|
Companies formed in 2004 Below is a list of the number of offshore
companies formed last year in the major offshore jurisdictions. Not
all jurisdictions make this information publicly available, so we
are unable to provide figures for such jurisdictions as
Liechtenstein, the Cook Islands etc. The list does not include
“offshore” companies incorporated in the USA (Delaware corporations,
LLCs in various states), as these are not officially offshore
companies.
1.
List according to number of companies incorporated
|
Position
|
Jurisdiction
|
Companies formed in
2004 |
|
1
|
Hong Kong
|
65
558 |
|
2
|
British Virgin
Islands |
54
361 |
|
3
|
Panama
|
25
760 * |
|
4
|
Cyprus
|
11
586 |
|
5
|
Cayman Islands
|
7 000 ** |
|
6
|
Belize
|
6 286 |
|
7
|
Bahamas |
6 784 *** |
|
8 |
Seychelles
|
4 098 |
|
9
|
Samoa |
3 700 ** |
|
10 |
Gibraltar |
3 142 # |
|
11 |
Jersey
|
2 439 |
|
12 |
Isle of Man
|
1 939 |
|
13
|
Mauritius
|
1 780 ** |
|
14
|
Anguilla
|
1 300 |
|
15
|
Guernsey
|
1 141 |
|
16
|
Bermuda |
1 055 |
|
17 |
Brunei |
1 060 ** |
|
18
|
St. Vincent
|
986 |
|
19
|
Labuan |
490 |
|
20 |
St. Lucia |
380 |
|
21 |
Antigua |
300 ** |
|
22 |
Barbados |
237
## |
|
* + 3 050 Private foundations
|
|
** Approximate figure
|
|
*** Offshore + local |
|
# 2003 figures |
|
## IBCs |
2.
List of jurisdictions in alphabetical order
|
Jurisdiction
|
Companies formed in
2004 |
|
Anguilla
|
1 300 |
|
Antigua |
300 ** |
|
Bahamas |
6 784 *** |
|
Barbados |
237
## |
|
Belize
|
6 286 |
|
Bermuda |
1 055 |
|
British Virgin
Islands |
54
361 |
|
Brunei |
1 060 ** |
|
Cayman Islands
|
7 000 ** |
|
Cyprus
|
11
586 |
|
Gibraltar |
3 142 # |
|
Guernsey
|
1 141 |
|
Hong Kong
|
65
558 |
|
Isle of Man
|
1 939 |
|
Jersey
|
2 439 |
|
Labuan |
490 |
|
Mauritius
|
1 780 ** |
|
Panama
|
25
760 * |
|
Samoa |
3 700 ** |
|
Seychelles
|
4 098 |
|
St. Lucia |
380 |
|
St. Vincent
|
986 |
|
* + 3 050 Private foundations |
|
** Approximate figure |
|
*** Offshore + local
|
|
# 2003 figures
|
|
## IBCs |
29/03/2005

Exempt
Status changes
On 21
January 2005, the EC Commission announced its view in relation to
Gibraltar’s Exempt Status Company under state aid rules and also
terms for the continuation of the Exempt Status Company under
certain conditions leading to its phasing out by 31 December 2010.
These terms have been the subject matter of intensive negotiations
and agreement with the EC Commission. The Gibraltar Government has
therefore accepted these terms and has requested the UK Government
(as the Member State responsible for Gibraltar’s external affairs),
on behalf of the Gibraltar Government, to formally notify the EC
Commission of the acceptance of the agreed appropriate measures.
The terms of
the agreed appropriate measures for the continued operation of the
Exempt Status Company are as follows :
1.
The total number
of exempt companies will be of 8,464.
2. Existing
exempt companies will be able to continue to benefit from their tax
exempt status until 31 December 2010.
3. Existing
exempt companies that change legal or beneficial ownership and/or
activity between 19 February 2005 and 30 June 2006 will be able to
benefit from their tax exempt status until 31 December 2007.
4. Existing
exempt companies that change legal or beneficial ownership and/or
activity after 30 June 2006 will lose their tax exempt status.
5. New
exempt companies can be formed up to 30 June 2006. This will be on
the following basis :
5.1 In 2005,
the number of new exempt companies that can be formed shall not
exceed 60% of the number of exempt companies leaving the regime in
2005, or in any event 823.
5.2 From 1
January to 30 June 2006, the number of new exempt companies that can
be formed shall not exceed 50% of the number of exempt companies
leaving the regime during that period, or in any event the number of
exempt companies admitted in 2005.
6. New
exempt companies will be able to continue to benefit from their tax
exempt status until 31 December 2007.
7. Regular
reports shall be submitted to the EC Commission certifying
compliance with the above.
For the
purposes of the foregoing, an existing exempt company is one which
enjoys tax exempt status on or before 18 February 2005 and a new
exempt company is one that acquires such tax exempt status between
19 February 2005 and 30 June 2006.
22/03/2005

