Beneficial Ownership Registry Rules Come to New Brunswick
By Alanna Waberski, Graham Haynes and Maria Cummings
On June 10, 2022, the Government of New Brunswick proclaimed into force Bill 95, which amends the Business Corporations Act (New Brunswick) (the “NBBCA”) to require corporations to maintain a register of all individuals with significant control over the corporation, among other things.
Non-compliance can result in significant fines for a corporation, its shareholders and other individuals.
Key Changes
1. Register Maintenance
Under Bill 95, all corporations formed under the NBBCA, aside from public corporations, are required to maintain a register of individuals with significant control (a “Register”). An “individual with significant control” over a corporation is defined as an individual who:
- is the registered holder of a “significant number of shares”;
- is the beneficial owner of a “significant number of shares”; or
- has direct or indirect control over a “significant number of shares”.
A “significant number of shares” is defined as either any number of shares that carry 25% or more of the voting rights attached to all of the corporation’s outstanding voting shares, or any number of shares that is equal to 25% or more of all of the corporation’s outstanding voting shares.
A register must contain the following information about every individual with significant control:
- their full name, date of birth and last known address;
- their jurisdiction of residence for tax purposes;
- the day they became, or ceased to be, an individual with significant control;
- a description of how each individual has significant control over the corporation, including their interests and rights in respect of shares of the corporation;
- a description of each step taken to ensure the information is accurate; and
- any other prescribed information.
At least once during each financial year, a corporation must take reasonable steps to ensure that it has identified all individuals with significant control, and ensure that the information in the register is accurate, complete and up to date, and must also update any information which has changed once it becomes aware of such change within fifteen (15) days.
2. Penalties
A corporation that, without reasonable cause, fails to maintain a Register or fails to comply with a request for information from an investigative body may be fined up to $10,200 for a first offence or, for a second or further offence, be fined up to $15,000 or such face imprisonment for up to 90 days. A judge may also choose to levy a fine in an amount above the aforementioned maximums in certain circumstances. Shareholders that fail to comply with requests for information from a corporation can also be subject to the same penalties for not complying.
3. Bearer Share Warrant Prohibition
Also under Bill 95, corporations are prohibited from issuing bearer share warrants (i.e., shares granting ownership to the person who physically possesses the bearer share warrant certificate) following the date of enactment.
If you would like our assistance in complying with these legislative changes and preparing your Register, or if you have any questions about the new disclosure requirements, please contact our Firm at compliance@stewartmckelvey.com.
Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.
Archive
By Deanne MacLeod, K.C., Burtley G. Francis, K.C., and David F. Slipp On June 20, 2024 the Fall Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2023 (the “Economic Statement”) received Royal Assent and became law. The Economic Statement…
Read MoreThis is the first in a two-part Thought Leadership series on a recent life insurance case out of Alberta, and the implications for life insurers. By Michelle Chai and Liz Campbell1 The Supreme Court of…
Read MoreThis articles follows our recent Thought Leadership piece on the Federal Government’s announcement of significant investment through the Smart Renewables and Electrification Pathways Program in Nova Scotia clean energy projects. By Dave Randell, Sadira Jan,…
Read MoreBy David Randell, Sadira E. Jan, Daniel Mowat-Rose, and Marina Luro1 Natural Resources Canada has released two important announcements relating to Nova Scotia’s transition to a green economy: Collaboration framework for a sustainable future Canada’s…
Read MoreBy Sheila Mecking and Lauren Sorel The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal (“BCHRT”) recently dismissed a complaint of discrimination in the workplace, stating that the employer’s investigation, and settlement offer, adequately resolved the complaint.1 The …
Read MoreBy Sarah Dever Letson, CIPP/C, Meaghan McCaw and Bertina Lou[1] Two decisions earlier this month from the Court of Appeal for British Columbia left open the question as to whether so-called “database defendants” can be held…
Read MoreIn conjunction with our upcoming sponsorship of the Halifax Chamber of Commerce luncheon, featuring the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources the Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson, we are pleased to present a Thought Leadership article highlighting…
Read MoreBy Jennifer Taylor & Marina Luro A recent Supreme Court of Canada decision has clarified how to interpret exclusion clauses in sale of goods contracts. The Court in Earthco Soil Mixtures Inc. v Pine Valley…
Read MoreBy Mark Tector and Tiegan A. Scott Decision On April 3, 2024, the Alberta Court of King’s Bench (“ABKB”) upheld a decision of the Chief of the Commissions and Tribunals (the “CCT Decision”), which held…
Read MoreBy Erin Best, Stephen Penney, Robert Bradley, Megan Kieley1 and Elizabeth Fleet1 Expropriation is a live issue in Canadian courts. The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision to broaden the test for constructive expropriation in Annapolis…
Read More