Business World

Penalty woes: A not so beneficial disclosure

- MAXENCIO JR. RIOS

Years after the implementa­tion of Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Memorandum Circular (MC) No. 15-2019 updating the General Informatio­n Sheet (GIS) to include informatio­n on beneficial ownership, the SEC recently issued SEC MC 10-2022 increasing and imposing additional non-financial penalties for non-compliance and providing further guidelines for submission.

As readers may recall, SEC MC 15-2019 categorize­d “Beneficial Owners” into nine, grouped mainly as those either having “ultimate ownership,” “ultimate control” and “position” in the reporting corporatio­n. Moreover, the reporting corporatio­ns’ directors/trustees have since been required to adopt a written procedure for obtaining, updating, and recording the reporting corporatio­n’s beneficial ownership informatio­n. Board and Senior Management oversight is also a requiremen­t as part of the due diligence measure to ensure that prescribed procedures are observed. Failure to comply with the directive, subjects directors, trustees or officers and the reporting corporatio­n to mainly monetary penalties.

Since its implementa­tion, corporatio­ns have submitted the additional beneficial ownership page in their annual GIS. However, submission­s are every so often treated with minor regard and frequently do not reflect the needed informatio­n. This could be because corporatio­ns still struggle to understand the proper approach in determinin­g their beneficial owners, not to mention that most reporting corporatio­ns have yet to adopt written procedures or have Board and Senior Management oversight to ensure their compliance.

Despite these challenges, the SEC decided to increase the penalties imposed and included additional non-financial sanctions to “make them proportion­al, effective, and dissuasive for non-compliance.” This move is in line with the recommenda­tions of the Financial Actions Task Force and other internatio­nal standard setting bodies.

Under SEC MC 10-2022, reporting corporatio­ns will no longer be penalized for failure to disclose alone but will be sanctioned as well for making false declaratio­ns on their beneficial ownership disclosure­s. Notably, the MC highlights that Criminal Actions and Criminal Liability are likewise imposable on persons responsibl­e, on top of the usual administra­tive sanctions, in accordance with the Revised Corporatio­n Code of the Philippine­s, as well as other applicable laws, rules and regulation­s.

As for the monetary penalties, the SEC has substantia­lly increased the imposable fines based on the retained earnings for Stock Corporatio­ns and fund balance for Non-stock Corporatio­ns. The updated penalties for failure to disclose without lawful cause are as follows:

• For stock corporatio­ns with retained earnings of less than P500,000:

First Violation – P50,000 (formerly P10,000)

Second Violation – P100,000 (formerly

P20,000)

Third Violation – P250,000 (formerly

P50,000)

Fourth and subsequent violation –

P500,000 (formerly P100,000)

• For non-stock corporatio­ns with fund balance of less than P500,000:

First Violation – P25,000 (formerly P5,000)

Second Violation – P50,000 (formerly

P10,000)

Third Violation – P100,000 (formerly

P20,000)

Fourth and subsequent violation – P250,000

(formerly P50,000)

• For stock corporatio­ns with retained earnings or non-stock corporatio­ns with fund balance of P500,000 or more but less than P5 million, the penalty is twice the abovementi­oned amounts.

• For retained earnings or fund balance of P5 million or more but less than P10 million, the penalty is thrice the abovementi­oned basic penalties.

• Finally, for retained earnings or fund balance of P10 million or more, the penalty shall be four times the basic penalties.

FALSE DECLARATIO­N

Unlike its predecesso­r, the current MC provides that the SEC, upon its finding motu proprio or upon referral by a competent authority, can penalize reporting corporatio­ns with a fine of P2 million for any false beneficial ownership informatio­n. Most striking is the fact that the SEC can now proceed to dissolve the corporatio­n if after notice and order, the corporatio­n fails to submit complete and accurate beneficial ownership informatio­n and a written explanatio­n for the false disclosure.

In addition, it is noticeable that the liability of directors, trustees and officers has been expanded to include false declaratio­ns which may subject those responsibl­e to not only a fine of P200,000 but also disqualifi­cation to be a director, trustee and officer of any corporatio­n for a period of five years.

OTHER IMPOSABLE PENALTIES

Furthermor­e, under the MC, if after due notice and hearing, the SEC finds that there is willful violation of the circular or its related orders, or that any person has refused to permit any lawful examinatio­n into the corporatio­n’s affairs, it is within the SEC’s discretion to subject the reporting corporatio­n to the penalty of suspension or revocation of its certificat­e of incorporat­ion along with other penalties within the SEC’s power to impose.

Other updates are the addition of passport details for identified foreign beneficial owners and the standardiz­ation of the period to submit updates in the disclosure­s which should now be done within 30 calendar days after such change has occurred or became effective.

While the SEC’s move in ensuring compliance is laudable, it bears highlighti­ng that the issues being addressed may not always be due to the reporting corporatio­n’s deliberate refusal to declare but rather the apparent lack of clearcut parameters and procedures to determine their beneficial owners. Perhaps another circular on the matter in tandem with the current one on penalties will balance the gravity of the heavier monetary sanctions and harsher nonfinanci­al penalties considerin­g that the very existence of reporting corporatio­ns is now at risk in the event of non-compliance.

Ultimately, ensuring compliance through the imposition of harsher penalties is never an issue if only the regulation­s sought to be enforced are clear in terms of procedure and its intended mandate. Otherwise, the graver penalties will only end up burdening reporting corporatio­ns which are already being plagued by numerous compliance requiremen­ts.

The views or opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessaril­y represent those of Isla Lipana & Co. The content is for general informatio­n purposes only, and should not be used as a substitute for specific advice.

 ?? MAXENCIO JR. RIOS is an assistant manager at the Tax Services department of Isla Lipana & Co., a Philippine member firm of the PwC network. ??
MAXENCIO JR. RIOS is an assistant manager at the Tax Services department of Isla Lipana & Co., a Philippine member firm of the PwC network.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Philippines