About Loeb Smith
People
Sectors
Expertise
- Legal Service
- Banking and Finance
- Blockchain, Fintech and Cryptocurrency
- Capital Markets and Privatization
- Corporate
- Cybersecurity and Data Privacy
- Insolvency, Restructuring and Corporate Recovery
- Insurance and Reinsurance
- Intellectual Property
- Investment Funds
- Litigation and Dispute Resolution
- Mergers and Acquisitions
- Private Client and Family Office
- Private Equity and Venture Capital
- Governance, Regulatory and Compliance
- Entity Formation and Managed Services
- Consulting
- Legal Service
News and Announcements
Locations
Subscribe Newsletters
Contact
Introduction
Megatrends we see developing in the offshore investment funds market.
Large institutions are increasingly making allocations to digital assets and/or investment funds investing in digital assets.
Tokenisation of assets being seen as a pathway to access new investors and enhance liquidity.
Development of digital assets as a legitimate asset class in which to invest. Economies of Scale that benefit investment funds and investors in offshore jurisdictions
BVI developing a reputation as the natural home of start-up managers and some emerging managers to establish their investment funds.
Loeb Smith Attorneys is pleased to announce that our team has been recognized for outstanding client service at HFM Asia Services Awards 2024 after being shortlisted for the second year in a row
“Best offshore law firm – client service” accolade highlights Loeb Smith Attorneys’ demonstrated exceptional client service, innovative product development, and strong and sustainable business growth over the past 12 months. The judging panel was made up of leading hedge fund COS, CFOs, CCOs, GCs and CTOs to ensure that the Awards recognized those driving up service standards across the hedge funds service providers sector.
With offices in the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands and Hong Kong, Loeb Smith Attorneys has been nominated for numerous awards over the years and has achieved high rankings in legal directories.
Special thanks to our much-valued clients and partners as their continuous support and trust in us are the key reasons for our achievement. This achievement is another testament to our team’s expertise and Loeb Smith Attorneys’ commitment in Asia.

About Loeb Smith Attorneys
Loeb Smith Attorneys is one of the leading offshore corporate law firms considered one of the most active and knowledgeable firms for advising on offshore investment funds formation and launch of all asset classes including public securities, private equity, venture capital, real estate, and virtual assets. Other areas of strength and growth are advising on M&A, Finance, Corporate Restructurings, Capital Markets, Regulatory Compliance, Investments, Logistics, Shipping and Aviation.
Considered a leading law firm in the Fintech and Blockchain Technology space, Loeb Smith also advises on token issuances, application for VASP licences for Web 3.0 businesses, Metaverse infrastructure and other virtual asset service providers, and utilising Cayman and BVI structures to develop virtual asset platforms for DAOs. Loeb Smith’s clients are investment managers, financial institutions, onshore counsels, and HNWIs who the firm advises on day-to-day legal issues and complex, strategic matters.
Some of our firm’s recent accolades are: winning Leading Firm in Client Satisfaction 2024 award by Legal 500; ranked in Investment Funds category and listed as one of the Firms To Watch for Corporate & Commercial by Legal 500 in 2024; named as Recommended Firm by IFLR 1000 from 2021 to 2024; named in Offshore Client Choice List by Asian Legal Business from 2021 to 2023; ranked amongst Top 30 Asia’s Fastest Growing Law Firms by Asian Legal Business in 2023 and 2024; ranked in The A-List: Top Offshore Lawyers by Asia Business Law Journal in 2022 and 2024; named as one of the ALB Hong Kong Firms to Watch 2024; winning Best Law Firm – Fund Domicile at Hedgeweek US Emerging Manager Awards 2023 and 2024; winning Best Law Firm – Fund Domicile at Private Equity Wire US Emerging Manager Awards 2023 and 2024; winning Best Law Firm – Fund Domicile at Private Equity Wire US Awards 2023; and winning The Best Offshore Law Firm – Client Service at With Intelligence HFM Asia Services Awards 2024.
www.loebsmith.com
BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS | CAYMAN ISLANDS | HONG KONG
Loeb Smith Attorneys is pleased to announce that Gary Smith has been recognized again as one of the top-rated practising offshore lawyers by the prestigious Asia Business Law Journal’s A-List of top offshore lawyers.
