A Beginners Guide To

Essential Aspects of Franchise Tax Status

Paying tax is an obligation that individuals and corporations of a certain state must honor. It is through tax payment that a nation is able to raise funds to undertake government projects. Taxes are a major source of government spending. There are various types of taxes that must be paid by individuals. In Texas, there is a certain type of tax called the franchise tax. The following are some of the things you need to know concerning franchise tax.

Franchise tax is a type of tax in Texas which is charged on entities that are either doing business in Texas or they were formed in Texas. This kind of tax is imposed on such entities as a way of paying for the privilege of doing business in Texas. The payment of franchise tax gives you the right to conduct your business activities in the state of Texas. You also need to know that all businesses are supposed to file franchise tax reports. This is necessary when the business is paying franchise tax or not.

When operating in Texas, you are supposed to confirm your franchise account status so that you know if you have the right to do business in Texas. The status of your account could be active, forfeited, eligible for withdrawal or termination, not established, franchise tax ended, or franchise involuntary ended. Your status becomes eligible for withdrawal or termination if your business entity has satisfied all the Texas franchise tax obligations to be able to file for withdrawal or termination with the Texas Secretary of State. Your right to do business in Texas can also be forfeited by the Secretary of State. Your entity’s status can read not established if you have not done the franchise tax questionnaire. The status can read franchise tax ended if your business has stopped doing business in Texas or your business has stopped existing in Texas. You are supposed to request for a certificate of account status from the Secretary of State. You should also get a tax clearance letter.

It is also vital for you to know that not all entities are eligible for franchise tax payment because some are not subject to the payment. Some of the entities that have to pay franchise tax in Texas are limited liability companies, corporations, joint ventures, business associations, professional associations, partnerships, trusts, savings and loan associations, professional corporations, banks, among other legal entities. Entities that are not supposed to pay the franchise tax include unincorporated political committees, real estate mortgage investment conduits, particular grantor trust, certain unincorporated passive entities, sole proprietorships, general partnerships whose direct owner is made up of natural persons, entities exempt in Tax Code Chapter 171(subchapter B). You can go to the Secretary of State website to find out if your company or entity is subject to franchise tax.

It is also vital for you to make sure that you understand how the franchise tax amount is calculated. This will assist you know the exact amount you are supposed to pay to the state of Texas. You should be aware of the fact that franchise tax is calculated using your business margin.

News For This Month:

If You Read One Article About , Read This One

Read More

How and Why to Open a Bank Account in Hong Kong

Hong Kong today remains one of the best offshore banking jurisdictions. It offers a great combination of bank secrecy, corporate secrecy, a financially and politically stable environment, and strong banks. But perhaps most importantly, it’s a secure offshore investment haven for those who want to diversify out of sinking western currencies into booming Asian markets, and China in particular.

So how can you go about opening an offshore bank account in Hong Kong? Do you have to travel there? This article will answer these questions and give you some practical hints and tips. But first some background.

A Successful Free Market Experiment For East and West Alike

Hong Kong, in my opinion, is the only practical example in the world of a major city that has been developed from scratch and run as something of an offshore, free market experiment – first by the British, then by the Chinese.

The main Island (and later Kowloon and the New Territories, parts of the mainland) was a British colony for most of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. During this time it grew from a fishing village and opium trading hub, into a city-state of seven million people. It became known as a free-wheeling, free market paradise for capitalists, with an economy characterized by low taxation, free trade and no government interference in business.

In 1997 the British returned sovereignty over Hong Kong to China. The former colony became one of China’s two Special Administrative Regions (SARs), the other being Macau. Many people were initially doubtful about one of the world’s capitalist bastions being run by a communist power, and at the time a lot of investors pulled out, many taking their dynamic business acumen heading to places like Singapore and Vancouver.

