Explore By Topic

Filter by:
Filter by:
Filter Close
Filter Dropdown Icon
Blog Posts

Legal Entities Vs. Employer of Record

It has been said that the most valuable assets of a business entity are its people. Employees, workforce, human capital––whatever the preferred term, the entity's employment of a labor force – its status as an employer – carries with it a myriad of benefits, tax, and labor law compliance obligations. The complexity and nuance of remaining in compliance with employment-related laws, regulations, and internal policies sometimes warrant time or expertise that is simply lacking within the business entity or unable to be allocated to the compliance obligations at hand. Within this compliance space, the relationship between a legal entity, employer of record, co-employer, and joint employer becomes apparent.In such cases, a legal entity may decide to contract out some administrative components of its employment-related compliance obligations to third-party entities such as an Employer of Record entity or a Professional Employer Organization. Some considerations of outsourcing employer compliance obligations are whether the employer contracting for services (the “client-entity") needs to be formed/registered in the jurisdiction in which the employee performs the work, what compliance obligations are outsourced, and which one (or both) of the contracting parties is considered the employer for purposes of risks and liabilities associated with the status of the employer.Employer Compliance ObligationsA legal entity can be defined as a company, organization, or institution – be it in the form of a limited liability company, corporation, limited partnership, general partnership, or business trust – that has legal obligations and rights. The compliance obligations include those concerning entity formation, registration, regulatory filings, reporting, and remitting of payments. For example, some entities are required to have registered agents, file annual reports, and file transactional reports at the time of formation, merger, or dissolution. Business entities may also be subject to industry-specific compliance obligations such as those in insurance, banking, healthcare, and pharmaceutical industries.A legal entity may or may not be an employer. Whatever the definition of the employment relationship as given by a particular statute, regulation, or case law, as an employer, the entity is accountable for compliance obligations arising out of its status. For example, US-based employers are required to calculate and withhold federal income tax, social security tax, state income tax, and other taxes from employees’ wages, remit the withholdings to the appropriate tax agency and file quarterly reports. Employers may also have compliance obligations stemming from the retirement and health-related benefits it offers employees, such as disclosure, recordkeeping, and/or reporting under the Employment Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) or the Affordable Care Act (ACA). An employer’s employment practices such as employment verification and pre-employment background checks can give rise to compliance obligations, for example, under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) or separations of employment giving rise to compliance obligations under unemployment insurance laws. Lastly, employers can have compliance obligations around workplace facilities and conditions such as those imposed by workers’ compensation and the Occupational Safety & Health Act (OSHA). The Employer of RecordAn employer of record contracts with a client-entity to assume certain compliance obligations the client-entity has with respect to its status as an employer. The employer of record serves in an administrative capacity, distinct from the day-to-day, onsite operations over which the client entity maintains control and direction. With this contractual division of administrative and operational oversight, the employer of record becomes the direct employer of the client-entity’s employee(s), assuming the risks and liabilities associated with the contracted-for services. These services can include pre-employment screening, entering and managing employment contracts with employees, visa applications and immigration compliance, collecting and tracking hours worked, payroll processing and tax withholding, benefits administration, workers’ compensation and unemployment administration, and severance arrangements, all administered in a manner compliant with the benefits, tax, and labor laws of the country and locale in or from which the employee works.Employer of record arrangements are routinely used in the global and domestic employment mobility contexts and may offer several benefits to a legal entity that wants to establish a presence in a different state or country than the jurisdiction in which it is formed/registered.Co-employment and Joint EmploymentIn addition to engaging an employer of record wherein the employer of record takes on specified liabilities and risks as the employer, a client entity can also contract out its employment-related compliance obligations by entering a co-employment relationship with a professional employer organization (PEO). In a co-employment relationship, the client-entity shares employment status with the PEO. In other words, unlike with an Employer of Record entity which is considered the employer, both the PEO and the client entity are considered employers but have contractually agreed which party will assume primary responsibility (and shared liability/risk) for compliance obligations. For example, if the PEO failed to remit payroll taxes or workers' compensation insurance premiums as its contract with the client entity required, the client entity could be held financially liable by the applicable government agencies.Furthermore, unlike partnering with an employer of record entity which does not (initially) require the client-entity to have a registered or formed legal entity in the jurisdiction in or from which the employee performs work, when engaging with a PEO, the client-entity has a registered legal entity in the jurisdiction where it co-employs employees. The relationship between the PEO and the client-entity is intended as an ongoing relationship and not as a temporary relationship as with an employee leasing arrangement for staffing projects and tasks that have a start and end date.As mentioned above, whether an entity is considered an employer can revolve around whether that entity controls and directs the day-to-day operations of employees (as distinct from the entity performing only employment-related administrative tasks). Whereas co-employment focuses on contractually agreed upon administrative services (and sometimes strategic services or business advising), a joint employer relationship is focused on the element of control and which entities benefit from the employee’s work. Joint employment can be seen in employee leasing or temporary staffing situations where the staffing agency is the primary employer, and the client-entity becomes the secondary employer through its control and direction of the workforce. The status of a joint employer can become important for determining whether the client-entity will be subject to liability and risk for, for example, certain wage and hour employment practices regulated by such statutes as the Fair Labor Standards Act and labor practices as regulated by the National Labor Relations Act.In SummaryIn summary, legal entities have options when it comes to contracting out employment-related compliance obligations. The contracting process allows a client entity to unshoulder the administrative challenges that come with being a compliant employer by shifting its employer status to a third party in an employer of record, co-employment, or joint employment relationship.

