Jämförelse mellan olika länders aktiebolagsformer med avseende på minsta kapitalinsatsen i bolaget
(2013) LAGF03 20132Faculty of Law
Department of Law
- Abstract
- In a limited liability company or similar corporate form with limited liability for the shareholders the legal capital plays an important role. The minimum capital requirements have appeared in some jurisdictions. In some countries, the minimum capital requirement have been abolished. This work will be a comparative comparison between German, British and Swedish companies rules with focus on the minimum capital requirement of a company.
The capital requirement is of interest to entrepreneurs who want to start their own business. A minimum contribution is important for the contractors consideration concerning both the corporation as the country of establishment. The capital requirement is therefore interesting for Sweden's... (More) - In a limited liability company or similar corporate form with limited liability for the shareholders the legal capital plays an important role. The minimum capital requirements have appeared in some jurisdictions. In some countries, the minimum capital requirement have been abolished. This work will be a comparative comparison between German, British and Swedish companies rules with focus on the minimum capital requirement of a company.
The capital requirement is of interest to entrepreneurs who want to start their own business. A minimum contribution is important for the contractors consideration concerning both the corporation as the country of establishment. The capital requirement is therefore interesting for Sweden's competitiveness as a entrepreneurship relative to other European countries such as Britain. Next to this is the weight that limited company forms is made available so that entrepreneurs choose company form the basis of the business and not from the capital.
The intention of this paper is to do a comparative analysis to get a broader perspective on the capital requirement for the types of companies with limited liability for the shareholders in Swedish, English, German law and EU law. In the work some aspects that underlie the determination of capital requirements will be treated. The Swedish capital protection system will be treated. A comparison of capital maintenance rule in the swedish companies law versus wrongful trading rules are made.
For public companies is required a minimum capital in all the countries surveyed. Capital requirements are set higher than what other companies in the Second Company Law Directive. In the UK, Germany private companies lacking of a minimum capital rule. Although the SPE- companies proposed 1 euro in legal capital. In Sweden, however, has chosen to have a fixed capital requirement of 50 000 kr in private limited companies. To abolish the minimum capital for private limited companies require that other capital rules need to be reformed.
The Swedish capital maintenance rule are based on the company's legal capital. In UK the wrongful trading rules is independent of a legal capital. There are arguments which suggest that the wrongful trading rules work more appropriately then the Swedish capital deficiency rules. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- I ett aktiebolag eller motsvarande bolagsform med begränsat ansvar för aktieägarna står aktiekapitalet i centrum. Lagstadgat krav på aktiekapital har förekommit i somliga rättsordningar. I vissa länder har kapitalkravet eftergetts. I detta arbete kommer att göras en komparativ jämförelse mellan Tysklands, Storbritanniens, Sveriges och EU:s aktiebolagsformer med avseende på minsta kapitalkravet i bolaget.
Kapitalkravet är av intresse för entreprenörer som vill starta egen rörelse. En minsta insats har betydelse för företagares övervägande gällande såväl bolagsform som etableringsland. Kapitalinsats är därför intressant för Sveriges konkurrenskraft avseende företagsetableringar i förhållande till övriga Europeiska länder som exempelvis... (More) - I ett aktiebolag eller motsvarande bolagsform med begränsat ansvar för aktieägarna står aktiekapitalet i centrum. Lagstadgat krav på aktiekapital har förekommit i somliga rättsordningar. I vissa länder har kapitalkravet eftergetts. I detta arbete kommer att göras en komparativ jämförelse mellan Tysklands, Storbritanniens, Sveriges och EU:s aktiebolagsformer med avseende på minsta kapitalkravet i bolaget.
Kapitalkravet är av intresse för entreprenörer som vill starta egen rörelse. En minsta insats har betydelse för företagares övervägande gällande såväl bolagsform som etableringsland. Kapitalinsats är därför intressant för Sveriges konkurrenskraft avseende företagsetableringar i förhållande till övriga Europeiska länder som exempelvis Storbritannien. Utöver detta är av vikt att aktiebolagsformen görs tillgänglig så att företagare väljer bolagsform utifrån rörelsens behov och inte utifrån kapitalkrav.
Avsikten med uppsatsen är att genom komparativ analys få ett vidare perspektiv på kapitalkravet för bolagsformer med begränsat ansvar för aktieägarna i svensk, engelsk, tysk rätt och EU-rätten. I arbetet kommer att belysas några aspekter som ligger bakom bestämmandet av kapitalkravet. Det svenska kapitalskyddssystemet behandlas. En jämförelse av kapitalbristregler i aktiebolagslagen visavi wrongful trading reglerna görs.
För publika bolag ställs ett krav på minsta kapital i samtliga undersökta länder. Kapitalkraven är satta högre än vad andra bolagsdirektivet föreskriver. För privat bolag saknas i princip ett krav på minsta kapital i Storbritannien och i Tyskland. Även för SPE-bolaget föreslås 1 euro i aktiekapital. I Sverige däremot har man ett kapitalkrav på 50 000 sek för privata aktiebolag. Avskaffning av kravet på minimikapital för privata aktiebolag ställer emellertid krav på att övriga kapitalskyddsregler reformeras.
De svenska kapitalbristreglerna bygger på bolagets egna aktiekapital. De engelska reglerna, wrongful trading, är oberoende av ett lagstadgat krav på kapital. Det finns argument som talar för att wrongful trading reglerna fungerar mer ändamålsmässigt än de svenska kapitalbristreglerna. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/4228426
- author
- Jovcic, Miroslav LU
- supervisor
-
- Per Nilsén LU
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20132
- year
- 2013
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- associationsrätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 4228426
- date added to LUP
- 2014-01-28 17:35:15
- date last changed
- 2014-01-28 17:35:15
@misc{4228426,
abstract = {{In a limited liability company or similar corporate form with limited liability for the shareholders the legal capital plays an important role. The minimum capital requirements have appeared in some jurisdictions. In some countries, the minimum capital requirement have been abolished. This work will be a comparative comparison between German, British and Swedish companies rules with focus on the minimum capital requirement of a company.
The capital requirement is of interest to entrepreneurs who want to start their own business. A minimum contribution is important for the contractors consideration concerning both the corporation as the country of establishment. The capital requirement is therefore interesting for Sweden's competitiveness as a entrepreneurship relative to other European countries such as Britain. Next to this is the weight that limited company forms is made available so that entrepreneurs choose company form the basis of the business and not from the capital.
The intention of this paper is to do a comparative analysis to get a broader perspective on the capital requirement for the types of companies with limited liability for the shareholders in Swedish, English, German law and EU law. In the work some aspects that underlie the determination of capital requirements will be treated. The Swedish capital protection system will be treated. A comparison of capital maintenance rule in the swedish companies law versus wrongful trading rules are made.
For public companies is required a minimum capital in all the countries surveyed. Capital requirements are set higher than what other companies in the Second Company Law Directive. In the UK, Germany private companies lacking of a minimum capital rule. Although the SPE- companies proposed 1 euro in legal capital. In Sweden, however, has chosen to have a fixed capital requirement of 50 000 kr in private limited companies. To abolish the minimum capital for private limited companies require that other capital rules need to be reformed.
The Swedish capital maintenance rule are based on the company's legal capital. In UK the wrongful trading rules is independent of a legal capital. There are arguments which suggest that the wrongful trading rules work more appropriately then the Swedish capital deficiency rules.}},
author = {{Jovcic, Miroslav}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Jämförelse mellan olika länders aktiebolagsformer med avseende på minsta kapitalinsatsen i bolaget}},
year = {{2013}},
}