2257 business question

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Humpy Leftnut
    Confirmed User
    • Apr 2007
    • 1292

    #1

    2257 business question

    Does the onus fall on the owners of a company to follow the rules, or does it have to do with the exchange of money? If a US entity received money from an International company but didn't own any of that company, they wouldn't be liable for the actions of that company right? I don't see how... But maybe?

    Just thinking if US people just put their companies into trust in another country and just received revenues from them as consulting contracting and expense fees, how could they be held liable for the actions of the international company, with no ownership involvement?
    Humpy Leftnut - Pornsumer Reviews
  • Humpy Leftnut
    Confirmed User
    • Apr 2007
    • 1292

    #2
    any thoughts?
    Humpy Leftnut - Pornsumer Reviews

    Comment

    • fatfoo
      ICQ:649699063
      • Mar 2003
      • 27763

      #3
      probably would not be liable
      Send me an email: [email protected]

      Comment

      • Deej
        I make pixels work
        • Jun 2005
        • 24386

        #4
        Heya Humpy there...

        This here is a business question and we dont tolerate that kind of scum round here!

        You best be wisen up n stickin with the "would you hit it" speeches n shit.



        Lets see some girls wrastlin!!!

        Deej's Designs n' What Not
        Hit me up for Design, CSS & Photo Retouching


        Icq#30096880

        Comment

        • GreyWolf
          So Fucking Banned
          • Jun 2007
          • 2036

          #5
          Originally posted by Humpy Leftnut
          Does the onus fall on the owners of a company to follow the rules, or does it have to do with the exchange of money? If a US entity received money from an International company but didn't own any of that company, they wouldn't be liable for the actions of that company right? I don't see how... But maybe?
          The owners (specifically the officers - tho that may vary depending on what international company - ie where there are nominees) are responsible for complying with corp laws where that corp is formed. Don't know what stage it may hit, but would ask who are the beneficial owners?

          Originally posted by Humpy Leftnut
          Just thinking if US people just put their companies into trust in another country and just received revenues from them as consulting contracting and expense fees, how could they be held liable for the actions of the international company, with no ownership involvement?
          Who is the trustee? He/she or they "own" the trust - again, depending.

          Can't say for US law - sounds like time for advice from a taxation lawyer and also advice from an "adult entertainment" lawyer.

          Sure.. nothing wrong with a contract with an "international corp" and getting paid (and declaring this as income) - but the background may not be "clean".

          Only thoughts are - if this is seen a contrived device to step outside the laws of whatever country, that may add to the problems. Depending where that "international corp" is located, there may be (most likely) MLAT's in place.
          Last edited by GreyWolf; 08-05-2007, 08:57 PM.

          Comment

          • RawAlex
            So Fucking Banned
            • Oct 2003
            • 9465

            #6
            if you are a US citizen living in the US, and you start an offshore company, you are still bound by US law as a resident.

            If you are not a US citizen but you started a US company to get processing or whatever, then you are bound by US law.

            If you are not a US citizen and you don't live in the US, and your company is not in the US, then you are not bound by US law.

            next.
            Last edited by RawAlex; 08-05-2007, 08:59 PM.

            Comment

            Working...