Why we don’t Incorporate Federally
Prospective clients often ask to incorporate “federally” or that they want a “Canadian incorporated” company. In most cases we recommend a provincial incorporation instead – here’s why:
1. Federal Falsehoods
At the start, it’s critical to dispel federal incorporation falsehoods:
First, federal incorporation does not allow the company to operate Canada-wide. Like a provincially incorporated company, a federal company must register in each province in which it does business (see separate nexus test), which involves paying an extraprovincial registration fee to each province (except Ontario, which is free for federal companies). Similarly, provincial companies must pay an extraprovincial registration fee in each province.
Second, federal incorporation does not protect a company name across Canada. The federal government uses the “NUANS” name reservation system, which has been adopted by some but not all provinces (British Columbia, for example, does not use NUANS) such that a federal company name is only protected in NUANS provinces. If you’re looking to protect a company name Canada-wide, the correct approach is to file a trademark.
2. Residency. Federal corporations are required to have a board of directors containing 25% Canadian residents or, if four or fewer directors, 1 resident director. Conversely, certain other provinces do not have director residency requirements, for example British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario and Nova Scotia. As most startups receive foreign (often U.S.) investment, federal residency requirements quickly become a problem.
3. Extra Provincial Registration. Since federal corporations are effectively foreign in all provinces (except Ontario), a federal corporation must immediately pay an additional extraprovincial registration fee based on the first province in which it does business. For example, a federal corporation based in British Columbia must pay roughly $450 in extraprovincial registration fees immediately upon incorporation, which for a cash-strapped startup is an unnecessary expense.
For all the above reasons, consider incorporating in your home province rather than federally (with some exceptions). Before taking the step to incorporate, be sure to speak with your legal advisors to determine which jurisdiction fits your particular needs.
Revisiting “Should I Incorporate my Canadian Startup in Delaware?”
It seems Canadians are still wrestling with whether to incorporate their startup in Delaware. I wrote about this question back in September 2014 and since then the post has racked up over 1,000 views. Back then, I concluded with this piece of advice, which I still stand by:
Don’t lock yourself into Delaware before you know where your investment comes from. Based upon the cost and complexity of operating a Delaware startup from Canada, I recommend that you incorporate in Canada at the start. Where a future U.S. investor requires you to incorporate in Delaware (or another state) your legal advisors can assist with this transition. Conversely, Canadian investors may prefer to invest in a Canadian company!
Tip: your product/service is important, not the place of incorporation.
Incorporating a Video Game Studio
We represent a number of indie video game studios and are often asked what legal structure should be used when incorporating a video game studio. Fortunately, the legal structure we recommend for most indie video game studios is simple and cost-effective to put in place. [Press Start]
- Incorporate. The studio should be an incorporated company (and not a sole proprietorship, meaning doing business personally). By incorporating you ensure that the company, and not you personally, would be the liable party should legal issues arise in the future. We do not recommend a partnership as the split of a partnership could tie up game IP and prevent release.
- Create one class of Shares. The company should have a simple structure comprised of a single class of common shares without a cap on the number of shares that can be issued (otherwise called an unlimited number of shares). If you are incorporating in the US where an unlimited number of shares is not possible, set a high cap such as 10,000,000 shares.
- Issue a few million shares per founder. Don’t stress about the number of shares to issue – more is better! Issue at least 1 million shares per founder as this avoids fractional shares should you issue shares in the future and looks better visually if you are trying to recruit people to the company. The shares should be purchased for a nominal amount, ex. $0.00001/share. Remember, ownership percentage is what matters and owning 1/10 shares is the same as owning 1,000,000/10,000,000 shares.
- Consider reverse vesting shares. If you are offering shares to a few team members who need to prove their value by, for example, meeting development milestones, then consider reverse vesting the shares issued to those team members. Reverse vested shares are issued to the team member up front but can be forfeit (entirely or in part) if the team member does not meet certain milestones set by the company, such as a time or development milestone. By reverse vesting shares you ensure that the company shareholders have earned their shareholding and, without, someone could walk away and keep their shares!
- Assign IP. The company will be licensing the video game to end-users and, in order to license the game, needs to own the game. By assigning all intellectual property that you have in the game to the company you ensure the company has sufficient rights to license the game.
The above is a simple to understand structure that works for many indie video game studios with a small shareholder base. By starting with a simple structure you can also easily modify the structure in the future should the studio take off and your legal needs shift.
Shameless plug: Voyer Law offers a flat fee legal package just for indie video game studios. Click on legal packages for more information.
Share Structure: do you need so many classes?
I frequently encounter early-stage startups with too many share classes. If you have read previous posts, you know that I advocate for a simple share structure for early-stage companies (usually common and, if needed, non-voting common). If more complex structures are required in the future, they can be created then.
When you are considering your startup’s share structure, consider creating only those share classes that you know you need now or will need. To that end, ask the following questions before creating any share class:
1. What is the share class to be used for? You need to understand the purpose served by each share class. Don’t create share classes because a third party tells you to or because you see other companies with similar structures. Each share class should have a reason for existing.
2. When is the share class to be used? If the share class is to be used at some point in the future, consider whether that class will 100% be suited to that hypothetical future event or will it need to be modified to suit that future event? Further, what is the likelihood of the future event occurring? If it seems unlikely the shares will be used in the future, consider not creating that class. For example, I question the value in creating preferred shares to be used for future investors as you currently do not know what terms those hypothetical investors will want on the preferred share class.
3. Will your share structure agitate investors? Perhaps you do have a future use for 4 share classes but what is the impact of this share structure on your capital raising activities? Will startup investors, used to seeing common share structures (and maybe a non-voting common), take issue with your complex share structure? This especially could be the case where you can’t explain the reason for the structure. Always consider how outsiders will view your share structure.
In sum: don’t create share classes without a reason – even if your lawyer says so! A founder should know their company structure and why it was created that way.