However, the “one country, two systems” model adopted by Beijing to coincide with free market reforms and the growth of China into an economic superpower has proven very successful. The Basic Law of Hong Kong, the equivalent of the constitution, stipulates that the SAR maintains a “high degree of autonomy” in all matters except foreign relations and defence. The SAR today operates as a major offshore finance center, discreetly oiling the wheels of commerce between East and West.

These days, rather than being put off by the Chinese influence, most international investors who are attracted to Hong Kong are coming precisely because of this Chinese connection. Hong Kong is the point of access to Chinese trade, without the legal and cultural difficulties of doing business in mainland China.

Those who do not trust their own governments are reassured by the fact that under the Basic Law, Hong Kong’s foreign relations are run from Beijing. While most offshore jurisdictions humbly submit to demands from the USA and other western countries, in the case of China, the relationship is definitely reversed. Hong Kong does have a number of Tax Information Exchange Agreements (see below) but these are sensibly policed and do not allow for fishing expeditions.

Offshore Banking in Hong Kong

The region’s population is 95 percent ethnic Chinese and 5 percent from other groups, but English is very widely spoken and is the main language in businesses like banking.

One thing I like about using Hong Kong for offshore bank accounts is the same argument I have used for Panama and Singapore: it’s a ‘real’ country with real trade going on. The Hong Kong dollar is the ninth most traded currency in the world. Compare this to doing business on a small island or other remote banking jurisdiction, where everybody knows your only reason for doing business there is offshore banking. It also means that there is no problem doing your banking in cash, if you so wish.

For now the HKD, the local dollar, still tracks very closely the US dollar, but this appears to be changing as the Chinese Yuan circulates freely in Hong Kong, both in cash and in bank deposits. We think this represents an excellent opportunity to diversify funds out of the US dollar now, gaining exposure to Chinese growth in the meantime. (Of course, you can also hold HKD in banks in other parts of the world too)

Bank accounts in Hong Kong are almost all multi-currency by default, allowing all major local and international currencies to be held under one account number and exchanged freely and instantly within the account at the click of a mouse.

There is no capital gains tax, no tax on bank interest or stock market investments, and no tax on offshore sourced income. This, combined with a welcoming attitude to non-resident clients in the banks (including US citizens by the way, who are generally unwelcome in traditional offshore banking havens like Switzerland), and strong cultural and legal respect for financial privacy, makes Hong Kong one of Asia’s best offshore banking jurisdictions.

For those who want to establish a small offshore account under reporting limits, or simply to have the bank account established in view of future business, Hong Kong is also attractive given the low minimum deposits demanded by the major banks there. The minimum bank account balance can be as low as HK$ 3,000. Of course, you can’t expect red carpet, VIP private banking at this level – but you get a perfectly good functioning bank account with all the technological trimmings.

Offshore Corporate Bank Accounts in Hong Kong – Do’s and Don’ts

Typically, offshore clients choose to open accounts using corporations, as opposed to personal accounts. This not only offers greater privacy, but also flexibility and can – depending of course on how things are structured – offer significant tax and asset protection advantages.

Accounts can easily be opened both for pure offshore companies like Panama, BVI, Nevis or Marshall Islands, or for local Hong Kong companies that are set up using nominee directors and shareholders.

When contacting local corporate service providers in Hong Kong, you’ll find that most of these corporate service providers will recommend you use a Hong Kong company to open the account. The reason they do this is that it’s simpler and more profitable for them. They can incorporate a local company at low cost, opening the bank account is smoother and faster with a local company, and they can carry on billing nominee director fees every year. But it may not be the right thing for you.

Whilst it is true that Hong Kong companies do not have to pay any tax provided they do not make any local source income, administering such a company is not so simple. For example, Hong Kong companies are required to file audited accounts every year. They must file pages and pages of documents to convince the Inland Revenue Department (HKIRD) that they don’t have any local business, and, from practical experience, the HKIRD is getting much stickier about this. Long-established companies are normally left unmolested but newly established companies can expect a lot of compliance work in their first few years. Again, this suits the Hong Kong corporate service providers who charge handsomely for such services.

