New Filing Requirements for Canadian Federal Corporations – Individuals with Significant Control (ISCs)

Starting January 22, 2024, all federal corporations created under the Canada Business Corporations Act (CBCA) are required to file information regarding individuals with significant control (ISCs) with Corporations Canada.

1.  Who is an ISC?

According to the CBCA, an ISC is an individual (see: human person) that:

• owns, controls or directs 25% or more of the shares of a corporation individually, jointly or in convert with one or more individuals;
• has control over the corporation without owning any shares; or
• meets a combination of any of the above two factors.

If a corporation’s shareholder is an entity (for example, a corporation, partnership, or trust), the individual(s) in control of such entity must be identified as ISCs.

Additionally, if multiple family members jointly own more than 25% of the shares of a corporation and one family member has sufficient influence over the other family members, such influential individual may be considered an ISC.

2.  What information will be filed?

The following information regarding ISCs must be filed with Corporations Canada:

Information that will be made public:

• full legal name;
• date on which the individual became an ISC;
• description of the ISC’s significant control; and
• mailing address.

Information that will not be made public:

• date of birth;
• country of citizenship;
• country of tax residency; and
• residential address.

If an ISC is less than 18 years of age, information will not be made publicly available until such individual turns 18 years old.

You may file an application to not make the information about an ISC public if:

• making the information publicly available presents or would present a serious threat to the safety of the individual;
• the ISC is declared incapable either by court or under provincial or territorial laws; or
• making the information publicly available would go against the Conflict of Interest Act or a similar legislation of a province or territory.

3.  Who is excluded from the ISC filing requirements?

Most federal corporations are required to comply with the new filing requirements, however, the following corporations are excluded:

• non-federal corporations (for example, a corporation incorporated under a province’s corporations act);
• a reporting issuer under provincial securities legislation or a wholly-owned subsidiary of a reporting issuer;
• a public corporation that trades its securities on a stock exchange designated by the Income Tax Act or a wholly-owned subsidiary of such a corporation; or
• a crown corporation or a wholly-owned subsidiary of a crown corporation.

4.  What does this mean for you?

If your corporation is federally incorporated and not exempt from the filing requirements, failure to maintain and file the ISC information may result in directors or officers facing penalties up to $1,000,000 or possible imprisonment, as well as potential fines to the corporation of up to $1,000,000 and involuntary dissolution.

Please reach out to the Voyer Law team to discuss your annual filing requirements and to maintain your corporation in good standing.

Problems with Stripe Atlas Incorporation for Canadians

We frequently work with Canadian startups operating a U.S. (usually Delaware) company incorporated on their behalf by Stripe Atlas.  On the surface, Stripe’s assistance with incorporating this U.S. company seems convenient and an easy way to meet the U.S. entity requirements to use the Stripe payment processing platform.  However, a number of material issues are generated by Stripe when it incorporates a U.S. company on behalf of a Canadian startup.

Problem #1

It’s critical to understand that a U.S. company cannot operate out of Canada without registering as doing business in Canada (thus exposing the company to unnecessarily complicated Canadian/US dual taxation), which Stripe does not address in its standard documentation.

The common solution to this is to treat the U.S. company as a parent to (or as a subsidiary of) a new Canadian company and isolate each company’s tax obligations in their respective countries.

Problem #2

Your U.S. company formed by Stripe needs to transact with your Canadian company on an arm’s length basis, taking into account tax transfer pricing rules.  If you don’t engage in tax planning around the flow of cash and assets between the two companies, expect expensive tax problems in the future

These tax issues can typically be addressed through cross-border tax planning as documented in an Intercompany Agreement in which we address the flow of cash and assets between the two companies.  For example, in the agreement we can address which company books sales in which countries and how the cash from these sales moves between the companies.

While Stripe Atlas touts the ease and speed with which a U.S. company can be incorporated, it neglects the massive cross-border legal and accounting issues that forming a U.S. company abroad generates.  If these issues are understood before incorporating, Stripe Atlas can be a valuable tool but, if not understood and planned for, expect it to generate more problems than it solves for.

California Consumer Privacy Act comes into Force Jan. 1, 2020

The California Consumer Privacy Act (the “CCPA”) is a new law intended to enhance privacy rights and consumer protections for California residents, which comes into force on January 1, 2020. 

In the lead-up to the CCPA coming into force, this blog post covers three common questions we receive: (1) do I need to comply? (2) when do I need to comply? and (3) what happens if I do not comply?

1.         Do I need to comply? Probably, but not directly.  Most companies that operate from Canada or in states other than California, will not directly have to comply with the CCPA as the territorial scope of the law is fairly limited, especially when compared with the EU’s General Data Protection Regulations (the “GDPR”).  To fall under the territorial scope of the CCPA, you have to be a for-profit business doing business in the State of Californiaand have one of three factors apply: 

(a) gross revenue of over $25,000,000 USD; 

(b) handle the personal information of more than 50,000 consumers, households or devices (it is unclear in the Act, at this stage, whether this is a California or world-wide number); or 

(c) derive more than 50% of annual revenue from the selling of consumers’ personal information.  