The A-List: Top Offshore Lawyers is based on interviews with thousands of in-house counsels in Asia and partners at international and onshore law firms in the region.
Gary Smith is Head of the Firm’s Investment Funds Group and is known for his ability to deliver pragmatic and well-thought-through solutions to complex technical issues. He advises on Cayman Islands & BVI investment funds, private equity investments, M&A, fintech, blockchain & virtual assets transactions, corporate, and corporate finance and is regularly praised by clients in international legal directories for his “strong client-relationships and is highly regarded by sources in North America and Asia” and “his knowledge impresses me and his creativity is very good. He is also very patient and intelligent”.
The Foundation Companies Act 2017 introduced a new corporate vehicle to the Cayman Islands – the “foundation company”. This company structure has several applications and is growing in popularity.
Foundation companies are governed primarily by the above-mentioned act together with certain provisions of the Companies Act (as revised) of the Cayman Islands, which apply to all types of company.
A foundation company is a legal person that is entirely distinct from that of its directors, members (where relevant), beneficiaries and founders. This means that a foundation company can own assets, and can sue and be sued.
The constitution
A foundation company is incorporated with a memorandum of association and articles of association (the “constitutional documents”), which set out the rights and responsibilities of the various parties who manage and who benefit from the foundation company.
A foundation company may also adopt bylaws that expand on the matters dealt with in the constitutional documents, and can even be used to confer specific rights on individuals or groups of beneficiaries. These bylaws may be kept private as they are not required to be filed with the Registrar of Companies.
Foundation companies therefore provide the functionality and flexibility of a trust but without any of the complexities associated with trust administration.
The following classes of person will be involved in the management of a foundation company:
- Directors. A foundation company will typically be managed by its board of directors, who owe fiduciary duties to the company.
- Secretary. A foundation company must have a secretary who is licensed or permitted to provide company management services in the Cayman Islands. The foundation company’s registered office must be at the secretary’s business address.
- Supervisor. If a foundation company either chooses not to have any members, or at any time ceases to have any members, it is required to appoint a supervisor, who oversees its management but crucially has no ownership rights or financial entitlement. In the absence of any members, this provides necessary checks and balances on the board of directors to ensure that the foundation company is being properly managed, and is conducting its business in accordance with its constitutional documents, the requirements of any bylaws, and applicable law.
- Founder. The founder is similar to a settlor in the context of a trust. Founders have no specific rights or powers in respect of the foundation company unless such rights and powers are specified in the constitutional documents and/or in the bylaws. It is common for the constitutional documents to grant the founder the power to appoint or remove directors and beneficiaries.
In addition, the following classes of person can be associated with foundation companies:
- Members. Members are not automatically entitled to participate financially in the success of the foundation company unless the constitutional documents or bylaws provide otherwise.
- Beneficiaries. Beneficiaries are, subject to the constitutional documents and bylaws, able to participate financially in the foundation company.
Characteristics, common uses
The foundation company structure is flexible. The roles and entitlements of members and beneficiaries are neither prescribed nor proscribed. It is therefore entirely within the discretion of the founders of the foundation. The two most common applications for foundation companies are as family offices/family trusts, or in the establishment of decentralised autonomous organisations (DAOs).
Family offices. The benefits of using a foundation company to operate a family office/family trust include the flexibility available to founders to determine the extent of any entitlement of beneficiaries, and the extent of their direct involvement/rights to information in the underlying business. The foundation company has a separate legal personality and overcomes issues of recognition and taxation in jurisdictions that don’t otherwise recognise common law trusts. For family offices with interests and assets across the globe, this is a significant advantage in terms of convenience and the potential for time and cost savings in what would otherwise be “difficult” jurisdictions.