Another factor to consider is Controlled Foreign Corporation (CFC) legislation in your home country. (For an explanation see Wikipedia ) Many clients choose to set up LLCs as they can be treated as passthrough entities, vastly simplifying reporting requirements in some countries like the USA. Hong Kong corporations are not LLCs and cannot be treated as passthroughs for tax purposes.

My advice – assuming you don’t intend to do any business in Hong Kong besides banking and perhaps the occasional trip to visit your money – would be to open the account in the name of a company from a foreign offshore tax haven. It’s a little more work and expense at the beginning, and the bank might ask you more questions, but it will save you a lot of money and headaches in the long term. If you want a local look and feel for your company, numerous virtual office services are available.

Hong Kong Tax Information Exchange Agreements

Contrary to what you will read on some out-of-date websites, Hong Kong has signed a number of Tax Information Exchange Agreements (TIEAs). However, the HKIRD is at pains to point out that fishing expeditions are not going to be tolerated.

The HKIRD has issued Practice Note 47, available on the internet, which usefully explains how the HKIRD seek to achieve a balance between the requirements of compliance with the OECD requirements, whilst providing checks and balances to protect the rights of businesspeople.

The HKIRD are professionals and should be well positioned to deal with TIEA requests properly and justly in accordance with the treaties and guidelines. I am confident not going to allow their ‘clients’ rights to be trampled on.

Regulation of Banks in Hong Kong

Hong Kong’s Banking Ordinance was revamped in 1986. It has since undergone several amendments to improve prudential supervision. The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) was formed in 1993 as a one-stop financial regulator, responsible for everything from banks to stored value anonymous debit cards.

The SAR maintains a three-tier system of deposit-taking institutions, comprising licensed banks, restricted license banks, and deposit-taking companies. Only licensed banks may operate current and savings accounts, and accept deposits of any size and maturity. RLBs are only allowed to accept deposits of HK$500,000 and above, while DTCs are only permitted to accept deposits of a minimum of HK$100,000 with original maturity of not less than three months.

Both these latter categories provide an opportunity for overseas banks to conduct wholesale, investment or private banking activities in Hong Kong without having to jump through the hoops of applying for a full banking license. In addition, some foreign banks have chosen to open representative offices in Hong Kong, which are not allowed to take deposits but can assist in opening accounts at other offices within their groups.

As Hong Kong is an international financial centre, it is an explicit policy of the HKMA that the regulatory framework in Hong Kong should conform as much as possible with international standards, in particular those recommended by the Basel Committee.

Hong Kong’s five largest banks, in terms of total assets, are as follows:

– Hong Kong & Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC)

– Bank of China (Hong Kong)

– Hang Seng Bank Ltd

– Standard Chartered Bank

– Bank of East Asia Ltd.

A full list of updated Hong Kong banks can be found on Wikipedia.

Visiting Hong Kong to Open a Bank Account

If you are visiting Hong Kong to open your account, it can normally be opened the same day provided you have made some arrangements with a local service provider, or directly with the bank, in advance. This is assuming you use one of the major banks, that nearly everybody does. You can then simply visit the bank, sign documents and receive the bank account number immediately. This will be a full multi-currency account and you will typically receive a digital token for internet banking, a password and a debit card.

The documents required for opening offshore bank account are:

1) Formation documents (in the case of corporate accounts. Apostilles are required in the case of foreign corporate accounts – your offshore provider will know how to obtain these.)

2) Bank forms and business plan/expected activity (a corporate service provider will normally supply these as part of the service)

3) Passport copies of each director, signatory and shareholder (take special note of this requirement if you are using nominee directors – if the persons are not present, copies will have to be notarized.)

4) Proof of address (such as updated bill statement which shows up your name and address) and signed (of each director and shareholder)

A bank reference is generally required if you are dealing direct with the bank. If you go through a corporate service provider, they normally write a reference so you do not need to supply a bank reference. However, if you can obtain a bank reference it is better.