End of the line for Gibraltar tax-exempt
companies
The EU have passed a
decision on the fate of the tax-exempt status in Gibraltar. The
agreement reached means that the tax-exempt status will come to an
end in 2010. The system was considered as contravening the EU’s
rules on State Aid, and thus distorting competition.
Under the agreement,
existing companies will continue to enjoy their benefits until
December 2010, provided that there are no changes in ownership or
activity. Any change in ownership or activity before June 30th
2006 will lead to benefits ending on December 31st 2007;
any such changes after June 30th 2006 will lead to the
immediate ending of such benefits. It will still be possible for new
entrants to apply for tax-exempt status up to June 30th
2006, but they will only enjoy the benefits until December 31st
2007. The number of new entrants will also be limited.
02/03/2005

EU Savings Tax –
deadline approaches
As we have mentioned
earlier, the EU Savings Tax Directive has been accepted and is due
to come into force on July 1st 2005. From that day, EU
member states, together with Switzerland and Liechtenstein, will
begin to exchange information on bank accounts held by residents of
member states (where information is not exchanged, a tax on interest
will be withheld). It should be noted that the directive applies
only to the accounts of private individuals, and not to accounts
opened in the name of companies.
02/03/2005

The UK LLP – an
interesting solution
The UK Limited
Liability Partnership is finding favour with increasing numbers of
clients, for a number of reasons. This company form was popular
initially with professionals in the UK, attracted by the draw of
limited liability, but it is being used more and more in regard to
international tax planning. The company (partnership) must be formed
by at least two members, but as these can be corporate members and
there are no restrictions on their place of residence, this opens
the door to a number of possibilities for trading, without being
liable to UK tax (if, for example, the partners are non-UK resident
for tax purposes, the company has no activity in the UK and receives
no funds from the UK, then the company may not be liable to tax in
the UK). The company does have to file accounts in the UK, and the
structure must be carefully planned if the company is not to be
liable to UK tax. For more information, please feel free to contact
our offices.
02/03/2005
Foundations in the Channel Islands
In their continued
attempt to modernise, and maintain their status as an important
financial centre the Channel Islands (particularly Jersey and
Guernsey) are considering the introduction of legislation on
foundations.
While traditionally
concentrating on the common law trust, the financial sector has seen
the possibilities offered by the foundation, particularly for
clients from civil law jurisdictions where the trust is less well
known and not so easily accepted.
The Channel Islands are
following the lead of a number of jurisdictions which have recently
introduced legislation on foundations.
02/03/2005

Liechtenstein, San Marino and Monaco
Liechtenstein, San Marino and Monaco have
followed Switzerland in signing agreements with the European Union
concerning savings taxes.
The agreements, based on the agreement signed by Switzerland, will
lead to tax being withheld on interest payments to EU individuals.
The rate will be 15% for the first 3 years, rising to 20 % for the
following three years and 35% thereafter. 75% of the withheld will
be transferred to the authorities of the individual’s member state
of residence, with the remaining 25% being retained by the country
in which the tax was withheld.
No tax will be withheld
if the individual involved authorises the disclosure of information
to his home tax authorities.
The agreement also
covers the exchange of information in cases of fraud or similar
activity.
10/01/2005

BVI
The government of the BVI have increased the amount of annual tax
payable by international business companies (IBCs) incorporated in
the BVI. From January 1st 2005, the annual tax will increase from
300 USD to 350 USD. The change will apply not only to new companies,
but also to existing ones.
01/01/2005