By
Adrian Camara
22/11/2021
All
EMEA
Blog Posts

4 Critical Steps in Corporate Subsidiary Management

What is a Subsidiary?Corporate business owners understand the value of creating companies to secure and safeguard the owner’s personal assets. Oftentimes, corporations with a large portfolio of assets create new legal entities to hold individual assets or a class of assets, such as real estate, stock, or materials, while controlling over 50% of the subsidiary’s shares, to protect the corporation’s assets. Each new legal entity that is wholly owned by the parent corporation is considered a subsidiary of the parent corporation.Using subsidiaries as a holding company for the parent corporation’s assets provides significant legal protection from lawsuits against the parent corporation and precludes claimants from going after the parent corporation’s other assets by essentially removing the parent corporation’s liability to that of the subsidiary. Subsidiaries also allow quick and efficient due diligence if the parent corporation pursues liquidation. Further, if a parent corporation seeks financing, it can efficiently enable its subsidiaries to act as guarantors and grantors of security. Creating subsidiaries introduces many legal and business complexities that require continuous attention. The benefits of corporate subsidiaries are manifold, but parent corporations often fall victim to being accountable for the subsidiary’s liabilities because of poor subsidiary management. This article suggests three steps corporations should take in managing their subsidiaries to ensure effective subsidiary management and the security of the parent corporation’s assets. #1- Pre-Formation PlanningBefore forming the subsidiary, the parent corporation should plan and organize which assets or functions of the business the subsidiary would hold, where the assets or functions will be located, and whether the subsidiary will conduct business and hire employees. The answers to these questions will allow each subsidiary to serve a precise purpose, which will increase efficiency at every stage and simplify its governance.The parent corporation’s managing officers should also consider centralizing all decisions regarding the subsidiaries’ management with the corporation’s legal counsel or the corporate secretary and passing a resolution authorizing the corporation’s legal counsel or the corporate secretary to take certain actions on the corporation’s behalf, such as the formation of subsidiary companies, deciding the appropriate jurisdiction for each subsidiary’s formation, filing all necessary documents and reports for each subsidiary, maintaining each subsidiary’s records, and paying any required taxes and fees. Initially, each subsidiary will prepare articles of incorporation and bylaws or an operating agreement. The parent corporation should pursue uniformity and should draft articles of incorporation and bylaws or operating agreements that are substantially similar in form to ensure no contradictory clauses or obligations. The subsidiary’s bylaws or operating agreement should include clauses that provide indemnification to the subsidiary’s directors and limit the directors’ personal liability. Both the parent corporation and subsidiary should also pass separate resolutions and a contribution agreement for the issuance of stock in return for capital contribution, which will allow the subsidiary to demonstrate it has adequate capital to exist as an independent company.