Structures juridiques | Page 14

Le groupe européen d’experts en droit des sociétés vient de faire une proposition pour un droit des groupes : « A proposal for reforming group law in the European Union – Comparative observations on the way forward, October 2016 ».

The legal regime applicable to groups of companies in the European Union has been discussed for many years. National legislations have been adopted in a certain number of member states, and new initiatives are being considered by the European Commission and in academic writing. The central issues in groups of companies is the relationship between the controlling shareholder, often the parent company and the subsidiaries, and the potential for abuse to the detriment of the latter’s minority shareholders and creditors. Several answers have been formulated, going from a duty of the parent to indemnify the subsidiary for the charges imposed by the parent, to the acceptance of these charges provided they result in some benefit to the subsidiary and provided they do not endanger the subsidiary’s solvency. In a third approach, these issues may be solved by other common company law, e.g.  on the basis of the unfair prejudice provisions.  With respect to shareholder and creditor protection, a comparative analysis concludes that there is no need for additional regulatory safeguards. The present approaches indicate that group relations are often characterised by conflicts of interest. Therefore, it is proposed to develop a standard for dealing with these, especially under the form of Related Party Transactions.   The specific conditions for dealing with intragroup related party transactions are submitted for further discussion.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Bonjour à toutes et à tous, c’est avec cette question que Michael Dorff (« Can a Corporation Have a Soul? ») ouvre un beau débat dans The Atlantic ? Merci à Mme Louise Champoux-Paillé d’avoir diffusé l’information sur cet article sur LinkedIn…

In light of recent corporate scandals such as Wells Fargo’s, one can be excused for wondering whether corporations seek anything beyond profits for their shareholders by any means necessary. In these days of activist hedge funds pressing companies for ever more share buybacks, is there room for a company that cares about its workers, the environment, or the communities in which it does business? In other words, can a company have a soul?

Mark Fields, the CEO of Ford Motor Company, believes so. In an interview with Fortune, he called Ford “a company with a soul,” pointing to a long-held policy of donating money and employees’ volunteer hours to the communities in which the company operates and to the company’s high rankings for good corporate behavior by an organization called the Ethisphere Institute. Fields quoted the company’s founder, Henry Ford, as saying, “A business that earns nothing but money is a poor business.”

Et la conclusion :

In the absence of any radical new regulations, for American-style capitalism to work again for the middle class as well as for the wealthy, more CEOs like Fields are going to have to adopt ambitious plans for implementing Henry Ford’s advice, plans that stretch far beyond making some charitable donations and implementing sustainability initiatives. They are going to have to give their companies true souls.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Très beau papier dans The Economist intitulé « The Dark Art ». Cet article revient sur la puissance des grandes entreprises qui leur permet de développer des stratégies favorisant leurs seuls intérêts au détriment de celui des États et des consommateurs (évasion fiscale, lobbying…)

Companies are by nature competitive. That is mostly to be welcomed, but sometimes their competitive instincts play out in less welcome ways as they engage in some of the darker arts of management. The two most obvious ones are to pay as little tax as is legally possible, and to lobby governments and a variety of other bodies to gain an advantage over rivals. To a greater or lesser extent all companies do this. The big difference is that the superstar companies, being good at everything they do, are also much better than the rest at practising these dark arts and taking them mainstream

Les moyens des grandes entreprises les conduisent à être bonnes dans beaucoup de domaines dont celui de jouer avec les règles juridiques ou de les orienter :

This raises three worries. The first is that they will keep getting better at them, applying the same creative excellence to rule-bending as they do to running their business in general. Second, superstars might use the combination of these and other skills to build up impregnable advantages, giving them growing monopoly power. Third, as their businesses become more mature, they may come to rely increasingly on those dark arts.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Un article d’un journalise de la presse.ca (Sylvain Larocque) met en lumière les difficultés attachées de la responsabilité sociétale et à contrer l’évasion fiscale des entreprises : « Évasion fiscale: le fisc cogne à la porte des quincailliers » (la presse.ca, 20 septembre 2016).

Dans une requête datée de décembre 2015 obtenue par Le Journal de Montréal, Revenu Canada demande à Rona de lui fournir la liste de tous les particuliers et entreprises ayant un compte chez elle. Rona, qui appartient désormais au détaillant américain Lowe’s, conteste la requête, y voyant une forme d’«intimidation» à l’endroit de l’industrie de la construction.

Or, une vingtaine d’entreprises de quincaillerie québécoises ciblées par le fisc ont déjà accepté de remettre leurs listes de clients, dont Groupe BMR pour ses 15 magasins non franchisés. Notons que la démarche ne vise pas les commerçants, mais leurs clients.

(…) Dans les listes remises par la vingtaine d’entreprises, Revenu Canada a dénombré plus de 6500 clients commerciaux, dont 1277 (soit près de 20%) «avaient omis de produire leur déclaration d’impôt pour au moins une année d’imposition sur la période s’échelonnant de 2008 à 2012», peut-on lire dans un document cité par Le Journal de Montréal.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Bonjour à toutes et à tous, Mme Sandrine L’Herminier propose un intéressant billet sur le comment de la RSE : « Comment cultiver la “RSE Attitude” dans votre entreprise ? » (e-RSE, 20 septembre 2016).

Responsabilité, innovation, bien-être, confiance….tout le monde s’accorde à dire que les entreprises doivent se réinventer et donner du sens à leur projet pour se différencier et fidéliser leurs équipes… Comment insuffler une culture RSE dans votre organisation, comment générer un mode de pensée et de management RSE-friendly ? Voici quelques exemples inspirants pour adopter la RSE attitude.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Le magazine The Economist publie en septembre un numéro consacré au gigantisme des sociétés par actions et à la tendance au regroupement qui se développe depuis quelque temps : « A giant problem ».

DISRUPTION may be the buzzword in boardrooms, but the most striking feature of business today is not the overturning of the established order. It is the entrenchment of a group of superstar companies at the heart of the global economy. Some of these are old firms, like GE, that have reinvented themselves. Some are emerging-market champions, like Samsung, which have seized the opportunities provided by globalisation. The elite of the elite are high-tech wizards—Google, Apple, Facebook and the rest—that have conjured up corporate empires from bits and bytes.

As our special report this week makes clear, the superstars are admirable in many ways. They churn out products that improve consumers’ lives, from smarter smartphones to sharper televisions. They provide Americans and Europeans with an estimated $280 billion-worth of “free” services—such as search or directions—a year. But they have two big faults. They are squashing competition, and they are using the darker arts of management to stay ahead. Neither is easy to solve. But failing to do so risks a backlash which will be bad for everyone.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian