View all newsletters
Have the short, sharp Spear's newsletter delivered to your inbox each week
  1. Wealth
May 9, 2016updated 10 May 2016 4:17pm

Personal security could be at risk from a property beneficial ownership register

By Spear's

Edward Burton argues that while a register of companies owning land in England and Wales helps transparency, it could also threaten personal security.

The government has recently closed its consultation on a register of beneficial ownership of all companies holding land in England and Wales.

Unlike the register of ‘persons with significant control’ (or PSC) register which relates to UK companies only – this proposed new register will apply to all companies, wherever incorporated, which own land in England and Wales and require disclosure of the ultimate beneficial owner(s) of the company. The company would need to be registered and have a unique identifying number before being allowed to purchase land in England and Wales although there may be exemptions for companies where such information is available in their home jurisdiction.

Greater transparency is a growing feature of the private wealth world with governments seeking more information in respect of the ultimate owners of such entities. The goal of such initiatives is laudable including ensuring further tax transparency and tackling money laundering and tax evasion – particularly as there is a perception that London property is particularly vulnerable to money laundering.

It seems likely, in any event, that with the proposed changes to inheritance tax from 2017 and the ongoing imposition of the Annual Tax on Enveloped Dwellings, increasing numbers of properties will be removed from their corporate envelopes having initially been purchased into corporate entities for legitimate succession, confidentiality or tax planning reasons.

However, there are a number of issues arising from the consultation which need to be considered carefully. A number of property owners use corporate owners of residential property for security reasons, legitimately concerned that their addresses are not publically accessible. They will therefore be rightly concerned that the proposed new register will be publically accessible and not restricted to government agencies.

Even without specific security concerns it would be a brave individual who would want their address to be publically available.

In addition, the consultation does not appear to address any disclosure requirements relating to direct trust ownership of properties.  Whatever is decided, it is important that the rules are clear.

Content from our partners
How Flygreen is ascending into the future of private aviation
Stoneweg, Icona, and CBH Strengthen Partnership with Cromwell Acquisition, Adding €4 Billion AUM to Stoneweg
Why investors should consider investing in nature

Whether or not this proposed new register comes to pass remains to be seen.  However, there are certainly a number of issues that should be considered carefully before the final form of this is finally decided.

Edward Burton specialises in prime and super prime residential property at boutique private wealth law firm Maurice Turnor Gardner LLP.

Select and enter your email address The short, sharp email newsletter from Spear’s
  • Business owner/co-owner
  • CEO
  • COO
  • CFO
  • CTO
  • Chairperson
  • Non-Exec Director
  • Other C-Suite
  • Managing Director
  • President/Partner
  • Senior Executive/SVP or Corporate VP or equivalent
  • Director or equivalent
  • Group or Senior Manager
  • Head of Department/Function
  • Manager
  • Non-manager
  • Retired
  • Other
Visit our privacy policy for more information about our services, how Progressive Media Investments may use, process and share your personal data, including information on your rights in respect of your personal data and how you can unsubscribe from future marketing communications.
Thank you

Thanks for subscribing.

Websites in our network