Structures juridiques

Bonjour à toutes et à tous, la sénatrice Élisabeth Warren vient d’introduire un projet de loi très ambitieux (!) : le S.3348 – Accountable Capitalism Act.

Plusieurs points saillants ressortent de ce projet :

• La création d’un Office of United States Corporations.
• La possibilité de s’enregistrer auprès de cet organisme fédéral (alors que jusqu’à maintenant, rappelons-le, l’enregistrement se faisait auprès des États et notamment celui du Delaware).
• Les salariés représenteraient 40 % du CA.
• L’entreprise devrait poursuivre une mission sociétale.
• La redéfintion des devoirs des administrateurs et hauts-dirigeants.

Pour en savoir plus, lire cet article ici du The Guardian.

Extrait du projet de loi

SEC. 5. Responsibilities of United States corporations.

(a) Definitions.—In this section:

(1) GENERAL PUBLIC BENEFIT.—The term “general public benefit” means a material positive impact on society resulting from the business and operations of a United States corporation, when taken as a whole. (…)

(1) IN GENERAL.—The charter of a large entity that is filed with the Office shall state that the entity is a United States corporation.

(2) CORPORATE PURPOSES.—A United States corporation shall have the purpose of creating a general public benefit, which shall be—

(A) identified in the charter of the United States corporation; and

(B) in addition to the purpose of the United States corporation under the articles of incorporation in the State in which the United States corporation is incorporated, if applicable.

(c) Standard of conduct for directors and officers.—

(c) Standard of conduct for directors and officers.—

(1) CONSIDERATION OF INTERESTS.—In discharging the duties of their respective positions, and in considering the best interests of a United States corporation, the board of directors, committees of the board of directors, and individual directors of a United States corporation—

(A) shall manage or direct the business and affairs of the United States corporation in a manner that—

(i) seeks to create a general public benefit; and

(ii) balances the pecuniary interests of the shareholders of the United States corporation with the best interests of persons that are materially affected by the conduct of the United States corporation; and

(B) in carrying out subparagraph (A)—

(i) shall consider the effects of any action or inaction on—

(I) the shareholders of the United States corporation;

(II) the employees and workforce of—

(aa) the United States corporation;

(bb) the subsidiaries of the United States corporation; and

(cc) the suppliers of the United States corporation;

(III) the interests of customers and subsidiaries of the United States corporation as beneficiaries of the general public benefit purpose of the United States corporation;

(IV) community and societal factors, including those of each community in which offices or facilities of the United States corporation, subsidiaries of the United States corporation, or suppliers of the United States corporation are located;

(V) the local and global environment;

(VI) the short-term and long-term interests of the United States corporation, including—

(aa) benefits that may accrue to the United States corporation from the long-term plans of the United States corporation; and

(bb) the possibility that those interests may be best served by the continued independence of the United States corporation; and

(VII) the ability of the United States corporation to accomplish the general public benefit purpose of the United States corporation;

(ii) may consider—

(I) other pertinent factors; or

(II) the interests of any other group that are identified in the articles of incorporation in the State in which the United States corporation is incorporated, if applicable; and

(iii) shall not be required to give priority to a particular interest or factor described in clause (i) or (ii) over any other interest or factor.

(2) STANDARD OF CONDUCT FOR OFFICERS.—Each officer of a United States corporation shall balance and consider the interests and factors described in paragraph (1)(B)(i) in the manner described in paragraph (1)(B)(iii) if—

(A) the officer has discretion to act with respect to a matter; and

(B) it reasonably appears to the officer that the matter may have a material effect on the creation by the United States corporation of a general public benefit identified in the charter of the United States corporation.

(3) EXONERATION FROM PERSONAL LIABILITY.—Except as provided in the charter of a United States corporation, neither a director nor an officer of a United States corporation may be held personally liable for monetary damages for—

(A) any action or inaction in the course of performing the duties of a director under paragraph (1) or an officer under paragraph (2), as applicable, if the director or officer was not interested with respect to the action or inaction; or

(B) the failure of the United States corporation to pursue or create a general public benefit. (…)

(d) Right of action.—

(1) LIMITATION ON LIABILITY OF CORPORATION.—A United States corporation shall not be liable for monetary damages under this section for any failure of the United States corporation to pursue or create a general public benefit.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Le journal Le Monde apporte un éclairage intéressant sur le réforme américaine à venir dans le domaine de la fiscalité touchant les entreprises : « Trump et les républicains lancent la réforme fiscale » (27 septembre 2017). Voici la synthèse :

• Impôts sur les sociétés :

Le deuxième axe consiste à baisser dramatiquement l’impôt sur les sociétés (IS), pour redonner aux entreprises leur compétitivité. « Les gagnants seront les travailleurs américains de tous les jours, lorsque les jobs vont commencer à affluer dans notre pays, les entreprises se concurrencer pour les emplois et les salaires augmenter », croit savoir M. Trump. Le projet prévoit de baisser le taux nominal de l’impôt sur les sociétés (IS) de 38 % à 20 %, soit au-dessous de la moyenne de l’Organisation de coopération et de développement économiques (OCDE) qui est de 22,5 % environ. Donald Trump a modéré son objectif de 15 % qu’il avait répété fin août. Pour favoriser l’investissement, les entreprises pourront pendant cinq ans amortir immédiatement leurs investissements en les passant en dépenses dans leur compte de résultat. Toute une série de déductions, notamment sur les intérêts d’emprunts, sont supprimées.

Ivan Tchotourian

Le National Credit Union Administration est devenu la première des six Agences à dévoiler une proposition de règle d’implantation de l’article 956 de la loi américaine Dodd-Frank (« Incentive-based Compensation Arrangements », 17 CFR Part 303, Release No.; File no., RIN). Commentaire à recevoir au plus tard pour le 22 juillet 2016 !

The OCC, Board, FDIC, FHFA, NCUA, and SEC (the Agencies) are seeking comment on a joint proposed rule (the proposed rule) to revise the proposed rule the Agencies published in the Federal Register on April 14, 2011, and to implement section 956 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act). Section 956 generally requires that the Agencies jointly issue regulations or guidelines:

(1) prohibiting incentive-based payment arrangements that the Agencies determine encourage inappropriate risks by certain financial institutions by providing excessive compensation or that could lead to material financial loss; and

(2) requiring those financial institutions to disclose information concerning incentive-based compensation arrangements to the appropriate Federal regulator.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Bonjour à toutes et à tous, Le Devoir (« Des élus américains veulent mettre fin aux structures anonymes ») m’apprend que des élus du Congrès américain ont déposé mercredi une proposition de loi s’attaquant aux sociétés anonymes créées aux États-Unis et soupçonnées de dissimuler des malversations financières et des opérations de blanchiment d’argent. À l’heure actuelle, plusieurs États comme le Delaware ou le Wyoming, permettent de créer une entreprise sans en révéler leur propriétaire.

À suivre donc…

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Bonjour à toutes et à tous, un article du Financial Post publié fin novembre 2015 « Governments’ war on multinationals » par Jack M. Mintz (Fellow du président, School of Public Policy, University of Calgary) revient sur les problématiques de l’inversion fiscale. L’affaire Pzifer sert de trame de fond…

While the multinational companies have won this battle, the desire of G20 countries to combat corporate tax avoidance with OECD-proposed measures may heighten. Will governments ultimately win the war over corporate profits?

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian