Posts Tagged Lawyer

Okt 17 2018

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte – Liability of managing directors for delay in filing for insolvency

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte – Liability of managing directors for delay in filing for insolvency

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte - Liability of managing directors for delay in filing for insolvency

If a company is faced with imminent insolvency or over-indebtedness, the managing director must file for insolvency. Failure to do so in due time may result in him or her being held personally liable.

It is often difficult for managing directors and other governing bodies to accept that the company is facing insolvency. Understandably, every possible measure is taken to avoid insolvency in a lot of these cases. Notwithstanding this, managing directors should not under any circumstances ignore signs of imminent insolvency, as one of their duties is to file for insolvency in due time. We at the commercial law firm GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte note that the managing director might otherwise be held personally liable for the delay in filing for insolvency. Our experience shows that many managing directors are unaware of when an insolvency petition needs to be filed and which payments can still made.

In principle, an insolvency petition must be submitted without undue delay, but no later than three weeks after the company becomes insolvent or over-indebted. A company is considered to be over-indebted if the company“s assets no longer cover its existing liabilities. In the case of insolvency, the company is no longer able to meet its payment obligations. A company is deemed to be insolvent if the vast majority of liabilities can no longer be settled, even if individual payments are still being made.

In that case, managing directors must above all take care to ensure that no payments are made that diminish the insolvency estate. Otherwise, they may be liable to pay damages. According to a ruling of the Bundesgerichtshof (BGH), Germany“s Federal Supreme Court, from 4 July 2017, payments made under these circumstances are only permissible if the compensation or return contribution offsets the reduction in the insolvency estate (Az.: II ZR 319/15). To this end, the compensation or return contribution to be added to the insolvency estate needs to be suitable for use by the creditors. The BGH noted that wages or services are generally not suitable for these purposes. The Court went on to state that if the managing director nevertheless arranges for payment of wages, he or she may be liable to make restitution.

A looming threat of insolvency may entail a high risk of personal liability for the managing director. That is why legal advice ought to be sought if there are signs that the company is on the verge of insolvency or over-indebtedness. Lawyers who are experienced in the field of company law can serve as expert advisers.

https://www.grprainer.com/en/legal-advice/company-law/restructuring-insolvency.html

GRP Rainer LLP www.grprainer.com/en/ is an international firm of lawyers and tax advisors who are specialists in commercial law. The firm counsels commercial and industrial companies and corporations, as well as associations, small- and mid-sized businesses, self-employed freelancers and private individuals worldwide from offices Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London UK.

Contact
GRP Rainer LLP
Michael Rainer
Augustinerstraße 10
50667 Cologne
Phone: +49 221-27 22 75-0
Fax: +49 221-27 22 75-24
E-Mail: info@grprainer.com
Url: http://www.grprainer.com/en

Okt 16 2018

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte – Experience drafting franchise agreements

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte – Experience drafting franchise agreements

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte - Experience drafting franchise agreements

A franchise agreement sets out the basic principles governing the relationship between franchisee and franchisor. For this reason, it is of great importance to both parties.

Franchising has become an established practice in many industries. It involves the franchisee running its own independent business and bearing the associated economic risks. At the same time, the franchisee uses the uniform branding of the typically already well-known franchisor in return for payment of a fee. This relationship gives rise to rights and obligations for both parties, and these are laid out in the franchise agreement. We at the commercial law firm GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte note that experience shows that the contractual provisions ought to be as comprehensive and detailed as possible to ensure minimal room for interpretation and a stable legal basis.

Due to the fact that there is normally a gap in knowledge that favours the franchisor, it is generally viewed as the stronger contracting party. As a result, it is subject to duties of disclosure vis-à-vis its contractual partner. While the relevant requirements have yet to be fleshed out by the legislature, the franchisor cannot give the franchisee false expectations, e.g. by presenting completely unrealistic economic figures. This kind of approach can potentially lead to the franchisee bringing claims for damages.

The parties largely have free reign when drafting the franchise agreement; there are no clear legal requirements. Instead, the franchise agreement is a type of mixed contract that particularly includes elements of a purchase agreement, a lease and a loan agreement. Examples of important aspects that should absolutely be regulated by the agreement are the duration, territorial protection and marketing. In addition, the conditions pertaining to the cessation or termination of the contractual relationship should also clearly defined.

When it comes to franchise law, rules and regulations from a variety of different legal fields need to be observed. These include commercial law, competition law, antitrust law and employment law, among others. In light of these complex requirements, it is good idea to obtain comprehensive legal advice from a single source. The contracting parties“ opportunities and expectations ought to be realistically assessed and their rights and obligations precisely defined. Nevertheless, it is always possible for difficulties to arise over the course of the partnership. Lawyers who are experienced in the field of franchise law can assist in overcoming such problems and advise on matters ranging from drafting agreements to terminating the franchise relationship.

https://www.grprainer.com/en/legal-advice/commercial-law.html

GRP Rainer LLP www.grprainer.com/en/ is an international firm of lawyers and tax advisors who are specialists in commercial law. The firm counsels commercial and industrial companies and corporations, as well as associations, small- and mid-sized businesses, self-employed freelancers and private individuals worldwide from offices Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London UK.

Contact
GRP Rainer LLP
Michael Rainer
Augustinerstraße 10
50667 Cologne
Phone: +49 221-27 22 75-0
Fax: +49 221-27 22 75-24
E-Mail: info@grprainer.com
Url: http://www.grprainer.com/en

Okt 15 2018

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte – Liability of managing directors in the event of competition violations

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte – Liability of managing directors in the event of competition violations

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte - Liability of managing directors in the event of competition violations

A company“s legal infringements can also come back to haunt its managing director. That being said, the latter“s liability towards third parties is strictly limited.

Legal infringements are particularly common in the fields of trademark and competition law. Our experience at the commercial law firm GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte shows that in these cases claims are often brought against the managing director of the company acting unlawfully as well. Having said that, the managing director“s personal liability towards third parties in event of competition violations is now strictly limited.

As early as 2014, the Bundesgerichtshof (BGH), Germany“s Federal Supreme Court, considerably curtailed managing directors“ liability (Az.: I ZR 242/12). The BGH distanced itself from the prevailing case law at the time, according to which managing directors“ liability came into consideration if the managing director knew of employees“ competition violations and did nothing to prevent them. The Karlsruhe judges held that the managing director“s status as a governing body and their general responsibility for the company do not by themselves give rise to an obligation on the part of the managing director to prevent competition violations in relation to external third parties. Mere knowledge of a competition violation and failure to prevent it are not enough to trigger liability on the part of the managing director.

Managing directors“ liability might nevertheless come into question if the managing director personally committed the unlawful act or ordered that it be carried out or, pursuant to the principles of tort law, a duty to intervene arises by virtue of his or her position, with the result that the managing director“s conduct can ultimately be blamed for the competition violation.

Furthermore, the managing director has a duty towards the company to ensure that legal infringements such as competition violations do not occur. If the managing director fails in this respect to fulfil their duty to manage the business in a prudent manner, he or she may still be liable towards the company. However, according to the case law of the BGH, this duty does not extend to external third parties, as general liability would impose an almost incalculable risk on the managing director.

Legal disputes are common when it comes to issues pertaining to managing directors“ liability. Lawyers who are experienced in the field of company law can provide managing directors and other executive organs as well as companies with comprehensive advice.

https://www.grprainer.com/en/legal-advice/company-law.html

GRP Rainer LLP www.grprainer.com/en/ is an international firm of lawyers and tax advisors who are specialists in commercial law. The firm counsels commercial and industrial companies and corporations, as well as associations, small- and mid-sized businesses, self-employed freelancers and private individuals worldwide from offices Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London UK.

Contact
GRP Rainer LLP
Michael Rainer
Augustinerstraße 10
50667 Cologne
Phone: +49 221-27 22 75-0
Fax: +49 221-27 22 75-24
E-Mail: info@grprainer.com
Url: http://www.grprainer.com/en

Okt 12 2018

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte – Assessment of removing a shareholder-managing director for good cause

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte – Assessment of removing a shareholder-managing director for good cause

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte - Assessment of removing a shareholder-managing director for good cause

It is possible to remove a shareholder-managing director from their post if there is good cause justifying this action, but good cause must be present at the time of the resolution“s adoption.