#2- Maintaining the Subsidiary’s StatusIt is foreseeable that parent corporations may forget calendar dates when taxes or annual reports (or equivalent filings, as applicable under the jurisdiction’s laws) are due for each of its subsidiaries. When a subsidiary’s taxes or annual reports are past due, the subsidiary is considered not to be in good standing, and the parent corporation exposes itself to the liabilities of the subsidiary (depending on the jurisdiction’s laws and whether the parent company is a corporation). This scenario occurred in a recent case where the parent corporation was successfully sued for money the subsidiary owed to a contractor because the subsidiary was not in good standing.Accordingly, it is paramount that parent corporations assign a person responsible within each subsidiary for keeping track of due dates for any taxes and annual reports. The subsidiary then should consider passing a resolution authorizing the person responsible within each subsidiary to explicitly take any actions necessary to maintain the subsidiary’s good standing. The person responsible could be one of the subsidiary’s directors or the subsidiary’s legal counsel.Although the parent corporation wholly owns its subsidiary, the subsidiary should hold its own annual meetings or execute unanimous written consents. If the parent corporation has many subsidiaries, although the directors may be the same, each subsidiary should hold its own annual meetings or execute unanimous written consents rather than performing the same jointly. If possible, the directors of each subsidiary should be different individuals. Through the subsidiary’s resolutions, each subsidiary should be able to demonstrate that the subsidiary is its own company rather than the parent corporation acting through the subsidiary. #3- Document EverythingIf one were to ask a group of attorneys for some non-billable legal advice, they could probably agree on two words: Document everything. Such is the importance of maintaining accurate and up-to-date records on everything. Keep every conversation, contract, note, deed, receipt, complaint, settlement, change of information, and file. More importantly, each subsidiary should diligently create corporate records for every action that requires board resolutions or consent, as provided by the bylaws or operating agreement. Every stock or asset transfer, material contract, annual meeting, director elections or appointments, and any significant corporate action should be documented in a board resolution. Within the resolution approving of certain actions, a catch-all clause approving of “all corporate actions necessary to further the company’s interests” should also be included to allow the flexibility of demonstrating that all actions performed were by the subsidiary rather than the parent corporation. After creating subsidiaries, document recording systems often become—for lack of better words—sloppy. Papers get misplaced, lost, or confused. To remedy this, management should consider creating separate filing systems for each subsidiary rather than centralizing document management with the parent corporation. This function can also be achieved by having someone responsible for accurately filing documents and assigning them to the correct subsidiary’s folders. All documents should be well-organized and filed with the appropriate subsidiary.‍#4- Invest in Tech SolutionsA cloud-based legal management system streamlines subsidiary management and allows its users to plan, maintain, and document each subsidiary’s records seamlessly. Further, a cloud-based entity management solution minimizes the risks of non-compliance with jurisdictional regulations. With a focus on increasing productivity, scalability, and an automating manual process, Athennian leverages user data to quickly populate reports, certificates, and other necessary documents in one accessible program, eliminating the headache that comes with managing subsidiaries the traditional, time-consuming way. 

