have been passed in addition to the Regulation on Markets in Crypto Assets (“MiCA”) amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937, and to the Regulation on information accompanying transfers of funds, and these rules are fully consistent with the OECD’s crypto-asset reporting initiative.
Fixed assets, and sometimes inventories too, have to be written off if they no longer meet your company’s needs or are obsolete, or if there is no demand for them. The issue of input tax deduction always comes up in such situations, and has been recently heard by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). This article explores Ruling C‑127/22 (Balgarska telekomunikatsionna kompania) of 4 May 2023.
Taking care of employees’ mental health is not merely idle chatter or a formal work safety obligation. An employer that fails to pay attention to staff overload issues may face some real legal consequences. This article examines the legal implications of a worker being diagnosed with burnout syndrome and offers a practical overview of how the employer could respond.
We use cookies to make our site work well for you and so we can continually improve it. The cookies that keep the site functioning are always on. We use analytics and marketing cookies to help us understand what content is of most interest and to personalise your user experience.
It’s your choice to accept these or not. You can either click the 'I accept all’ button below or use the switches to choose and save your choices.
For detailed information on how we use cookies and other tracking technologies, please visit our cookies information page.
These cookies are necessary for the website to operate. Our website cannot function without these cookies and they can only be disabled by changing your browser preferences.
These cookies allow us to measure and report on website activity by tracking page visits, visitor locations and how visitors move around the site. The information collected does not directly identify visitors. We drop these cookies and use Adobe to help us analyse the data.
These cookies help us provide you with personalised and relevant services or advertising, and track the effectiveness of our digital marketing activities.