The general meeting of the shareholders is the main decision-making body of a GmbH, a type of German private limited liability company. It is normally responsible for deciding whether a shareholder-managing director is removed from their post as well as whether their employment contract is terminated. However, the shareholder-managing director is also personally entitled to vote, which means that he or she might potentially be able to thwart a resolution to remove them from their post. Notwithstanding this, the shareholder-managing director is not allowed to exercise their voting rights if their removal is being proposed based on good cause. We at the commercial law firm GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte note that the assessment of whether there is in fact good cause justifying removal is therefore the decisive factor.

In practice, it has frequently been a controversial point of discussion whether it is sufficient for removal to formally take place on the basis of good cause or whether good cause requires objective and transparent underlying proof. In a judgment from 4 April 2017, the Bundesgerichtshof (BGH), Germany“s Federal Supreme Court, provided clarity (Az.: II ZR 77/16). The Court held that for the purposes of courts reviewing the validity of shareholder resolutions concerned with the removal of a GmbH shareholder-managing director or termination of their employment contract, it comes down to whether or not good cause was in fact present at the time of the resolution“s adoption. It went on to state that in the context of a legal dispute, the requirement to demonstrate and provide evidence of good cause must be met by the party whose claim relies on its existence.

In the case in question, there were differences of opinion among the shareholders of a GmbH. The general meeting of the shareholders was supposed to vote on the removal of the shareholder-managing director. However, the shareholder-managing director owned 51 per cent of the voting shares, and the attempt to remove him failed as a result.

The BGH ruled that the shareholder-managing director had been allowed to exercise his right to vote because the good cause justifying his removal and termination of his employment contract was not objectively present at the time of the resolution“s adoption. The Court noted that there is good cause if it would no longer be reasonable to expect the company to continue employing the managing director, in particular due to gross dereliction of his duties.

Disputes among shareholders are common. Lawyers who are experienced in the field of company law can advise shareholders and managing directors.

https://www.grprainer.com/en/legal-advice/company-law.html

GRP Rainer LLP www.grprainer.com/en/ is an international firm of lawyers and tax advisors who are specialists in commercial law. The firm counsels commercial and industrial companies and corporations, as well as associations, small- and mid-sized businesses, self-employed freelancers and private individuals worldwide from offices Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London UK.

Contact
GRP Rainer LLP
Michael Rainer
Augustinerstraße 10
50667 Cologne
Phone: +49 221-27 22 75-0
Fax: +49 221-27 22 75-24
E-Mail: info@grprainer.com
Url: http://www.grprainer.com/en

Okt 11 2018

Genesis Mining terminating unprofitable contracts

Genesis Mining terminating unprofitable contracts

Genesis Mining terminating unprofitable contracts

The price of Bitcoin has fallen sharply. This has put pressure on mining companies such as Genesis Mining, which is now seeking to terminate or upgrade contracts with its clients.

Last year, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies hit a high. Though many sought to profit from this boom, mining cryptocurrencies is energy intensive and requires a lot of computing power. This makes it difficult for individuals to profit from mining. Some have turned to mining companies such as Genesis Mining to rent computing power. The fall in the price of Bitcoin has exacerbated the problems associated with running profitable mining operations. For this reason, Genesis Mining notified its investors in August that it would be terminating open-ended contracts. As an alternative, we at the commercial law firm GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte can report that the company is offering an upgrade to a contract with a five-year term.

Genesis Mining was established in Germany in 2013 and within a few years grew to become one of the leading cloud mining firms. The company moved its computing power to Iceland, among other places, due to cheaper electricity prices and it being easier to cool computers. The firm offers its clients various infrastructure packages for mining cryptocurrencies. Yet Bitcoin“s downward trend and the increasing difficulty associated with mining is making it more challenging to run profitable mining operations. It means that maintenance costs are higher than the returns on some contracts. These open-ended contracts are now being terminated by Genesis Mining within a 60-day period. Its clients are being offered to change their contracts as an alternative, with the new contracts featuring a reduced price per 1 TH/s of 180 US dollars, down from 285 US dollars. However, the contracts have a five-year term.