Switzerland manages to retain control of bank secrecy on
deposited funds
Switzerland has managed to retain control of bank secrecy on
deposited funds, despite EU efforts to change this in the fight
against money laundering and tax evasion. At an EU-Swiss summit held
in Berne, certain agreements were signed whereby Switzerland was
granted exemption from the obligation to report on accounts held by
EU-resident citizens, as laid down by EU laws. In cases where
clients do not consent to details regarding tax payment being given
to the police or tax authorities, information will not be released,
as money laundering and tax evasion do not constitute crimes under
Swiss law. This will not apply, however, to funds deposited as the
proceeds of “blatantly obvious crime”. Furthermore, tax on interest
on funds deposited by citizens of EU member states will be increased
to such a level that investors will be discouraged from depositing
funds. The EU is seeking to force Switzerland to sign up to, or at
least accept, the terms of the Schengen agreements, whereby they
would at least show a willingness to co-operate mutually with the
police forces of the EU members. Without the co-operation of the
Swiss, the EU would be unable to introduce the control of bank
accounts by 2005, and would be unable to force other non-EU states
such as Liechtenstein, Andorra and the Isle of Man to adopt such
measures. The agreements and conditions mentioned above refer to
private bank accounts. The EU directives do not apply to company
accounts.
29/06/2004

New tax concessions to be introduced in the Isle of Man
The decision of the Isle of Man parliament to provide companies
involved in astronautical and aeronautical engineering with a zero
tax rate has created significant interest among such companies in
the United Kingdom. The new rate will apply to all those companies
which produce, operate, sell and otherwise work with products
required for sending rockets, satellites and other objects into
space. This also includes teaching and training directly related to
this field. The zero rate of tax was introduced earlier for
companies involved in a series of activities, including marine
shipping and insurance. The government plans to introduce the zero
tax rate for companies operating in all spheres by 2006.
29/06/2004

Luxembourg changes laws related to holding companies
As expected, Luxembourg will make significant changes in its laws in
the near future, to bring laws on royalties and dividends in line
with an EU directive on this topic. In line with EU directives,
there will be no withholding tax levied on dividends if a company
holds at least 25% of the authorised capital of another company, or
if a third company holds at least 25% of the capital in two other
companies. In this case, both companies will be subject to tax on
their incomes. Luxembourg would also like to go even further, and
the changes to be introduced mean there will be no withholding tax
on royalties paid to non-resident companies, and Luxembourg holding
companies incorporated according to the terms of the law of 1929
will not be subject to such withholding tax either. The withholding
tax on royalties is currently 10% (unless an agreement for the
avoidance of double taxation signed between Luxembourg and the
country concerned provides for a different rate). In line with the
directive, the laws will come into force retrospectively, with
effect from January 1st 2004. In addition, Luxembourg must also
harmonise its laws on “harmful tax practices” with the EU
regulations. According to the new laws, a holding company will lose
its tax-free status if it receives 5% or more of the dividend paid
by a tax-free or low-tax company. 11% is considered to be a suitable
level of taxation. Existing holding companies, operating according
to the law of 1929, will probably be granted a period of grace until
2011.
29/06/2004

Taxes levied on German companies are among the highest in Europe
According to a report by the German finance minister, taxes levied
on German companies are among the highest in Europe. The aggregate
of consolidated taxes paid by German companies in local and state
taxes currently stands at 40%. The same report also shows that the
gap between taxes in Germany and the 10 new EU member states is
continuing to grow. At the same time, during their preparations for
entrance into the common market, the new member states were making
great efforts to reduce the amount of tax levied on companies.
29/06/2004

BVI companies and bearer shares
The situation regarding BVI companies with bearer shares has taken
another twist. The Government now looks set to extend the deadline
for the “immobilisation” of bearer shares (or the exchange of bearer
shares for registered shares) until December 31st 2010. It will
still be possible to issue bearer shares, but the annual tax payable
will increase from the current 300 USD to 1000 USD, and the bearer
share certificates will have to be deposited with an approved
custodian. In addition, amendments will have to be made to the
Memorandum & Articles of Association removing the possibility for
the company to issue bearer shares. If the amendments are not made,
then the higher rate of annual tax will be applicable. The deadline
for these amendments to be made is January 1st 2008. In the case of
new companies, the new rates of annual tax, and changes in the
Memorandum & Articles of Association will apply from January 1st
2005.
10/06/2004