By
Adrian Camara
17/11/2021
All
EMEA
Blog Posts

The Impact of the ESG Regulations on Entity Management in North America

Environmental, Social and Governance Disclosure Obligations Lately, there has been a great deal of news in the media about the potential for ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) reporting regulations to soon become mandatory for North American entities, and in fact, on June 16, 2021, the U.S. House of Representatives enacted legislation that imposes both due diligence and disclosure requirements on companies that are publicly traded. Indeed, the COP26 Summit, the United Nations Climate Change Conference 2021, has highlighted not only the importance of tackling the globe’s long-term shift in temperature and weather patterns as a direct result of human activity, but also the vital role of business in this struggle.Indeed, at the COP26 conference, the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) was created with the aim of facilitating a global and harmonized system of specific sustainability disclosure standards. With ESG representing the philosophy that companies should look to align their operations with values that support sustainable economic development, there is valid concern that this will create risks and onerous obligations that may potentially impact on the ability of a company to create long-term value. This is linked to disquiet not only about climate change, but also connected issues such as resource scarcity and social criteria related to a company’s business relationships, governance, and its treatment of employees.How Legal Technology Facilitates ESG Compliance Yet ESG and the forthcoming regulatory requirements provide a unique opportunity for legal entities to benefit from the operationalization of ESG standards and disclosure requirements. It is legal technology that will provide your legal or business organization with the crucial ingredient for the implementation of ESG principles in your corporate strategy, and this ultimately depends upon successful integration. This will involve the organization-wide incorporation of ESG into numerous matters, including the enactment of workforce diversity and inclusion policies, the business credentials of partners and your investment strategy, as well as your organization’s approach to compensation and the identification of ESG risks. This is undeniably a great deal of work, and there is a lot to consider. There are, however, unquestionable benefits for a firm that incorporates a more integrated approach to ESG. Indeed, to name just one compelling reason to implement ESG principles in your organization, there is significant evidence that sustainable corporate practices tend to result in increased performance. An open and integrated approach to working on the basis of ESG principles will also be undoubtedly effective in enhancing your reputation. The reverse of this approach has proven to be devastating for companies; an organization’s failure to ensure visibility into its own activities can result in the imposition of legal fines, lost profits, director liability, and a damaged reputation. Indeed; the impact of “high ESG controversy” events has been shown to result in the underperformance of shares even a distance of two years later.The previous voluntary and essentially market-led practice under which organizations provided their own data and disclosures, and which were often not even externally verified, will no longer be acceptable. To this end, the use of legal technology to facilitate the integration of ESG principles in your organization will be crucial. With the explosion of new data sources, business models, and external forces, we are finding ourselves in unchartered territory where traditional corporate governance may not be sufficient to address the risks involved. The ESG and corporate social responsibility concerns that impact how companies interact with stakeholders including employees, customers, shareholders, and suppliers mean that any attempt by law firms and the legal departments of organizations to track these requirements manually will be a recipe for disaster.Yet many legal departments are already weighed down by heavy workloads and budgetary restrictions and lack the capacity to properly manage the extra tasks imposed by the requirements of ESG compliance. Often, the tax and finance departments are brought in to support the legal team, but they are likely to be struggling with their own pressures and priorities. While some firms do possess internal solutions to entity management, they are often bespoke and lack the scale, convenience, and responsiveness of an off-the-shelf software solution.Legal Technology and the Integration of ESG Factors It is fortunate, therefore, that software entity management provides a vital means for the proper centralization of your organization’s data, and for ensuring that your ESG goals and forthcoming disclosure requirements are met. Entity management can be used to integrate ESG regulations into the day-to-day operations of a company. As the world grows ever more global, organizations will need to focus on building awareness of social and environmental responsibility.Indeed, entity management software provides a means by which organizations can collect, benchmark, and report ESG data in a seamless and flexible manner. Its comprehensiveness means that it is easy to create dashboards and reports that measure and report accountability across all organization units so that lawyers and executives can see where improvements are needed quickly, effectively, with robust metrics reports. Entity management software, through interactive dashboards and reports, means that organizations can proactively identify risk. It also helps to drive business operations, ultimately leading to increased sales and market share. By the inclusion of multiple ESG considerations within your organization’s internal policies or procedures, the associated processes are delivered through the software entity management system, monitoring compliance with automation specifically designed to integrate and analyze your data. Crucially, the software streamlines process time by avoiding the delays caused by manual processes, eliminating the need for IT staff to maintain multiple spreadsheets or different information technology systems. Implementing Entity Management Software in Advance of ESG Disclosure RequirementsThe imminent requirement that ESG disclosure will soon be required of SEC-listed companies means that entity management organization should no longer be overlooked, given the huge value it provides. Through an automated workflow, an entity management solution will enable an automated workflow for all governance and ESG activities, providing a centralized foundation that will ensure an organization’s compliance with all legal and financial requirements. With a leading legal entity management system in place, you will reap the benefits of the most up-to-date legal technology. The previous time and effort expended on monitoring compliance of legal and business functions across jurisdictions will finally be eliminated, ensuring that you stay ahead of the game and are in place to meet all ESG compliance and reporting obligations.

By
Adrian Camara
10/11/2021
All
Entity Management
Regulations & Compliance
Blog Posts