This five-year term could become a problem, as it is not possible to predict trends for cryptocurrencies, mining or legal regulations. This has become abundantly clear from the substantial fluctuations in the price of Bitcoin in recent months. Moreover, mining for cryptocurrencies is likely to become increasingly complex and require greater computing power. This might result not only in mining becoming less profitable but also major financial losses. Uncertain clients of Genesis Mining as well as other mining companies can turn to experienced lawyers.

https://www.grprainer.com/en/legal-advice/capital-markets-law.html

GRP Rainer LLP www.grprainer.com/en/ is an international firm of lawyers and tax advisors who are specialists in commercial law. The firm counsels commercial and industrial companies and corporations, as well as associations, small- and mid-sized businesses, self-employed freelancers and private individuals worldwide from offices Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London UK.

Contact
GRP Rainer LLP
Michael Rainer
Augustinerstraße 10
50667 Cologne
Phone: +49 221-27 22 75-0
Fax: +49 221-27 22 75-24
E-Mail: info@grprainer.com
Url: http://www.grprainer.com/en

Okt 10 2018

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte – Assessment of shareholder“s right of access

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte – Assessment of shareholder“s right of access

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte - Assessment of shareholder"s right of access

The shareholders of a GmbH have extensive rights of access and inspection which go beyond the general meeting and that enable them to inform themselves about what is happening within the business. These shareholder rights cannot be restricted in the articles of association. And yet, we at the commercial law firm GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte note that even shareholders“ requests for information are subject to limitations in exceptional circumstances.

For the purposes of assessing whether the managing director must grant a shareholder the information the latter requested, it is first necessary for the managing director to determine whether the company“s interests could be harmed by the information or whether this information could be used for non-company purposes. Should the managing director come to the conclusion that, in the interests of the company, the information ought not to be granted, the final decision is not, however, his or hers to make; it is the general meeting of the shareholders that has the final word. It is essential that the managing director be aware that final decision-making authority does not rest with him or her and that misconduct may have serious consequences for them. If he or she acts on their own authority in denying access to the information, they may even render themselves liable to pay damages and their employment contract could be terminated without notice.

The general meeting of the shareholders decides whether a shareholder needs to be granted his rights of access and inspection. The shareholder requesting the information is not allowed to take part in the vote. If the general meeting of the shareholders decides that the information should not be granted, the shareholder still has the option of enforcing his rights of access and inspection in court.

A shareholder“s rights of access and inspection cover all of the company“s legal and economic activities. This includes activities and processes that have already been completed as well as projects and proposals that are still in the planning stage. The shareholder can request access to view agreements, the accounts, logs and records etc. In doing so, the shareholder can decide for him- or herself whether they wish to exercise their right of access, their right of inspection or both. The managing director is then obliged to comply with the shareholder“s request as soon as possible assuming there are no grounds for refusing access to the information or calling a general meeting of the shareholders.

Lawyers who are experienced in the field of company law can advise shareholders and managing directors.

https://www.grprainer.com/en/legal-advice/company-law.html

GRP Rainer LLP www.grprainer.com/en/ is an international firm of lawyers and tax advisors who are specialists in commercial law. The firm counsels commercial and industrial companies and corporations, as well as associations, small- and mid-sized businesses, self-employed freelancers and private individuals worldwide from offices Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London UK.

Contact
GRP Rainer LLP
Michael Rainer
Augustinerstraße 10
50667 Cologne
Phone: +49 221-27 22 75-0
Fax: +49 221-27 22 75-24
E-Mail: info@grprainer.com
Url: http://www.grprainer.com/en

Okt 9 2018

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte – Assessment of claims for damages in response to kickbacks

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte – Assessment of claims for damages in response to kickbacks

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte - Assessment of claims for damages in response to kickbacks

Corruption, attempted bribery and kickbacks are all commonplace in commercial life. Aggrieved parties can assert claims on account of damage caused by acts contrary to public policy.

