M
142
9.
As not more than four or five of all of the
China Companies transferring appear to have issued different
classes of shares, I do not consider that it is appropriate
that the enactment of the Regulations enabling the remainder
to complete their change of status should be held up on account
of difficulties relating to such a small minority. As the
present suggested Regulations are intended to be made under
the Proclamation, other Regulations can, if necessary, be
formulated later to deal with these special cases as they arise.
It has been suggested that as an alternative to
giving power to the Court to determine a deadlock a Regulation
be made enabling a Company to obtain a special order from the
Governor (he being substituted for the Board of Trade) in
similar manner to Regulation 5 of the Defence (Companies)
Regulations. This suggestion has the advantage that it would
avoid complicated legislation designed to deal with a few
isolated cases only.
10.
11.
On the question of retaining the .04% annual
capital fees paid by China Companies and continuing the
exemption from estate duty and stamp duty, it has been
suggested that the most satisfactory solution would be to
intimate to China Companies registering here that consent to
their maintaining in China a branch share register would be
freely given under Section 103 of the Companies Ordinance.
Under this section a similar fee of .04% is payable in
respect of the paid up capital of the Company to which the licence
is issued. By this means the normal law of the locality of
assets for estate duty and stamp duty purposes would be retained.
You are referred in this connection to Section 105 of the
Companies Ordinance. Furthermore, no vital alteration
of the Companies Ordinance would be necessary. I am seeking
the reactions of former China Companies to this suggestion
with regard to branch registers, but from the administrative