Opening an account without visiting Hong Kong

It is also perfectly possible to open accounts without visiting Hong Kong (known as ‘remote account opening’) though this process tends to take substantially longer as banks will ask a lot more questions. In this case, your bank or service provider will generally e-mail you the forms, that you will need to print out and sign.

Depending on the bank, there may well be certain special instructions about how and where to sign – for example, HSBC in Hong Kong will typically request that you have your signature witnessed in the HSBC Bank nearest to you. As with all foreign bank accounts, you should be sure to use the same signature that appears in your passport, otherwise the documents will be rejected.

In the case of remote account opening the bank will normally courier the password, debit card, and token direct to your address in your home country. Then you need to activate them via the bank’s website.

Conclusion

Hong Kong competes very favorably with Singapore, the other Asian banking jurisdiction we favor. If you have not yet diversified your offshore holdings into Asia, you should seriously consider doing so. I hope this article will be helpful in this regard.

Read More

Offshore Banking – Fiction Vs Fact

FICTION: Offshore banking can’t be that good because they can’t really pay the high interest rates they offer. If they could really pay those rates then U.S. banks would try to be competitive and have the same interest rates.

FACT: Examine closely the financial statements of any U.S. Bank. You will see that their “gross” profits against customer deposits can range from 25% to 40% — but — they have laws written in stone to limit the interest amount they can pay customers on their deposits. The U.S. banks place their earnings into unnecessary frills and non-productive expenditures like fancy buildings etc., while offshore banking facilities don’t do this and share their profits with their customers.

FICTION: Offshore banking isn’t regulated, so you are at risk of losing all money deposited with them.

FACT: The truth is that every country in the free world has regulations, rules and laws governing financial institutions and banks. Those regulations, rules, and laws, however, are much less restrictive than the “protectionist” U.S. banking regulations, rules, and laws and allow the offshore banking industry better opportunity to earn much greater profits for their investors and depositors.

FICTION: Offshore banking facilities are not insured by the F.D.I.C.

FACT: Some of the banks are but not that many. If they are, they must comply with the same protectionist banking regulations and rules as all the other F.D.I.C. insured banks. But, the majority of offshore banking facilities are insured; one way or another.

Depositor insurance programs similar to the F.D.I.C. program have been established in some countries, so that the banks in those countries have their deposits insured. Independent insurance companies insure the deposits of offshore banking facilities in other countries AND unlike the F.D.I.C., insure 100% of the banks deposits; not just those under $100,000. (By the way, some of the banks in the U.S. insure their deposits with independent insurance companies and many banks in the U.S. are not F.D.I.C. insured)

Offshore banking is “self-insured” for the most part which means those banks have a liquidity factor equal to 100% (or more) of the deposits on the books. Those banks have $1 (or more) in liquid assets for every $1 held on deposit. Therefore, there is no bank run because they can cover any depositor demand.

Self-insured offshore banking is actually more secure than F.D.I.C. insured U.S. banking. Why? Because the F.D.I.C. insured U.S. banks are permitted to maintain a liquidity factor equivalent to approximately 10 percent of their public deposits. (Is it any wonder why more U.S. banks fail each year than in any other country?)

Which kind of bank would you feel more safe having your money in? An offshore banking institution which as one dollar in cash for every dollar on deposit, or a U.S. bank which as ten cents in cash for every dollar that shows up on the deposit statement they give their clients?

FICTION: Offshore banking isn’t as big or strong as U.S. banking.