Up until the end of the 20th century, it was still possible in Germany to claim bribes paid to foreign business partners against tax as „nützliche Aufwendungen“, i.e. beneficial expenditures. Times have changed. Kickback payments made by German firms have been punishable by law since 2002. We at the commercial law firm GRP Rechtsanwälte note that this has led to greater accountability of businesses and their managers. Kickback payments are contrary to public policy. According to sec. 826 of the Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB), the German Civil Code, a person who inflicts damage on another person in a manner contrary to public policy is liable to pay compensation for the damage.

Assessing and proving whether damage has been inflicted because of an illegal payment arrangement can sometimes prove challenging, since the party claiming compensation due to a kickback arrangement made without their knowledge must first be able to prove its existence. It is enough, however, for them to be able to present sufficient evidence indicating that a kickback agreement was concluded. In a ruling from 18 January 2018, the Bundesgerichtshof (BGH), Germany“s Federal Supreme Court, held that this would already be enough to satisfy the burden of proof (Az.: I ZR 150/15). It went on to note that the other party would then have to be able to demonstrate that the accusations are without merit and that there were no illegal arrangements.

In the instant case, a furniture dealer had engaged a forwarding company to transport furniture from Asia to Europe and granted a third party the relevant powers necessary for the purposes of supervising these transactions. In the course of this, increased freight reimbursements were reported, of which the furniture dealer knew nothing. It demanded that the freight surcharges be returned. The Oberlandesgericht (OLG) Hamburg, Hamburg“s Higher Regional Court, dismissed the claim.

The BGH delivered a different ruling. It took the view that the plaintiff had presented sufficient evidence supporting the existence of a kickback arrangement. However, the respondent then went on not only to dispute the kickback payments within the scope of its secondary burden of presentation, but also set out a completely different version of events, facts and circumstances. The BGH referred the case back the OLG, stating that the judge had not given sufficient consideration in their judgment to all aspects when hearing the evidence.

Legal advice is essential if there are accusations or suspicion of damage caused by acts contrary to public policy or kickback payments. Lawyers who are experienced in the field of commercial law can serve as expert advisers.

https://www.grprainer.com/en/legal-advice/business-law.html

GRP Rainer LLP www.grprainer.com/en/ is an international firm of lawyers and tax advisors who are specialists in commercial law. The firm counsels commercial and industrial companies and corporations, as well as associations, small- and mid-sized businesses, self-employed freelancers and private individuals worldwide from offices Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London UK.

Contact
GRP Rainer LLP
Michael Rainer
Augustinerstraße 10
50667 Cologne
Phone: +49 221-27 22 75-0
Fax: +49 221-27 22 75-24
E-Mail: info@grprainer.com
Url: http://www.grprainer.com/en

Okt 8 2018

OLG München – Managing directors liable if they exceed the scope of their discretionary powers

OLG München – Managing directors liable if they exceed the scope of their discretionary powers

OLG München - Managing directors liable if they exceed the scope of their discretionary powers

A managing director who culpably breaches his or her duties may be liable to pay damages to the company. This was confirmed by a ruling of the Oberlandesgericht (OLG) München, Munich“s Higher Regional Court.

A managing director may be liable to pay damages not only to third parties but also the company if he or she culpably breaches his or her duties. We at the commercial law firm GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte note that this means that the managing director needs to have acted intentionally or negligently and caused harm to the company in doing so. The managing director“s conduct might already amount to a breach of duty of this kind if he or she concludes a new framework agreement and this does not include a customer protection (exclusivity) clause in contrast to the original agreement. In a ruling from 8 February 2018, the Oberlandesgericht München held that under these circumstances the managing director is deemed to have exceeded his or her discretionary commercial powers (Az.: 23 U 2913/17).

Companies include a customer protection clause to prevent a contractual partner from directly benefiting from the former“s business relationships and using the contacts to expand their own client base, thereby effectively poaching the company“s clients. In the instant case, a company had an agreement with a business partner that included a customer protection clause. This was later removed when the managing director renegotiated the framework agreement with said business partner. The managing director justified this by stating that the contractual relationship would otherwise have been terminated and he had therefore acted in the interests of the company.