DAOs. DAOs often do not have legal personality, and it is necessary for projects that involve DAOs to incorporate an entity that will act as the counterparty to any contractual relationships outside of the DAO (e.g. service providers). The ability for foundation companies to not have members is particularly attractive as this is consistent with the decentralised and “ownerless” nature of a DAO. Also, the ability to provide for bespoke arrangements and rights within the bylaws adds to the attractiveness of foundation companies.
E: robert.farrell@loebsmith.com
E: elizabeth.kenny@loebsmith.com
This article was first published in the Asia Business Law Journal.
https://law.asia/cayman-islands-foundation-companies/
The Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2024 (“Bill”) of the Cayman Islands was published in the Cayman Islands in January 2024, and proposed to make a number of amendments to the Companies Act (2023 Revision) (the “Act”). In consideration of the changing market dynamics, the Bill, if passed into law as it was drafted, would have provided a more flexible approach in a number of areas to enhance the Cayman Islands’ financial services and to improve efficiency in a number of well-trodden processes.
The Companies (Amendment) Act, 2024 was published on 11 March 2024 (the “Amendment Act”). Whilst the Amendment Act will, when it comes into force, enact a number of the very useful proposals that were contained in the Bill, there are a number of amendments that were proposed in the Bill but which do not feature in the Amendment Act.
A summary of the key amendments contained in the Amendment Act are set out below, whilst we also briefly consider amendments that were proposed in the Bill and which did not make the final cut.
Reduction in share capital
The Amendment Act, when in force, will simplify the process for a solvent company limited by shares or a solvent company limited by guarantee (with a share capital) to reduce its share capital. Whilst the traditional method by special resolution and confirmation by the Court will remain available, the process is simplified by the introduction of a new method which includes a special resolution supported by a solvency statement, consequently removing the need for Court confirmation.
To be accepted, the solvency statement (which is to be made by the directors of the company) must be made no more than 30 days before the date on which the special resolution approving a reduction of share capital is passed. A copy of the solvency statement must be sent or submitted to every member of the company at the same time or before the special resolution is provided to them.1
The solvency statement will need to be provided to the Registrar within fifteen days after the special resolution is passed along with the minutes of the company reflecting (i) the amount of share capital of the company, (ii) the number of shares into which the share capital is to be divided and the amount of each share; and (iii) the amount deemed to be paid up on each share (if applicable).2
Failure to notify the Registrar within the 15-day allowance will require the company to apply to the Court by way of petition for an order confirming the reduction of share capital.3
This is a welcome development which will inevitably increase the efficiency of reductions in share capital.
Issuance of fractions of shares
The Amendment Act will empower companies limited by shares or companies limited by guarantee (with a share capital) to redeem or repurchase fractions of shares.
Re-registrations
The Amendment Act will make several changes to the provisions which relate to transfers by way of continuation and re-registration, as follows:
- companies with or without a share capital will be able to apply to be registered by way of continuation as an exempted company limited by shares in the Cayman Islands. Currently, this is only available to companies with a share capital4;
- exempted companies, which currently must conduct business mainly outside of the Cayman Islands, may re-register as an ordinary resident company by passing a special resolution and applying to the Registrar for re-registration. Previously, this was not possible. However, when such re-registration takes effect, any tax undertaking given to the company by the Cayman Islands Government under the Tax Concessions Act will cease to apply5;
- a limited liability company incorporated under the Limited Liability Companies Act may, with the written consent of (subject to the terms of its LLC Agreement) at least two-third of its members convert to an exempted company6; and
- a foundation company incorporated under the Foundation Companies Act may, upon the passing of a special resolution to this effect, convert to an exempted company7.
Missed opportunities?