The Solution to Outdated Software: Athennian vs. EnAct

According to EY research, 96% of legal teams face challenges with their entity management due to organizational challenges, mismanaged formats, and other unique complexities. With a concerningly large percent of the industry reporting inefficiencies, it is important to take a look at the existing infrastructure that supports this particular function of law. Entity management is one of the most laborious processes in corporate law, as it requires constant maintenance and review. Most entity management platforms on the market today were created before the year 2000, meaning they were designed pre-cloud, pre-wireless, and before the tech standard became at-your-fingertips-accessible. Shouldn’t a process so complex have a product that not only matches its nuance but also enhances it through today’s best-in-class technology? Feature Comparison:As EnAct nears its end of life, users are considering switching to similar Corporatek systems or migrating to a modern, scalable, cloud-based solution that understands the day-to-day needs of a legal professional. Unlike EnAct, Athennian requires no installation or IT management and lives securely in the cloud. Without constant IT management, businesses save time for higher-value tasks and can put budget toward advancing their technology road-maps instead of depleting IT resources.Athennian provides users with a secure and flexible solution to their entity management. The ability to add unlimited users to Athennian gives teams the flexibility to collaborate and share data with stakeholders easily.With Athennian, users can access the system from anywhere with no limitations. This is a direct contrast to Corporatek’s VPN requirements needed for remote access, and their pay-per-user model. Athennian’s ease-of-use is fueled by its rapid auto-population function, allowing users to create signature-ready documents with the click of a button, whereas EnAct’s manual functions add friction and time to an already complex process. In addition to Athennian’s ease of use, our dedicated product team maintains a system that works with 99.99% uptime. Athennian’s routine weekly updates seamlessly integrate into the system, unlike Corporate systems which are frequently down and often require manual intervention and maintenanceWell-loved features of EnAct can also be found in Athennian. For example, both systems allow for easily exportable digital minute books, and have access to intricate org charts that map subsidiary relationships. However, with Athennian’s platform, certain regions can eFile, streamlining the entity management process even further. For a complete feature comparison, you can download our Feature Comparison sheet:‍Upgrading to Athennian From EnActAthennian’s dedicated migration teams make transferring your business-critical data simple, secure, and streamlined.Athennian has developed a proven methodology for successfully transferring your data from EnAct to its new home in Athennian. Athennian can expertly migrate all data from EnAct, such as:Entity & compliance detailsAddresses, agents, registrationsBy-laws, articles, governance, etc. Shareholders, share classes, transactions, certificates, etc. Directors, officers, etc. Custom coded documentsFor a full overview of the migration process from EnAct to Athennian, you can download our Migration Sheet, here.

By
Molly Greville
5/11/2021
All
EMEA
Entity Management
Legal Operations
Blog Posts

Gartner Urges Legal Teams to Take on a Technology Strategy by 2025

It is more important than ever to maintain resilience and prepare for capricious circumstances in today’s world of constantly changing variables (e.g., climate change, political and social upheaval, economic volatility, the COVID-19 Pandemic). According to a recent report from Gartner, research suggests that businesses that have demonstrated this durability share three critical attributes: Responsive risk management, a dynamic culture, and a flexible structure. Responsive Risk ManagementOrganizations that prioritize risk management through implementation from a senior leadership level are more adaptable to unforeseen changes. Constant coordination, management, and mitigation prove to yield better outcomes; however, only 13% of respondents feel confident that they can manage cross-functional risks without pulling from other business areas.A Dynamic Culture‍Gartner characterizes a dynamic culture as “communicative, collaborative, cooperative, and creative.” The research concludes that organizations with time-efficient and relevant decision-making processes are more likely to thrive competitively.‍A Flexible Structure‍By adopting practices that leverage technology and remote-working, teams create a globally diverse and competitive environment and empower a more inclusive workforce. Legal teams that have embraced digital and remote-enabled practices have seen huge benefits since the start of 2020. Adopting a Technology StrategyAdopting a strategy or roadmap is uncharted territory for an industry that has been historically resistant to technological change. Among those surveyed by Gartner, only “9% of respondents feel confident that they can create a cohesive, long-term plan for digitalizing the legal department.” Gartner reports that legal departments struggle to leverage technology and rely on “market hype” rather than addressing their unique needs and investing in solutions that will impact their broader business outcomes. Action StepsAccording to the survey, there are three key action steps to follow when implementing a technology strategy: 1. Identify ChallengesGartner urges legal teams to identify their challenge areas and prioritize those technologies that can improve their most pressing needs. In looking at the business at large and identifying the overarching challenges, the logical solutions become apparent. ‍2. Create Operating ProcessesAlign your team with new operations that supplement your technology investments. A technological roadmap requires adaptation and ground-up tactics for creating streamlined processes. ‍3. Plan & TestAccording to the report, it is critical to involve stakeholders when identifying future needs. With top-down alignment, you can "pressure-test hypotheses" and create designs for solutions moving forward.Need More Help Evaluating Solutions?Because legal teams are unpracticed in the evaluation stage of software buying, Athennian has created a guide for purchasing legal entity management software.For best practices and a detailed checklist for what to look for in a technology vendor, download Athennian’s Essential Checklist here. 

By
Molly Greville
1/11/2021
All
Entity Management
Legal Operations
No results found.
There are no results with this criteria. Try changing your search.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Cloud-based entity & subsidiary management platform
Paper Interactive, Inc. 2024. "Athennian" is a registered trademark of Paper Interactive, Inc. in the United States, Canada and other countries. All rights reserved.