The latter nevertheless sued him for payment of damages on the basis that removing the customer protection clause had resulted in the loss of a number of clients and thus harmed the company. The OLG München upheld the claim for damages, ruling that by concluding a new framework agreement without a customer protection clause, the managing director had acted in a manner that amounted to a breach of duty.

The Court went on to say that while a managing director does enjoy broad discretionary powers and that this entails taking commercial risks to a certain extent, he or she is deemed to have exceeded this discretion if, from the standpoint of a prudent and conscientious manager, there is undeniably a high risk of harm and, on the other hand, no reasonable economic grounds for taking this risk. The OLG concluded that by forgoing the customer protection clause, the managing director had exceeded his discretionary powers and thus committed a breach of duty.

Managing directors are faced with a great deal of responsibility and risk. Lawyers who are experienced in the field of company law can serve as competent advisors in relation to issues of manager liability.

https://www.grprainer.com/en/legal-advice/company-law.html

GRP Rainer LLP www.grprainer.com/en/ is an international firm of lawyers and tax advisors who are specialists in commercial law. The firm counsels commercial and industrial companies and corporations, as well as associations, small- and mid-sized businesses, self-employed freelancers and private individuals worldwide from offices Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London UK.

Contact
GRP Rainer LLP
Michael Rainer
Augustinerstraße 10
50667 Cologne
Phone: +49 221-27 22 75-0
Fax: +49 221-27 22 75-24
E-Mail: info@grprainer.com
Url: http://www.grprainer.com/en

Okt 5 2018

ECJ on infringements of geographical indications

ECJ on infringements of geographical indications

ECJ on infringements of geographical indications

According to a ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) from 7 June 2018, an association with a protected indication is not by itself sufficient to infringe the registered geographical indication (Az.: C-44/17).

As in the case of word marks or figurative marks, it is also possible to obtain trade mark protection for geographical indication of origin. Consumers may make certain associations with geographical designations of origin, e.g. regarding the quality of the product. We at the commercial law firm GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte note that while protection of designations of origin is, for this reason, important to businesses, it is not without limits.

The Court of Justice of the European Union had to rule on whether use of the term „glen“ in the case of whisky from a German brewery infringes the registered trade mark „Scotch Whisky“. That is the position of the Scotch Whisky Association. It argued that the term „glen“ could give consumers the wrong idea about a connection with the registered geographical indication and thus mislead them as to the origin of the whisky. The Association therefore initially lodged a claim with the Landgericht Hamburg, the Regional Court of Hamburg, which in turn appealed to the ECJ.

The ECJ clarified that „indirect commercial use“ of a registered geographical indication requires that the disputed element be used in a form that is identical or phonetically and/or visually similar to this indication. It went on to say that it is not enough that the description might evoke in consumers some kind of association with the registered geographical indication or the relevant geographical area.

Whether the term „glen“ alludes to the protected geographical indication was said to depend to a large extent on whether consumers are prompted by this description to make a connection between the product and the protected geographical indication. Consumers would therefore need to be thinking specifically about Scotch Whisky when they have „glen“ whisky from the German brewery in front of them. This must now be re-examined by the Landgericht Hamburg in the case in question. The ECJ added that in doing so the context of the disputed element, e.g. the statements on the label regarding the true origin of the product, is not to be taken into account.

Trade mark or copyright infringements can be met with severe penalties. Lawyers who are experienced in the field of intellectual property rights can advise companies when enforcing or fending off claims.

https://www.grprainer.com/en/legal-advice/ip-law/trademark-law.html

GRP Rainer LLP www.grprainer.com/en/ is an international firm of lawyers and tax advisors who are specialists in commercial law. The firm counsels commercial and industrial companies and corporations, as well as associations, small- and mid-sized businesses, self-employed freelancers and private individuals worldwide from offices Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London UK.