Finally, the Bill had also proposed the following amendments to the Act which will not take effect, as they do not feature in the Amendment Act:
- a change to the procedure for shareholder to dissent from a proposed merger or consolidation. Under the current Act, the requirement is for shareholders to give written notice of their dissent prior to the vote on the proposal taking place. The company is then required to give notice of the authorisation of the proposed merger or consolidation to each shareholder who dissented. The Bill suggested a new “objection deadline” which would require a dissenting shareholder to give notice to the company within twenty days of the notice to propose a resolution authorising a plan of merger or consolidation. The company is then only required to give notice of the authorisation of the proposed merger or consolidation to those dissenting shareholders who gave notice of their dissent prior to the objection deadline; and
- a change to the requirements for passing a special resolution in writing (i.e. other than in a general meeting of the company. Under the Act, such a written resolution must be passed unanimously, whereas the Bill proposed to reduce this to a two-thirds majority to match the threshold that must be reached in a general meeting.
These changes have not been reflected in the Amendment Act. It isn’t clear why these changes were left out of the Amendment Act, but they may be revisited in future amendments.
When do the changes take effect?
The date that the amendments set out in the Amendment Act will become law will be such date as may be appointed by Order made by the Cabinet . The Cabinet has yet to publish such an order and so the enactment date is unknown for the time being.
1. Companies (Amendment) Act, 2024 cl 5, 14A(1)
2. Companies (Amendment) Act, 2024 cl 5, 14B
3. Companies (Amendment) Act, 2024 cl 5, 14B(6)
4. Companies (Amendment) Act, 2024 cl 10
5. Companies (Amendment) Act, 2024 cl 12
6. Companies (Amendment) Act, 2024 cl 15, 233A
7. Companies (Amendment) Act, 2024 cl 15, 233B
Further Assistance
This publication is not intended to be a substitute for specific legal advice or a legal opinion. If you require further advice relating to the matters discussed in this Legal Update, please contact us. We would be delighted to assist.
E: gary.smith@loebsmith.com
E: robert.farrell@loebsmith.com
E: ivy.wong@loebsmith.com
E: cesare.bandini@loebsmith.com
E: elizabeth.kenny@loebsmith.com
E: edmond.fung@loebsmith.com
E: vivian.huang@loebsmith.com
E: faye.huang@loebsmith.com
E: yun.sheng@loebsmith.com
E: frost.wu@loebsmith.com
E: max.lee@loebsmith.com
Loeb Smith Attorneys is pleased to announce that our Investment Funds team has won the “Best Law Firm – Fund Domicile” category at the Hedgeweek US Emerging Manager Awards 2024 for the second year in a row.
The awards recognise fund performance and service provider excellence within hedge fund emerging managers and were presented at an exclusive ceremony and networking event today, 6 June, at Convene 101 Park Avenue, New York. The pre-selection data for the fund manager shortlist was provided by Bloomberg. Congratulations to all winners: https://www.hedgeweek.com/hedgeweek-announces-winners-of-us-emerging-manager-awards-2024/
With offices in British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands and Hong Kong, Loeb Smith advises on a comprehensive set of investment fund areas including Hedge Funds, Private Equity Funds, Venture Capital, Infrastructure Project Funds, Tokenized Funds, Real Estate Funds, Distressed Funds as well as other asset classes. Contact us to find more about our services.

About Loeb Smith Attorneys
Loeb Smith Attorneys is one of the leading offshore corporate law firms considered one of the most active and knowledgeable firms for advising on offshore investment funds formation and launch of all asset classes including public securities, private equity, venture capital, real estate, and virtual assets. Other areas of strength and growth are advising on M&A, Finance, Corporate Restructurings, Capital Markets, Regulatory Compliance, Investments, Logistics, Shipping and Aviation.
Considered a leading law firm in the Fintech and Blockchain Technology space, Loeb Smith also advises on token issuances, application for VASP licences for Web 3.0 businesses, Metaverse infrastructure and other virtual asset service providers, and utilising Cayman and BVI structures to develop virtual asset platforms for DAOs. Loeb Smith’s clients are investment managers, financial institutions, onshore counsels, and HNWIs who the firm advises on day-to-day legal issues and complex, strategic matters.
Some of our firm’s recent accolades are: winning Leading Firm in Client Satisfaction 2024 award by Legal 500; ranked in Investment Funds category and listed as one of the Firms To Watch for Corporate & Commercial by Legal 500 in 2024; named as Recommended Firm by IFLR 1000 from 2021 to 2024; named in Offshore Client Choice List by Asian Legal Business from 2021 to 2023; ranked amongst Top 30 Asia’s Fastest Growing Law Firms by Asian Legal Business in 2023 and 2024; ranked in The A-List: Top Offshore Lawyers by Asia Business Law Journal in 2022 and 2024; named as one of the ALB Hong Kong Firms to Watch 2024; winning Best Law Firm – Fund Domicile at Hedgeweek US Emerging Manager Awards 2023 and 2024; winning Best Law Firm – Fund Domicile at Private Equity Wire US Emerging Manager Awards 2023 and 2024; winning Best Law Firm – Fund Domicile at Private Equity Wire US Awards 2023; and winning The Best Offshore Law Firm – Client Service at With Intelligence HFM Asia Services Awards 2024.
Loeb Smith Attorneys is pleased to share that our team has been shortlisted in the “Best offshore law firm” and “Best offshore law firm client service” categories for the With Intelligence HFM Asia Services Awards 2024 for the second year in a row.
The shortlisting is a strong industry recognition of our leadership and expertise in the offshore law space and our commitment to delivering outstanding client service and comes less than a month after winning the “Best Law Firm – Fund Domicile” at the Private Equity Wire US Emerging Manager Awards 2024.
With offices in Hong Kong, British Virgin Islands and Cayman Islands, our integrated business model combined with our far-reaching approach to innovation and client service, enables us to meet the ever- evolving needs of clients and grow alongside them through sustainable partnerships.

About Loeb Smith Attorneys
Loeb Smith Attorneys is one of the leading offshore corporate law firms considered one of the most active and knowledgeable firms for advising on offshore investment funds formation and launch of all asset classes including public securities, private equity, venture capital, real estate, and virtual assets. Other areas of strength and growth are advising on M&A, Finance, Corporate Restructurings, Capital Markets, Regulatory Compliance, Investments, Logistics, Shipping and Aviation.
Considered a leading law firm in the Fintech and Blockchain Technology space, Loeb Smith also advises on token issuances, application for VASP licences for Web 3.0 businesses, Metaverse infrastructure and other virtual asset service providers, and utilising Cayman and BVI structures to develop virtual asset platforms for DAOs. Loeb Smith’s clients are investment managers, financial institutions, onshore counsels, and HNWIs who the firm advises on day-to-day legal issues and complex, strategic matters.
Some of our firm’s recent accolades are: winning Leading Firm in Client Satisfaction 2024 award by Legal 500; ranked in Investment Funds category and listed as one of the Firms To Watch for Corporate & Commercial by Legal 500 in 2024; named as Recommended Firm by IFLR 1000 from 2021 to 2024; named in Offshore Client Choice List by Asian Legal Business from 2021 to 2023; ranked amongst Top 30 Asia’s Fastest Growing Law Firms by Asian Legal Business in 2023 and 2024; ranked in The A-List: Top Offshore Lawyers by Asia Business Law Journal in 2022 and 2024; named as one of the ALB Hong Kong Firms to Watch 2024; winning Best Law Firm – Fund Domicile at Hedgeweek US Emerging Manager Awards 2023 and 2024; winning Best Law Firm – Fund Domicile at Private Equity Wire US Emerging Manager Awards 2023 and 2024; winning Best Law Firm – Fund Domicile at Private Equity Wire US Awards 2023; and winning The Best Offshore Law Firm – Client Service at With Intelligence HFM Asia Services Awards 2024.
The EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) applies to offshore investment funds with European investors. The Cayman Islands Data Protection Act, 2021 (“DPA”), regulates the processing of all personal data. Inspired by the UK’s Data Protection Act, the DPA includes provisions very similar to GDPR (together “Data Protection Laws”), with certain notable differences.
Even though the DPA applies generally to the processing of personal data and not just to investment funds, within this context and as part of the subscription process, investors are required to provide a government-issued photo ID, source of funds and wealth, contact details, payment details, and tax residence information, or even additional information about employment, dependents, income and investment objectives (the “Investor Personal Data”), which are processed and stored by or on behalf of the investment fund (the “Fund”) and/or by one or more of the service providers to the Fund. Some of the processing may be done by different parties in various jurisdictions.
Within the context of investment funds, the Administrator, Transfer Agent, Distributor, and the Investment Manager of a Fund may fall within the definition of a Data Controller or Data Processor. To ensure compliance with GDPR and/or DPA, the Fund’s Board of Directors should review the contractual arrangements with these parties and may need to appoint a Data Protection Officer. As a reminder, the Board of Directors of the Fund is required to supervise third party service providers and ensure that there are sufficient measures in place to protect Investor Personal Data. Privacy Notices in the Fund’s offering documents would need to be updated to ensure that investors are fully aware of where their Personal Data is being processed, by whom and for what purpose.
For ease of reference, a brief comparison between GDPR and the DPA is included below.
Comparison of the Main Provisions
GDPR | DPA | |
Personal Data | Any information relating to an individual who can be identified, directly or indirectly, from that data (including online identifiers such as IP addresses and cookies may qualify as personal data if they are capable of being linked back to the individual). | Same as GDPR |
Data Controller | The person who, alone or with others, determines the purposes, conditions and means of the processing of Personal Data.
|
DPA applies to any Data Controller in respect of Personal Data (a) established and processed in the Cayman Islands; or (b) processed in the Cayman Islands otherwise than for the purposes of transit . |
Privacy Notice | At the time of collection of the data, individuals must be informed of the purposes and detail behind the processing, the details of transfers of data and any security and technical safeguards in place. This information is generally provided in a separate privacy notice. | Same as GDPR |
Right to Access | Individuals have the right to obtain confirmation that their Personal Data is processed and to access it. Data Controllers must respond within a month of the access request. A copy of the information must be provided free of charge. | Same as GDPR, but the DPA permits a reasonable fee to be charged. |
Retention Period | Personal data should not be kept for longer than is necessary to fulfil the purpose for which it was originally collected. Controllers must inform data subjects of the period of time (or reasons why) data will be retained on collection. | Not a requirement under DPA. However, as with the GDPR, if there is no compelling reason for a Data Controller to retain Personal Data, a data subject can request its secure deletion.