Will Cyprus be an attractive financial centre in the future?
In the spring of 2002 our colleague in Cyprus wrote a thesis with
this title at Nottingham Trent University in England. This happened
when the changes in the tax laws which were approved by a vote of
the Cypriot parliament in July were still only in the planning
stage. Certain points were only made known at the last moment,
taking many experts in the field by surprise.
A tense period of waiting swept across Cyprus leading up to the
vote, with nobody knowing what the future might hold. Would the
offshore business be killed off, or not? Would joining the EU mean
the end for a business which was extremely important to the island,
or would it be possible to survive and carry on in the future?
Nobody knew anything, but everybody tried to keep abreast of
developments. One week the representatives of one of the banks in
Cyprus came to us for advice, the following week a different team
appeared, trying to find out what was happening, whether the old
clients would remain and new ones would come if taxes were raised.
This was all after they had held numerous forums and seminars
outlining the expected changes and possible problems and
possibilities that EU membership would bring.
The tension visibly eased to a degree when the new changes in the
law were accepted in July, 2002, and the main modifications became
clear. The essence is as follows: the difference between offshore
and non-offshore companies has officially ceased, or rather will
cease to exist. From January 1st 2003, all companies will pay a
uniform rate of 10 % tax on profits. Companies which were
formed and had started operating before December 31st 2001 can
continue to pay tax at the earlier rate (4.25%) until December 31st
2005. The rate of 10% was fixed with the imminent EU membership in
mind, as this was the minimum requirement from Brussels with regard
to taxation. The tax rates in several current and future EU member
states are set around this figure; in Ireland, for example, the rate
is 12.5%, and in Hungary from January 1st 2004 the rate is 16%. The
Cypriots, however, have still adopted the most attractive rate.
At the declaration level, there is no difference between local
companies and offshore companies. In practice, however, this is not
strictly true, as the incorporation of a local company (which
actually operates in Cyprus) is more complicated than in the case of
an offshore company, and local companies are also subject to VAT, as
well as some additional “stealth” taxes. To the outsider this may
not be immediately apparent, even if that person is an expert on the
EU; the differences and points of interest may only come to light in
the office of a lawyer or accountant during the course of a possible
company formation.
At the same time, the differences are not apparent to foreign tax
authorities either. Provided that it is managed from Cyprus, a
Cyprus offshore company may take advantage of the agreements for the
avoidance of double taxation signed by Cyprus. One important
difference is that according to the new laws is that to qualify for
tax residency it is not enough for the company to be registered in
Cyprus – major managerial decisions regarding the company must be
made by the directors in Cyprus. The Cypriots have probably copied
the British “management control” test model in this. If a company
meets the above conditions, then it can request a Tax Residence
Certificate from the tax authorities in Cyprus, and can then use
this abroad to prove that it has the right to make use of the
agreement for the avoidance of double taxation signed by Cyprus.
The three main areas where the beneficial tax rates offered by
the agreements are used are in the redistribution of income from
dividends, interest and royalties. According to the current
agreements (not yet taking EU membership into account), the country
of source may also tax the above types of income, but the rates
offered by the agreements, which are generally more advantageous
than local rates, are usually used. So until now it was definitely
worth considering this type of holding structure, where a Cyprus
company was used to own and finance a foreign subsidiary. And these
benefits will also apply in the future, and it will still be worth
using a Cyprus company as a parent holding company in relationships
between Europe and North America.
According to the law changes of 2001, dividend income is not
included as income in Cyprus. As a result, it is not even
included in the tax base, and is treated separately in financial
statements and the annual accounts. At the same time, when a Cyprus
company pays a dividend to its owners, there is no further
withholding tax, as long as the owners are foreigners. In practice,
therefore, a dividend received from abroad can pass freely through
the Cyprus company into the hands of the ultimate beneficiary.
Interest payments received from abroad are subject to tax, but
only 50% of the payments received will be taxed. On the other
hand, interest payments made abroad at normal market rates can be
freely deducted as an expense. The most recent tax changes do not
include regulations regarding subsidiary-capitalisation in Cyprus.
At the same time, it is important to note that financing can not
just take place freely, as the Cyprus company may only take part in
the financing of its own group of companies. However, it is not
totally clear what is meant by the term group of companies.
The Cyprus company will continue to be a perfect vehicle for
the collection of royalties because of the agreements for the
avoidance of double taxation. This is true, even if fees from
royalties count 100% as income and are subject to tax. In this case,
too, royalties paid abroad can be relatively freely deducted, and
the company in Cyprus paying the royalty is not required by law to
apply a withholding tax.
The 2001 tax changes also include numerous new aspects with
regard to personal income tax and VAT, which time and space will not