FACT: Of the strongest and largest big banks in the world (in assets), one bank ONLY is located in the United States:

Here are the safest offshore banks in the world, according to a ranking done in 2007 after examining their total assets in US dollars. This ranking is compiled from balance sheet information included on AllBanks.org

1 UBS AG Switzerland 2 Barclays UK 3 The Royal Bank of Scotland Group UK 4 Deutsche Bank AG Germany 5 BNP Paribas SA France 6 The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd Japan 7 ABN AMRO Holding NV Netherlands 8 Societe Generale France 9 Credit Agricole SA France 10 Bank of America NA USA

2008/2009 UPDATE AFTER THE FINANCIAL COLLAPSE OF 2008

Germany’s largest bank, Deutsche Bank AG, reported a fourth quarter loss of about $6.3 billion. A year earlier, the bank posted a profit of about $1.3 billion (1 billion euros), Bloomberg reported.

Royal Bank of Scotland is expected to post losses of as high as £1.7 billion.

Bucking the trend is a bank not even on the list above and that bank is Standard Chartered bank which is expecting to post profits of 1.3 billion pounds. I have a contact who can help you open an account at this bank for your company if you desire to do so. The account would be in Hong Kong.

Another bank I know about is rated AAA by an independent rating service and if you are not from the U.S. or if you are from the U.S. and have a foreign LLC or IBC to open the account with then you can deposit $15,000 and get involved in their borrow low and deposit high program which has earned depositors as much as 100% per year on their deposit. It is easy to open an account there.

FICTION: Offshore banking must not be very good, or more facilities would advertise their services in newspapers and magazines in the U.S.

FACT: Offshore banking in general is restricted by law from advertising in magazines, newspapers, radio and on T.V. unless they come under the same protectionist rules and regulations that are placed upon U.S. banks. Knowing that, you should be cautious about doing business with any offshore banking facility that publicly advertises in the U.S. media. Because you can be very sure that they have sold-out to the U.S. banking establishment and that establishment will end up selling you out to those who make the rules.

FICTION: Offshore banking is only for the wealthy.

FACT: About 25 years ago, that may have been true. But I know of about three offshore banking facilities that will allow you to open an account for as little as $500. One of these is in the Asia, another in Europe, and another in Latin America.

FICTION: Opening an account at an offshore banking facility is too difficult, and it is very difficult to get a withdrawal when you need it.

FACT: Opening an account at an offshore banking facility is easy because you just follow the instructions they give to you. Getting your money out only requires a request that you fax or email with an attachment included.

This article is governed by international copyright laws and is governed by the laws of Ezine Articles. Violators of their rules will be punished to the fullest extent possible.

Read More

Eastern European Banking Model

A traditional banking model in a CEEC (Central and Eastern European Country) consisted of a central bank and several purpose banks, one dealing with individuals’ savings and other banking needs, and another focusing on foreign financial activities, etc. The central bank provided most of the commercial banking needs of enterprises in addition to other functions. During the late 1980s, the CEECs modified this earlier structure by taking all the commercial banking activities of the central bank and transferring them to new commercial banks. In most countries the new banks were set up along industry lines, although in Poland a regional approach has been adopted.

On the whole, these new stale-owned commercial banks controlled the bulk of financial transactions, although a few ‘de novo banks’ were allowed in Hungary and Poland. Simply transferring existing loans from the central bank to the new state-owned commercial banks had its problems, since it involved transferring both ‘good’ and ‘bad’ assets. Moreover, each bank’s portfolio was restricted to the enterprise and industry assigned to them and they were not allowed to deal with other enterprises outside their remit.

As the central banks would always ‘bale out’ troubled state enterprises, these commercial banks cannot play the same role as commercial banks in the West. CEEC commercial banks cannot foreclose on a debt. If a firm did not wish to pay, the state-owned enterprise would, historically, receive further finance to cover its difficulties, it was a very rare occurrence for a bank to bring about the bankruptcy of a firm. In other words, state-owned enterprises were not allowed to go bankrupt, primarily because it would have affected the commercial banks, balance sheets, but more importantly, the rise in unemployment that would follow might have had high political costs.

What was needed was for commercial banks to have their balance sheets ‘cleaned up’, perhaps by the government purchasing their bad loans with long-term bonds. Adopting Western accounting procedures might also benefit the new commercial banks.