Contact
GRP Rainer LLP
Michael Rainer
Augustinerstraße 10
50667 Cologne
Phone: +49 221-27 22 75-0
Fax: +49 221-27 22 75-24
E-Mail: info@grprainer.com
Url: http://www.grprainer.com/en

Okt 5 2018

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte – Erfahrungsbericht zur Ausnutzung von Freibeträgen bei der Schenkungssteuer

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte – Erfahrungsbericht zur Ausnutzung von Freibeträgen bei der Schenkungssteuer

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte - Erfahrungsbericht zur Ausnutzung von Freibeträgen bei der Schenkungssteuer

Durch Schenkungen zu Lebzeiten kann die Erbschaftssteuer umgangen werden. Aber auch bei der Schenkungssteuer gilt es, die geltenden Freibeträge optimal auszunutzen.

Nach einem Erfahrungsbericht der Wirtschaftskanzlei GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte wird oft nicht berücksichtigt, dass auch bei Schenkungen zu Lebzeiten Freibeträge optimal ausgeschöpft werden sollten, um die Schenkungssteuer zu umgehen und den Vermögensübergang so steueroptimal wie möglich zu gestalten.

Bei größeren Vermögen ist es häufig ratsam, sich frühzeitig Gedanken über den Vermögensübergang zu machen. Wird das Vermögen erst nach dem Tod des Erblassers übertragen, fällt unter Umständen eine beträchtliche Erbschaftssteuer an, die das Erbe schmälert. Durch Schenkungen zu Lebzeiten kann die Erbschaftssteuer vielfach umgangen oder zumindest in Grenzen gehalten werden, so die Kanzlei GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte.

Schenkungen sind Zuwendungen unter Lebenden, wobei der Schenkende einen Teil seines Vermögens auf eine andere Person überträgt, die im Gegenzug aber zu keiner Gegenleistung verpflichtet ist. Grundsätzlich unterliegt dieser Vorgang der Besteuerung. Allerdings können bei Schenkungen steuerliche Spielräume und Freibeträge geschickt ausgenutzt werden. Unter Ehepartnern und Lebenspartnern gilt ein Schenkungsfreibetrag von 500.000 Euro, bei Kindern, Stief- und Adoptivkindern liegt der Freibetrag bei 400.000 Euro. Bei Enkelkindern bleiben Schenkungen bis zu einer Höhe von 200.000 Euro steuerfrei und bei Eltern und Großeltern bis zu einer Höhe von 100.000 Euro. Für entferntere Verwandte oder Freunde liegt der Freibetrag in der Regel bei 20.000 Euro.

Allerdings können die Freibeträge bei vorausschauender Planung mehrfach ausgeschöpft werden. Nach zehn Jahren kann erneut eine Schenkung unter Ausnutzung des Freibetrags vorgenommen werden. Das bedeutet, dass es aus steuerlicher Sicht sinnvoller sein kann, Vermögen nicht in einer Zuwendung zu übertragen, sondern die Schenkungen über einen längeren Zeitraum zu verteilen oder auf mehrere Personen aufzuteilen, um die jeweiligen Freibeträge optimal auszunutzen.

Aufgrund der steuerlichen Optimierungsmöglichkeiten sollte bei Schenkungen vorausschauend mit der nötigen Übersicht und dem erforderlichen Weitblick gehandelt werden. Im Steuerrecht erfahrene Rechtsanwälte können dabei beraten.

https://www.grprainer.com/rechtsberatung/steuerrecht/schenkungssteuer.html

GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte ist eine internationale, wirtschaftsrechtlich ausgerichtete Sozietät. An den Standorten Köln, Berlin, Bonn, Düsseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, München, Stuttgart und London berät die Kanzlei insbesondere im gesamten Wirtschaftsrecht, Gesellschaftsrecht und Steuerrecht sowie im Kapitalmarktrecht und Bankrecht. Zu den Mandanten gehören nationale und internationale Unternehmen und Gesellschaften, institutionelle Anleger und Privatpersonen.

Kontakt
GRP Rainer Rechtsanwälte
Michael Rainer
Augustinerstraße 10
50667 Köln
02212722750
0221-27 22 75-24
info@grprainer.com
http://www.grprainer.com