allow us to list here. We can, however, make two clear statements
about the new position of Cyprus:
1. In Central-Eastern European relations, companies
incorporated in Cyprus offer some of the most advantageous taxation
possibilities with regard to parent companies and subsidiaries.
2. Cyprus offers the lowest rates of profit tax in the EU,
and payments made to foreigners from income attract the lowest
levels of tax. And all this is accompanied by an extremely
client-friendly and liberal accounting system, based on the
permissive Anglo-Saxon traditions, rather than the stricter
continental model.
But why is all this important? On May 1st 2004, the
European Union will expand, with ten new members being admitted; as
a result, an enormous common market will come about, made up of 400
million, albeit not equal, people. This will be the world’s biggest
market-place – bigger than the USA and whose consumer potential will
even exceed, for the time being at least, that of China. One of the
major factors in the EU market-place price war will be tax. The use
of legal tax benefits can provide a considerable plus for all those
producers and consumers whose business transactions are carried out
through countries with lower rates of taxation. On a 100 EURO
transaction the difference between 15 or 20% VAT can be very
important; in the same way, it can make a huge difference if a
company pays only 10% profit tax in Cyprus as opposed to 30% in
England.
A wave of tax migration will begin within the EU, which will
clearly lead to astute companies taking their business to countries
with lower rates of tax, such as Cyprus. The signs are already
there, and it is the British who have made the first moves. This is
not surprising as the island was part of the British Empire until
1964, and the ties between the two countries are still very strong,
and the Cypriots have always tried hard to maintain the Anglo-Saxon
legal traditions. Re-settlement to Cyprus will be particularly
beneficial in the case of trading companies, as they can possibly
redistribute their profits to greater advantage.
One thing is clearly visible even today: the days of “paper
companies” in Cyprus are over. It will probably not be possible
within the EU for a Cyprus company to write all sorts of invoices to
western European buyers without some kind of control. Tax
authorities will be able to check the authenticity of Cyprus
companies more thoroughly, and see whether or not they are real
companies with a real physical presence. The solution of having a
Cypriot lawyer represent the company as its director will probably
not be the ideal answer either. It is not possible for every second
Cyprus company to have a lawyer as its director, and the practice of
having 500 companies registered in one office is not too plausible,
and there isn’t even a name-plate at the entrance. A more competent
visiting tax inspector, private detective or journalist will spot
the fact that this is a “paper company” before he even walks through
the front door.
So what is the solution? In short, the answer is probably
a real physical presence. A small commercial office, run by real
flesh and blood people (if possible not Cypriots), in a separate
office with its own name-plate, and not just pretending to operate,
but actually giving and receiving business proposals, and arranging
advertising and invoices. Apart from checking the actual physical
presence, foreign authorities will have very little legal reason to
inspect the books and administration of the company. Taking the tax
advantages into consideration, it turns out that a medium-sized
Italian manufacturer would benefit from re-locating at least part of
the trading arm of its business to Cyprus, in the form of a small
two-man office. And Italy is not the only country within the
European Union with high rates of tax.
But what advantages can be gained by an eastern European
client from running a Cyprus company? Over recent years Cyprus
has been repeatedly condemned and criticised. They said it was the
money-laundering capital, a regular haunt of the Russian Mafia, a
notorious tax haven, and so on. As a result, there were people who
decided not to choose Cyprus for the incorporation of their
companies. The rumours with regard to Cyprus were particularly
prevalent among the Russians. Recently it was claimed that the
Central Bank of Cyprus automatically reports people who buy offshore
companies to the Russian authorities. In the light of such an
article, it is difficult to explain that this is only possible in
the case of serious crime and in accordance with the terms of the
legal agreement between the two countries, and certainly does not
happen automatically. Even within Cyprus this does not happen
automatically. The law dictates that the Central Bank is not
authorised to hand over details of the beneficial owners to local
commercial banks, and this law is strictly adhered to.
Without going over the reasons again, we would like to repeat the
main points described above: On May 1st 2004 Cyprus will become a
member of the European Union. Anyone who has a Cyprus company
will automatically have an EU company in the EU member with the
lowest rate of tax, and which has signed an agreement for the
avoidance of double taxation with the majority of CIS countries.
People may continue to scoff at the idea of Cyprus, quoting the
example of the girl with loose morals who gets married, only to
continue in exactly the same way as before. This type of
moralisation will only bring a smile to the faces of the money men.
The west will not waste too much time on the question of morals. The
east, however, will fall behind if they fail to see and take
advantage of the tax possibilities of a United Europe. In a country
where there is an old, well-established tradition of providing
service to foreigners, a pleasant climate regarding both nature and
taxation, competent professionals, in short everything you need for
success in business. In short: VIVE LA CYPRUS! Why not?
16/02/2004
Offshore news 2003