|
Right to Erase | Should the individual subsequently wish to have their data removed and the Personal Data is no longer required for the reasons for which it was collected, then it must be erased. Data Controllers must notify third party processors or sub-contractors of such requests. | Same as GDPR |
Transfers | International transfers permitted to third party processors or between members of the same group. | Same as GDPR. |
Data Security | Minimum security measures are prescribed as pseudonymisation and encryption, ability to restore the availability and access to data, regularly testing, assessing and evaluating security measures. | Appropriate technical and organisational measures must be taken to prevent unauthorised or unlawful processing of Personal Data and against accidental loss or destruction of, or damage to, Personal Data . |
Data Processors | Security requirements are extended to data processors as well as Data Controllers | There is no liability for processors under the DPA. However, they may be held liable based on contract or tort law. |
Data Breach | Data Controllers must notify the regulatory authority of Personal Data breaches without undue delay and, where feasible, not later than 72 hours after having become aware of a breach. | In the event of a Personal Data breach, the Data Controller must, “without undue delay” but no longer than five (5) days after the Data Controller should have been aware of that breach, notify the Ombudsman and any affected individuals |
Breach Notice | The notification should describe the nature of the breach, its consequences, the measures proposed or taken by the Data Controller to address the breach, and the measures recommended by the Data Controller to the individual concerned to mitigate the possible adverse effects of the breach. | Same as GDPR. |
Right to be Forgotten | An individual may request the deletion or removal of Personal Data where there is no compelling reason for its continued processing. | The DPA contains a similar right, although this is expressed as a general right of “erasure”. Under the UK’s Data Protection Act, the right is limited to processing that causes unwarranted and substantial damage or distress. Under the DPA this threshold is not present. As with the GDPR, if there is no compelling reason for a data controller to retain Personal Data, a data subject can request its secure deletion. |
Right to Object | An individual has the right at any time to require a Data Controller to stop processing their Personal Data for the purposes of direct marketing. There are no exemptions or grounds to refuse. A Data Controller must deal with an objection to processing for direct marketing at any time and free of charge. | Same as GDPR. |
Direct Marketing and Consent | The Data Controller must inform individuals of their right to object “at the point of first communication” and in a privacy notice. For any consent to be valid it needs to be obvious what the data is going to be used for at the point of data collection and the Data Controller needs to be able to show clearly how consent was gained and when it was obtained. | Including an unsubscribe facility in each marketing communication is recommended best practice. If an individual continues to accept the services of the Data Controller without objection, consent can be implied. |
Data Processors | The GDPR sets out more detailed statutory requirements to apply to the controller/processor relationship, and to processors in general. Data Processors are now directly subject to regulation and are prohibited from processing Personal Data except on instructions from the Data Controller. | Best practice would always be to put in place a contract between a controller and processor. Essentially, the contract should require the Data Processor to level-up its policies and procedures for handling personal data to ensure compliance with the DPA. Use of sub-contractors by the service provider should be prohibited without the prior approval of the Data Controller. |
Data Protection Officer | Mandatory if the core activities of the Data Controller consist of processing operations which require large scale regular and systematic monitoring of individuals or large scale processing of sensitive Personal Data. | Does not require the appointment, although this is recommended best practice. |
Penalties | Two tiers of sanctions, with maximum fines of up to €20 million or 4% of annual worldwide turnover, whichever is greater. | Refusal to comply or failure to comply with an order issued by the Ombudsman is an offence. Penalties are also included for unlawful obtaining or disclosing Personal Data. Directors may be held liable under certain conditions. The Data Controller is liable on conviction to a fine up to CI$100,000 (approx. US$122,000) or imprisonment for a term of 5 years or both. Monetary penalty orders of an amount up to CI$250,000 (US$304,878.05) may also be issued against a Data Controller. |
Further Assistance
This publication is not intended to be a substitute for specific legal advice or a legal opinion. If you require further advice relating to the matters discussed in this Briefing, please contact us. We would be delighted to assist.
E: gary.smith@loebsmith.com
E: robert.farrell@loebsmith.com
E: ivy.wong@loebsmith.com
E. elizabeth.kenny@loebsmith.com
E: cesare.bandini@loebsmith.com
E: vivian.huang@loebsmith.com
E: faye.huang@loebsmith.com
E: max.lee@loebsmith.com
E: frost.wu@loebsmith.com
The Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (“CIMA”) has recently published its annual AML/CFT Activity Report for 2022 which can be viewed at the following link: AML CFT Activity Report 2022 V1 (cima.ky) and there are a few points worth noting. In particular:
- CIMA carried out 88 Inspections in 2022 compared to 161 in 2021; only 3 of those inspections resulted in letters of no findings, which means that 85 resulted in findings (i.e. clarifications and/or remediations were required);
- CIMA issued 2 administrative fine penalties totaling CI$378,670.72 (approx. US$461,793. 56) relating to breaches of the Anti-Money Laundering Regulations (2023 Revision);
Securities Investment Businesses remains a key priority for CIMA and appropriate resources should be allocated to cover AML/CFT compliance; - VASPs are also identified as having medium to high overall inherent risk and are likely to be closely scrutinized by CIMA as they become more widespread – particular attention should be placed on compliance with the ‘Travel Rule’;
risk assessments (risk-based approach) remain important to demonstrate compliance (or lack thereof); - Client Due Diligence/Know Your Client documents ought to be checked and updated to ensure they are consistent with policies and procedures; and
documented corporate governance and leaving a paper trail behind any AML/CFT-related decisions being taken by the board is very important.
