|
Post by jimmicat on Nov 23, 2017 19:57:59 GMT
So firstly I apologise if this topic has been covered off previously on the forum.
My question to the forum is,
Has anyone looked at the e-residency situation in Estonia and has anyone used it as an opportunity set up a limited company in estonia to purely invest in the Estonian platforms, ie. Bondora, Investly, Estateguru to name a few.?
I've read conflicting views on doing this, so saying you need a credit licence to lend through a company if the majority of its revenue is sourced from consumer loans.
Does any one have any real life experiences with this?
|
|
|
Post by buttchopf23 on Nov 23, 2017 21:47:39 GMT
Interesting, I have played with this idea as well. But what would be your benefit from it instead of investing as an individual person?
I cannot say anything towards the credit licence, this is an important question though.
|
|
|
Post by wiseclerk on Nov 23, 2017 23:22:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by southseacompany on Nov 24, 2017 5:47:11 GMT
Has anyone looked at the e-residency situation in Estonia and has anyone used it as an opportunity set up a limited company in estonia to purely invest in the Estonian platforms, ie. Bondora, Investly, Estateguru to name a few.? I've read conflicting views on doing this, so saying you need a credit licence to lend through a company if the majority of its revenue is sourced from consumer loans. First, about the FSA registration. I believe this is the text of the relevant law (a draft but I think it's mostly unchanged). In it, §4(3) defines a crowdfunding company as offering solutions to "investors". So if your company only invests its own equity capital, it would appear to me it doesn't have "investors" and hence is outside the purview of the law. NB - this is just my understanding. Don't act on it before getting legal advice. Second, is it prudent to invest through an Estonian company? For someone from outside Europe, that would make good sense since most of the euro platforms only accept clients resident in the EU (plus Switzerland, Norway etc.). For Europeans, Estonia's status as a tax haven of sorts makes the idea attractive. However, many European countries have laws to the effect that if the sole/main purpose of setting up the company is for tax avoidance (and you are actively managing it from your own country), you can be made personally liable to pay tax on the company's income even though it is a separate legal entity in a different country. That would negate the only real advantage of this idea and thus render the whole exercise pointless. It might work out better if you start an Estonian company with a couple of buddies (so you're not the sole owner) and do some other local business, however small, in addition to P2P investing, but that goes well into the domain of necessitating expert advice. In any case this part of tax law has not been harmonized between EU countries so the tax implications will ultimately depend on which one you are resident in.
|
|
|
Post by jimmicat on Jan 3, 2018 20:50:07 GMT
Thanks all for your comments.
Interesting point on the potential risk of still being captured under personal tax legislation if deemed tax avoidance. I would argue in this instance that it is not tax avoidance, although Estonia company tax (I believe) is 0%, you do get taxed on dividends additionally once the dividend is received in person I was then have to pay tax in the country I am a tax resident (currently the UK) after any tax credits. Your merely changing the timing of when the tax is paid.
The way I see it is that by using the e-residency to establish a company in Estonia it would enable me to reinvest nearly 100% of earnings (after admin costs) generating faster returns that can be reinvested.
Having through about it further I believe to avoid credit licence issues if a majority of investments are to other companies (eg through Estateguru) this may be sufficient to argue that the primary business is not lending consumer credit but rather to companies which I believe fall outside the credit licencing requirements.
|
|