Skip to content
Wednesday 2 September 2026London --:--Frankfurt --:--Zurich --:--
NewslettersSearchEN · DE · FR
MorningWire

European business, markets and politics

FTSE 100
10,756.45
-0.30%
DAX
25,843.34
-0.49%
CAC 40
8,280.63
-0.26%
STOXX 50
6,363.17
-0.09%
  • Europe
  • Markets
  • Business
  • Economy
  • Regulation
  • Politics
  • Opinion
More
GermanyFranceEU InstitutionsCompetitionPublic AffairsBankingTechnologyEnergy
  • Germany
  • France
  • Europe
  • Markets
  • Business
  • Economy
  • Regulation
  • Politics
  • Opinion
  • DE
Tuesday 12 October 2010 9:22 pm  |  Updated:  Thursday 30 May 2019 7:20 am

The grass is not always greener for shareholders in low-tax states

By: KCS-content

Add as a preferred source on Google

RELOCATING overseas is becoming a fashion. This week it was reported that online bookmaker Betfair is considering a move after a row over tax. It follows building services firm Wolseley’s recent announcement that its base will move to Switzerland for tax reasons.

Wolseley’s decision was welcomed by analysts and shareholders who saw a company seeking to manage its tax burden and apparently saving £23m. When a company redomiciles, it is often for tax reasons and sometimes to align the nationality of its headquarters with that of its business. However, if more companies follow Wolseley’s lead and depart the UK, are they leaving behind more than high tax rates? Is a move always in the interests of shareholders? Are there more than financial considerations at play?

Let’s examine some of the positives about being a UK registered company. The UK legal framework determines the duties of directors and puts in place important restrictions such as the ability of directors to receive loans from the company or to make political donations. It is also the source of those shareholders’ remedies of last resort: power to remove directors, power to requisition shareholder resolutions and the power to mount a derivative action against directors on the part of the company. Though seldom used, these provide shareholders with a measure of protection when required.

Wolseley’s chosen mode of exit (using a company incorporated in Jersey but resident in Switzerland for tax purposes) preserves key shareholder protections, but in other cases many of these protections cannot be taken for granted, even for non-UK companies listed in London. Governance protections are increasingly converging, with non-UK companies listed in London now expected to comply or explain against the UK Corporate Governance Code. But certain key protections simply do not apply to many overseas companies even though they are London listed.

Similarly, the Takeover Code provides significant protection for shareholders in UK companies. The Code stipulates that all shareholders must be treated equally; it regulates when and what information companies must and cannot release publicly in relation to a potential bid and sets timetables for certain aspects of the bid. Does the new domicile of the company afford such protection? Could there be a scenario where the company became the subject of a hostile takeover bid and shareholders were simply left in the dark?

With the success of the company in mind, the board must consider whether foreign jurisdictions offer shareholders anything other than just a sunny tax haven. Shareholders must consider which protections come with the law of the company’s country of incorporation, or not as the case may be. As a Jersey incorporated company, Wolseley’s shareholders are still afforded protection under the Takeover Code and will enjoy the best of both worlds. By contrast, shareholders of companies incorporated in jurisdictions which do not offer the same protections as the UK may be at a disadvantage if the relevant law falls short of the UK regime. Such companies may attempt to replicate UK safeguards in their constitutional documents. For example, a number of offshore companies have been known to replicate the Takeover Code’s key minority shareholder protections in their articles of association as a safety blanket for shareholders. This is not a perfect solution as shareholders do not have the benefit of the Takeover Panel standing behind the protections and all of the associated infrastructure, but it may be a satisfactory compromise should the allure of the tax benefits outweigh these other factors.

With many companies considering moving overseas, shareholders should think seriously about the protection the UK affords them. There are real advantages in being a UK registered company and not all foreign jurisdictions have equal protection. Shareholders should ensure the baby is not being thrown out with the bath water.

Richard Brown is a partner at Hogan Lovells and leads the firm’s equity capital markets practice.

Share this article

  • Facebook
  • X
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Email

Similarly tagged content:

Sections

  • Jobs and Money

Categories

  • Money

Related Topics

  • NULL

Trending Articles

  • Vodafone and Deliveroo look to patch up Reform ties after Yusuf prison threats

  • Trio of firms poised to quit London Stock Exchange as exodus gathers pace

  • Jaguar reveals the Type 01’s screen-free interior

  • Easyjet’s over-60s recruitment push is economically necessary

  • Jim O’Neill: Capital gains tax hike ‘looms’ as top option for Burnham

More from Morning Wire

  • Big bank bosses on alert as tax noise gets louder under Burnham

    Banking
    Two men, one in a white shirt and red tie, the other in a navy jacket, conversing outdoors.
  • Plus500 splashes cash on investors after US expansion bears fruit

    Fintech
    Plus500 branding on a large Jumbotron scoreboard at a US sports arena, displaying game stats.
  • Budget 2026: Which taxes will Burnham and Healey hike?

    Tax
    Andy Burnham, John Healey, and Louise Haigh by a doorway, discussing tax policy for a news article.
  • Ask the expert: How do I avoid double tax on my pension?

    Personal Finance
    Marianna Hunt discussing financial strategies at a business conference, wearing a professional suit, engaging with the aud...
  • Jim O’Neill: Capital gains tax hike ‘looms’ as top option for Burnham

    Politics
    Jim ONeill in a blue suit and red tie, hands clasped, speaking at a business event.
  • Gary Stevenson is right, rich people want to help Britain – here’s how to let them do it

    Opinion
    Gary Stevenson debates economist Dr Kristian Niemietz on wealth tax issues during a live event.
  • Think your tax affairs are settled? Think again.

    Opinion
    HMRC
  • Shareholder backlash pushes up low-ball London takeover bids

    Markets
    Over 100 major London-listed companies, including Fevertree Drinks and YouGov, have written to the Chancellor warning that the uncertainty surrounding the future of a key tax relief tied to London’s junior stock market is battering investor confidence. 
MorningWire

Independent European business, markets and political news for decision-makers.

Morning Briefing

Europe

  • Germany
  • France
  • EU Institutions
  • Europe

Business

  • Markets
  • Business
  • Economy
  • Regulation
  • Competition
  • Public Affairs

Editorial

  • Opinion
  • Editorial Policy
  • Corrections
  • Contact

Company

  • About Morning Wire
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Policy
© 2026 Morning Wire Ltd · Published by Morning Wire Media, Bahnhofstrasse 65, 8001 Zürich, Switzerland
Privacy · Terms · Cookies · Facebook