Increased
annual tax in Delaware
The state of Delaware, USA, has increased the amount of fixed
annual tax to be paid by corporations and LLCs. The annual tax on
corporations has increased from 50 USD to 60 USD per year, while the
tax on LLCs has been raised from 100 USD to 200 USD per year. The
changes were introduced in the summer, and, as the taxes in Delaware
are payable for the calendar year, also apply retrospectively to
companies whose anniversary of incorporation falls between January
1st and the date on which the changes came in to force.
10/09/2003

Due
diligence on banking activities in the Cayman Islands
Despite protests from some long-standing account holders, the Cayman
Island authorities are insisting on tighter due diligence controls
on all those who bank in the islands. All account holders, both new
and old, are required to provide proof of identity and physical
address, as well as details of their banking activities.
10/09/2003

New
company format in the Seychelles
With the introduction of new offshore legislation, the Seychelles
continue to develop as a serious financial services centre. Among
the new legislation was the Companies (Special Licenses) Act, which
will allow for the incorporation of low tax companies. These
companies will be taxed at 1,5 % on their world-wide income, but
will also be able to take advantage of any treaties for the
avoidance of double taxation signed by the Seychelles.
10/09/2003

Panama
increases annual tax
Panama has recently introduced new legislation increasing the fixed
rate annual registration fee for offshore companies. The new rate
will be 250 USD per year, replacing the previous amount of 150 USD.
10/09/ 2003
|
Companies formed in 2002
Below is a list of the number of offshore companies
formed last year in the major offshore jurisdictions. Not all
jurisdictions make this information publicly available, so we
are unable to provide figures for such jurisdictions as
Liechtenstein, the Cook Islands etc. The list does not include
“offshore” companies incorporated in the USA (Delaware
corporations, LLCs in various states), as these are not
officially offshore companies.
1.
List according to number of companies
incorporated
|
Position
|
Jurisdiction
|
Companies formed in 2002 |
|
1
|
British Virgin
Islands |
51 234 *
|
|
2
|
Hong Kong
|
38 862 **
|
|
3
|
Panama
|
16 659 ††
|
|
4
|
Cyprus
|
7 500 **
|
|
5
|
Cayman Islands
|
7 000
# |
|
6
|
Belize
|
4 425
|
|
7
|
Gibraltar
|
3 470
|
|
8
|
Bahamas
|
3 458
|
|
9
|
Samoa
|
3 000
#
|
|
10
|
Jersey
|
2 833
|
|
11
|
Isle of Man
|
2 805 †
|
|
12
|
Seychelles
|
2 500
|
|
13
|
Mauritius
|
2 232
|
|
14
|
Bermuda
|
1 657 *
|
|
15
|
Guernsey
|
1 303
|
|
16
|
Anguilla
|
1 238 *
|
|
17
|
Turks & Caicos
|
1 203
|
|
18
|
St. Vincent
|
959 |
|
19
|
Brunei
|
800
#
|
|
19
|
Antigua
|
800
#
|
|
21
|
Malta
|
689 |
|
22
|
Curaçao
|
545 |
|
23
|
Barbados
|
525 |
|
24
|
Niue
|
452 |
|
25
|
Vanuatu
|
417 |
|
26
|
St. Lucia
|
408 |
|
27
|
Labuan
|
364 |
|
28
|
Hungary
|
300
#
|
|
29
|
Aruba
|
192 |
|
30
|
Alderney
|
36
|
|
*
2001 figures |
|
**
Offshore + local |
|
† +
59 LLCs |
|
†† + 1
765 Private foundations
|
|
#
Approximate figure
|
2.
List of jurisdictions in alphabetical
order | |