This picture of state-controlled commercial banks has begun to change during the mid to late 1990s as the CEECs began to appreciate that the move towards market-based economies required a vibrant commercial banking sector. There are still a number of issues lo be addressed in this sector, however. For example, in the Czech Republic the government has promised to privatize the banking sector beginning in 1998. Currently the banking sector suffers from a number of weaknesses. A number of the smaller hanks appear to be facing difficulties as money market competition picks up, highlighting their tinder-capitalization and the greater amount of higher-risk business in which they are involved. There have also been issues concerning banking sector regulation and the control mechanisms that are available. This has resulted in the government’s proposal for an independent securities commission to regulate capital markets.

The privatization package for the Czech Republic’s four largest banks, which currently control about 60 percent of the sector’s assets, will also allow foreign banks into a highly developed market where their influence has been marginal until now. It is anticipated that each of the four banks will be sold to a single bidder in an attempt to create a regional hub of a foreign bank’s network. One problem with all four banks is that inspection of their balance sheets may throw up problems which could reduce the size of any bid. All four banks have at least 20 percent of their loans as classified, where no interest has been paid for 30 days or more. Banks could make provisions to reduce these loans by collateral held against them, but in some cases the loans exceed the collateral. Moreover, getting an accurate picture of the value of the collateral is difficult since bankruptcy legislation is ineffective. The ability to write off these bad debts was not permitted until 1996, but even if this route is taken then this will eat into the banks’ assets, leaving them very close to the lower limit of 8 percent capital adequacy ratio. In addition, the ‘commercial’ banks have been influenced by the action of the national bank, which in early 1997 caused bond prices to fall, leading to a fall in the commercial banks’ bond portfolios. Thus the banking sector in the Czech Republic still has a long way to go.

In Hungary the privatization of the banking sector is almost complete. However, a state rescue package had to be agreed at the beginning of 1997 for the second-largest state bank, Postabank, owned indirectly by the main social security bodies and the post office, and this indicates the fragility of this sector. Outside of the difficulties experienced with Postabank, the Hungarian banking system has been transformed. The rapid move towards privatization resulted from the problems experienced by the state-owned banks, which the government bad to bail out, costing it around 7 percent of GDP. At that stage it was possible that the banking system could collapse and government funding, although saving the banks, did not solve the problems of corporate governance or moral hazard. Thus the privatization process was started in earnest. Magyar Kulkereskedelmi Bank (MKB) was sold to Bayerische Landesbank and the EBDR in 1994, Budapest Bank was bought by GE Capital and Magyar Hitel Bank was bought by ABN-AMRO. In November 1997 the state completed the last stage of the sale of the state savings bank (OTP), Hungary’s largest bank. The state, which dominated the banking system three years ago, now only retains a majority stake in two specialist banks, the Hungarian Development Bank and Eximbank.

The move towards, and success of privatization can be seen in the balance sheets of the banks, which showed an increase in post-tax profits of 45 percent in 1996. These banks are also seeing higher savings and deposits and a strong rise in demand for corporate and retail lending. In addition, the growth in competition in the banking sector has led to a narrowing of the spreads between lending and deposit rates, and the further knock-on effect of mergers and small-hank closures. Over 50 percent of Hungarian bank assets are controlled by foreign-owned banks, and this has led to Hungarian banks offering services similar to those expected in many Western European countries. Most of the foreign-owned but mainly Hungarian-managed banks were recapitalized after their acquisition and they have spent heavily on staff training and new information technology systems. From 1998, foreign banks will be free to open branches in Hungary, thus opening up the domestic banking market to full competition.

As a whole, the CEECs have come a long way since the early 1990s in dealing with their banking problems. For some countries the process of privatization still has a long way to go but others such as Hungary have moved quickly along the process of transforming their banking systems in readiness for their entry into the EU.

Read More