The all-powerful manager of a civil-law partnership: was it always a fiction?

The civil-law partnership has long been a popular control structure among wealth planners. In many cases, donors do not want to give up their assets entirely, and still want to retain some control over what they donate. Definitely in cases of transfers of family companies, the donors (often parents or family members) still want to retain control over the course of the business. 

The advantages of setting up a civil-law partnership structure
For various reasons, the civil-law partnership is considered a suitable instrument. Firstly, the assets contributed by parents can easily be transferred by donating the shares of the partnership. Secondly, the dual technique of managing the company and retaining usufruct on the donated shares allows parents to retain a certain amount of control and revenue. Another attractive advantage is that it is a simple private contract with few formalities and binding legal rules. For example, no intervention on the part of a notary is necessary, and the contribution, board of directors and duration can all be freely arranged. In addition, the civil-law partnership is not subject to corporation tax as it is fiscally transparent, which is often interesting from a tax perspective.

However, the consequences of this structure (incorporation of the partnership, contribution and donation of the shares) should not be underestimated. The parent-donor-manager cannot act as though these transactions never took place, still fully imposing their authority on the contributed assets. Disregarding the established structure in this way can cause problems both in assessing the donation and in terms of the management of the partnership.

Curtailment of management power by the judiciary?
The ruling of the Ghent Court of Appeal of 5 September 2018 concerns the management of the partnership. Although not all the facts of this case are known, we have been informed that it involved a manager who managed the partnership in his own interest, and not in the interest of the common special-purpose assets created by the contribution. The other partners (in this case the children) demanded that the manager's (their father) power to manage the business be withdrawn, and the court agreed with them. Although the power of control of the manager-donor is often set out in very broad terms in the articles of association of the civil-law partnership, it should not be forgotten that the civil-law partnership is and remains a purpose-bound asset. Consequently, not only does the manager of the partnership need to take his own interests into account when managing the partnership, but also needs to take the interests of the other partners into account. The Court of Appeal clearly states that (translation) "it is possible that the statutory manager may exercise his mandate in such a way that there is a risk that the interests of the company (including the proper management of the common special-purpose assets) may be undermined in the process".

The Court of Appeal presumably considered the arguments of the partners convincing enough, because it appointed a provisional administrator who has to take over the management of the civil-law partnership in the interest of all the partners. For the time being, it is not yet clear to what extent the manager had disregarded his obligations vis-à-vis the other partners. Some people now claim that a manager is "no longer the Sun King". It would be more accurate to say that managers never have been the Sun King (although some advisers may have praised managers as though they were). We can therefore say that this ruling does not fundamentally change anything, and is certainly no reason to panic. The ruling simply confirms that a manager must manage the contributed (and donated) assets in the interest of all partners, and not merely in his own interest. So nothing new in fact.

As such, the civil-law partnership remains an excellent structure for wealth planning. In most cases, the manager will exercise his authority reasonably. The courts will also exercise caution with the option of appointing a provisional administrator. This ruling makes it clear to everyone that the rules of the partnership must be respected: management must be exercised correctly in the interest of all partners. If you follow the rules of the game, you have nothing to fear! Since an appeal was lodged against this ruling in Cassation, it will clearly not be the end of the discussion .....

7 consequences of incomplete registration
The importance of correct registration in the crossroads bank for enterprises in 2019
Each company has its unique registration in the Crossroads Bank for Enterprises (CBE). However, businesses often forget to keep this registration up to date. This may have unpleasant consequences. The CBE is a register managed by the Federal Public Service Economy in which all basic information about companies and their establishments is kept. The CBE centralises the basic information about com
Are they 50% or 100% deductible?
Reception costs of a publicity event are only deductible in part
According to the letter of the law (art. 53, 8° of the Income Tax Code (WIB), reception costs incurred during a business related event are only 50% deductible. For some time already, there have been ongoing discussions concerning the question whether or not this limited deductibility likewise applies when the reception costs are incurred within the context of a publicity event.  And do these
Not as obvious as many people think
Restructuring? Think about your directorships
The restructuring of a company involves many aspects. An element that is often forgotten is the directorship positions held by the acquired company in a number of other companies. The question is what will happen with these directorships once the company holding them disappears as a result of a merger or division. In many cases, the intention is that these directorships will continue uninterrupted
This year it will be more likely that people will need to respond
Simplified declaration proposal? Check it thoroughly and respond in good time!
The number of simplified declaration proposals has been on the rise for several years now. This year, more than 3.2 million Belgians will receive such a proposal. If nothing needs to be changed, you do not need to respond either. However, if something does need to change (i.e. the Tax Authorities hold incorrect or incomplete data), then you must respond in good time. This year,
Also companies are required to follow the procedure
Conflicts of interest in the new Companies and Associations Code
The new Companies and Associations Code (CAC) entered into force on 1 May 2019. The CAC provides for broader and stricter regulations concerning conflicts of interest that may arise within an organisation. Broadening the scope of regulation means that the directors of cooperative companies, non-profit organisations (ASBL/VZW) and foundations&n
Important things you have to know
Some do’s and don’ts when making a bank donation
The bank donation is still a very popular way of donating money by bank transfer. This is not surprising: if it is carried out according to the rules of the game, the bank donation is a valid donation, without (too much) red tape and without incurring gift tax. However, there are a few rules that threaten to spoil the game if they are not followed correctly. Hence some tips that you should keep in
The further course of the relationship between the UK, the EU and the EEA
What impact will Brexit have on your corporate income tax?
For the time being, the United Kingdom (UK) is still part of the European Union (EU) and the European Economic Area (EEA). The UK has since been given until 31 October 2019 at the latest to implement Brexit. This means that cross-border transactions with the UK continue to fall within the scope of EU directives. However, after Brexit, the UK will no longer be able to rely on these directives. This
Less strict circular for catering sector
New circular regarding the VAT rate for restaurant and catering services
On 1 January 2010, the VAT rate for restaurant and catering services was reduced to 12%. This rate only applies to food. Drinks (including non-alcoholic beverages and coffee and tea) are still subject to the standard VAT rate of 21%. On 23 December 2009, the administration published an explanatory note in which it detailed how an overall price for a menu (including drinks) needed to
From now on, also 'high' fixed cost deductions for self-employed persons
Personal income tax return form AY 2019: several new features explained
From now on, also 'high' fixed cost deductions for self-employed and other changes  The new personal income tax return form for assessment year 2019 was published on 7 April, the starting shot for the annual tax return race. For the Flemish tax return, "only" 6 codes have been added, and for the Walloon and Brussels tax returns, "only"
Does the new definition of a company have any consequences for your organisation?
Broader requirements for registration with the CBE - clarification for unincorporated companies
In a previous article, we explained that the introduction of a definition of 'company' in the new Companies and Associations Code (CAC) also affects the registration with the CBE (Crossroads Bank for Enterprises). In this article, we will discuss in more detail the registration obligation for unincorporated companies.  Consequences of the broader definition of a company  With the new

Subscribe to our newsletter