While the CCPA may not apply directly to many companies, as we saw with the GDPR rollout in 2018, the CCPA will likely indirectly apply as major tech companies like Google and Apple will have to comply with this law and as such, they will likely require, as part of their own compliance requirements, that companies they do business with that collect personal information also comply.  The extent of this indirect compliance is currently unclear and may only apply to certain provisions of the CCPA.

2.         When do I need to comply?  The effective date of the CCPA (the date at which the CCPA becomes law), is January 1, 2020, and while enforcement by the California Attorney General’s office may not begin until supporting regulations are finalized (deadline for regulations is June 1, 2020), we recommend that companies that need to comply directly begin compliance work immediately and aim to be fully compliant by January 1.  Companies that only need to comply indirectly may have some time to wait and see how the CCPA will affect contracts and terms with CCPA compliant companies but it won’t hurt to be compliant by early 2020. 

3.         What happens if I do not comply?  Beware of the cost!  There are several penalty clauses in the CCPA, including $2,500 for each non-intentional violation and $7,500 for each intentional violation.  If you have over 50,000 users, these penalties can easily amount to over $125,000,000.  For companies that will have to comply indirectly through contracts or user agreements, beware of indemnification clauses and other liability amendments that may push these penalties onto your company.

For many companies, the CCPA may not directly apply. However, it’s important to monitor CCPA factors, relative to your company’s business, to ensure that you do not miss compliance should a factor be met in the future – this is especially important in rapidly growing startups where it’s easy for a compliance obligation to be missed. Even if the CCPA factors are not met, there may be an obligation to comply as large tech companies will likely be complying and force compliance on everyone else they do business with.

Founder Leaving the Company

While founders embark on the journey of launching a company with an abundance of optimism it may be the case that their relationship does not last as long as the company, leading to the question of how to handle a founder leaving the company? This situation goes one of two ways: (1) the company and its founders entered into agreements that address this situation and the process set forth in these agreements is followed; or (2) no agreements are in place and the company and founder are left to try and work out a resolution (difficult if the departure was not amicable).

In this post we will detail two agreements to put in place early-on in a company’s life that could ease a founder’s departure:

1. Reverse Vesting Agreement. A reverse vesting agreement subjects a founder’s shares to repurchase by the company if the founder leaves/is fired from the company within a particular period of time. Each time shares “vest”, meaning that a particular period of time has elapsed and a certain number of shares cease to be subject to the company’s repurchase right. Typical terms are described as “4 years with a 1 year cliff”. This means that the agreement lasts for 4 years and that 1/4 of the shares vest after 1 year and are no-longer subject to the company’s repurchase right. After the cliff, shares typically vest in monthly or quarterly instalments for the remaining 3 years. The repurchase price is a nominal amount, typically the amount the founder paid for the shares upon incorporation (ex. $0.00001/share).

BENEFITS: If the founder leaves within the vesting period, the company can exercise its repurchase right and repurchase those unvested shares. This is especially useful if a founder leaves early, such as within the first year and allowing the company to repurchase all the founder’s shares. Without this agreement, a founder could leave the company within the first year yet retain all their shares.

COMMON MISTAKES: (1) Too short of a term, for example 2 year vesting term when the founder is needed for at least 3 years in order to complete the product; and (2) setting the repurchase price too high resulting in shares that are too expensive for an early-stage company to repurchase.

2. Shareholders Agreement. A Shareholders Agreement addresses the relationship among the shareholders and the company and may often contain clauses addressing founders specifically. Relevant to a founder’s departure, the Shareholders Agreement may contain a section permitting the company and/or the shareholders (or maybe the other founders) to repurchase the departing founder’s shares. The Shareholders Agreement would contain a mechanism for valuing the shares and a process for completing the repurchase. Additionally, even if the shares were not purchased or no purchase mechanism exists, it may contain a voting trust serving to transfer the votes held by the founder’s shares to a company designee.

BENEFITS: By including a repurchase mechanism, the Shareholders Agreement can kick-in following expiration of a Reverse Vesting Agreement, providing a way to easily repurchase shares of a departing founder once that agreement has expired. Additionally, the voting trust ensures that the founder receives the financial benefit in the future of any shares they retain but by transferring the votes associated with those shares to a company designee it ensures that only people actively involved in the company can vote on company matters.

COMMON MISTAKES: (1) Drafting the Shareholders Agreement to only apply to initial shareholders and not containing provisions whereby the agreement automatically applies to new shareholders; and (2) not creating a clear process for valuing shares and a process for resolving any dispute over share value.

In summary, if you plan for shareholder problems at the start you will be well equipped should those problems arise in the future. While founders may not want to dwell on a divorce when they are optimistic about the future they will be glad they did if things turn for the worse down the road.