We have advised and guided clients in both 2022 and 2023 through a number of CIMA inspections resulting in either no findings or in findings but with no administrative fine penalties from CIMA. Should your Cayman Islands company become the subject of an upcoming inspection from CIMA, please do not hesitate to get in touch with us.
Further Assistance
This publication is not intended to be a substitute for specific legal advice or a legal opinion. If you require further advice relating to the matters discussed in this Briefing, please contact us. We would be delighted to assist.
E: gary.smith@loebsmith.com
E: robert.farrell@loebsmith.com
E: ivy.wong@loebsmith.com
E: elizabeth.kenny@loebsmith.com
E: cesare.bandini@loebsmith.com
E: vivian.huang@loebsmith.com
E: faye.huang@loebsmith.com
E: max.lee@loebsmith.com
E: frost.wu@loebsmith.com
Introduction

Loeb Smith is pleased to welcome Ivy Wong to the firm as Senior Legal Director for its Corporate practice in the Hong Kong office, where her practice focuses on advising multi-national corporations and conglomerates, shareholders, investment funds, financial institutions, banks, public and private companies, as well as high net worth individuals. Ivy will become a Partner of the firm pending upon registration as a foreign lawyer in Hong Kong.
Ivy is a seasoned corporate transactional lawyer who is qualified in multiple jurisdictions and has led many unprecedented and high-profile cross-border transactions that won industry awards and recognitions. She was previously a Partner and had served as a regional steering committee chair and a global steering committee member for her practice at one of the largest international law firms. Her practice is primarily focused on cross-border corporate work, capital markets, corporate finance, merger and acquisition, investments and restructuring, compliance and general commercial work.
Ivy is highly experienced in communicating with regulators, providing solutions that meet both regulatory and commercial needs, and advising board members and senior management in their corporate planning and transactions. With a track record serving a wide range of industry sectors, multiple of Ivy’s recent transactions are in healthcare, biotech and life sciences sectors.
Ivy has been shortlisted for Euromoney Asia Women in Business Law Award for consecutive years and is named one of the leading practitioners in Hong Kong. She is a Vice Chair of the Social Sustainability Committee of The British Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong and sits on the judging panel for the Hong Kong Corporate Governance and ESG Excellence Awards co-conferred by the Chamber of Hong Kong Listed Companies. She has been quoted and interviewed by international media and journals including Bloomberg, CNBC, The Wall Street Journal, The Economist and Reuters.
“Ivy’s addition adds greater depth and expertise to the firm’s corporate, capital markets and M&A practice in Hong Kong for its international clients and enables the firm to better serve its clients and their business needs in Asia, practice areas that continue to be a strategic priority for our firm.” said Gary Smith, Partner. “Ivy is an experienced corporate transactional lawyer with a strong market profile, and a wonderful addition to our growing team in Hong Kong focused on offshore legal expertise and outstanding client service.”
“I am pleased to have the opportunity to join the team, which is young and energetic, with a clear vision for growth and commitment to the region. What sets it apart is also its expertise in the virtual assets space that is both cutting edge and fast-growing, and also its responsiveness to the regulatory changes and delivery of timely and quality advice to its clients.” said Ivy Wong.