Skip to content

Beneficial ownership, corporate transparency and other updates affecting Newfoundland and Labrador corporations

Sarah Byrne and Tauna Staniland, QC

On November 16, 2021, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador proclaimed into force Bill 24, which amends the Corporations Act, RSNL 1990, c C-36 (the “Act”). The amendments remove the residency requirements for directors and increase the transparency of beneficial ownership of corporations by placing additional record keeping requirements upon privately held Newfoundland and Labrador corporations.

With respect to the amendments to increase transparency of beneficial ownership, all corporations formed under the Act, aside from public corporations, are now required to maintain a register of individuals with significant control (“ISC Register”) which must be updated at least annually.

An “individual with significant control” over a corporation includes individuals who:

  1. directly or indirectly hold or control a significant number of shares; or
  2. have direct or indirect control or direction over a significant number of shares of the corporation, that, if exercised, would result in control in fact of the corporation.

Under the Act, a “significant number of shares” means (1) shares that carry 25% or more of the voting rights attached to all of the corporation’s outstanding voting shares; or (2) shares that represent 25% or more of all of the corporation’s outstanding shares as measured by fair market value.

The register must contain the following information about every individual with significant control:

  1. full name, date of birth and last known address;
  2. the jurisdiction of residence for tax purposes;
  3. the day they became, or ceased to be, an individual with significant control;
  4. a description of how each individual has significant control over the corporation;
  5. a description of each step taken to ensure the information is accurate; and
  6. any other prescribed information.

At least once during each financial year, a corporation must take reasonable steps to ensure that it has identified all individuals with significant control, and ensure that the information in the register is accurate, complete and up to date.

Non-compliance can result in fines of up to $200,000, imprisonment up to six months, or both, for directors, officers or shareholders. Corporations may be fined up to $5,000 for failing to maintain a register or for failing to comply with a request for information from an investigative body.

If you would like our assistance in complying with these legislative changes and preparing your ISC Register, or if you have any questions about the new disclosure requirements, please contact us at compliance@stewartmckelvey.com. If you do not respond to this communication we will assume that you are handling compliance internally.


This client update is provided for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. If you have any questions about the above, please contact a member of our Corporate Formation/Reorganization group.

 

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Client Update: Court of Appeal confirms accounting firms may take on multiple mandates for the same company

June 14, 2017

Neil Jacobs, QC, Joe Thorne and Meaghan McCaw The Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal recently confirmed that accounting/auditing firms may take on several mandates in respect of companies that may or do become insolvent in Wabush Hotel Limited…

Read More

Negligence claims in paper-only independent medical examinations: Rubens v Sansome, 2017 NLCA 32

June 13, 2017

Joe Thorne and Brandon Gillespie An independent medical examination (“IME”) is a useful tool for insurers. An IME is an objective assessment of the claimant’s condition for the purpose of evaluating coverage and compensation. Where a…

Read More

Client Update: Mental injury? Expert diagnosis not required

June 12, 2017

On June 2, 2017 the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Saadati v. Moorhead, 2017 SCC 28, clarifying the evidence needed to establish mental injury. Neither expert evidence nor a diagnosed psychiatric illness…

Read More

Client Update: Proposed reform of Ontario’s labour and employment statutes

May 30, 2017

Mark Tector and Annie Gray This morning, May 30, 2017, Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne announced her government’s intention to introduce sweeping legislative reform of labour and employment laws. If passed, the proposed Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act, 2017 would…

Read More

Get ready: CASL’s consent grace period ends July 1, 2017

May 19, 2017

Canada’s Anti-Spam Law (“CASL”) is a federal law in force since July 1, 2014, aimed at eliminating unsolicited and malicious electronic communications and requires organizations to comply with specific consent, disclosure and unsubscribe requirements when…

Read More

Nothing fishy here: Federal Court dismisses application for judicial review in PIIFCAF case

May 18, 2017

Jennifer Taylor Introduction Kirby Elson had been fishing in Newfoundland and Labrador for about 50 years when the policy on Preserving the Independence of the Inshore Fleet in Canada’s Atlantic Fisheries (“PIIFCAF”) was introduced in…

Read More

Client Update: The Cannabis Act – Getting into the Weeds

May 9, 2017

Rick Dunlop, David Randell, Christine Pound, Sadira Jan and Kevin Landry The federal government’s introduction of the Cannabis Act, the first step in the legalization of marijuana (or cannabis), has understandably triggered a wide range of reactions in the Canadian business…

Read More

The Latest in Employment Law: A Stewart McKelvey Newsletter – Amendments to the Occupational Health and Safety Act, SNS 1996, c 7

May 9, 2017

Mark Tector and Annie Gray On April 26, 2017, the Government of Nova Scotia announced that amendments to the Occupational Health and Safety Act, which were passed in May of 2016, will officially come into force as of June…

Read More

Client Update: CPP disability benefits are deductible from awards for loss of earning capacity and loss of income in MVA claims

May 4, 2017

On May 2, 2017, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal issued a significant decision in Tibbetts v. Murphy, 2017 NSCA 35, on the proper interpretation of s. 113A of the Insurance Act. Specifically the issue was whether…

Read More

Protests and injunctions: is the presence of journalists a material fact for the court?

April 24, 2017

Joe Thorne and Amanda Whitehead A fundamental principle of our legal system is that all parties to a dispute should be given the opportunity to be heard. However, the law recognizes that some circumstances warrant speedy judicial…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top