George Tong and Ada Luk, our partners in our Corporate Team, have contributed to the Practice Note for Thomson Reuters’ Practical Law Global, outlining the statutory requirements to keep and maintain registers and other records for private limited companies incorporated in Hong Kong. The note can be accessed here: Company Records and Registers in Hong Kong

We have an outstanding team of lawyers and company secretarial services unit, who will be able to advise on and help you navigate regulatory compliance and corporate governance matters. Should you have any enquiries or require assistance in this aspect, please do not hesitate to contact us.

* Reproduced from Practical Law with the permission of the publishers. For further information, please visit www.practicallaw.com.

We are pleased to announce Ada Luk and Iris Cheng’s promotion to Partners at MinterEllison LLP. The promotion of Ada and Iris brings the firm’s number of Partners to 21.

Ada and Iris have shown unwavering commitment to our firm’s growth. Please join us in extending heartfelt congratulations to both Ada and Iris on reaching this significant career milestone.

For the third year, MinterEllison LLP is pleased to have hosted a 2-day work shadow programme in partnership with ARCH Community Outreach Careers Programme on 8-9 August. The Programme aims to empower local secondary school students to believe in themselves with an opportunity to learn about different career paths from professionals in different industry, in preparation for their university applications.

During their time with us, two students gained firsthand exposure to the day-to-day work of a solicitor, attended court hearings, and had meaningful discussions with our lawyers on career planning.

Our Consultant Katherine U, Paralegal(Pending Admission) Alan Sham, and trainee solicitor Matthew Lau led the initiative, which is part of our on-going commitment to community engagement and fostering the next generation of legal professionals.

The Hong Kong government has introduced a new “patent box” tax incentive through the Inland Revenue (Amendment) (Tax Concessions for Intellectual Property Income) Ordinance 2024. This new ordinance officially came into effect on 5 July 2024, allowing taxpayers to apply for the incentive retroactively from the 2023/24 year of assessment.

Under this new regime, qualifying profits derived from eligible intellectual property (IP) will be subject to a concessionary tax rate of 5%, significantly lower than Hong Kong’s standard profits tax rate of 16.5%. Eligible IP includes patents, copyrighted software, and new plant variety rights. Notably, eligible IP registered worldwide can qualify for the incentive, provided the profits are sourced in Hong Kong.

To benefit from the tax concession, the eligible IP must be primarily developed by the taxpayer. If the research and development (R&D) process involves acquiring IP or outsourcing R&D activities, the proportion of profits eligible for the concessionary rate may be reduced. Additionally, enterprises will need to obtain local registration for their non-Hong Kong patent and plant variety right to enjoy the concession, a requirement that will come into force two years after the implementation of the “patent box” tax incentive.

The key amendments are summarized as follows:

The Commerce & Economic Development Bureau stated that this regime encourages enterprises to increase their R&D activities and promotes IP trading, thereby strengthening Hong Kong’s competitiveness as a regional IP trading center. The government views this initiative as a crucial step in enhancing the city’s overall innovation and technology landscape.

For access to the full text of the Ordinance, please refer to the following: https://www.gld.gov.hk/egazette/english/gazette/file.php?year=2024&vol=28&no=27&extra=0&type=1&number=17

In the recent case of Joint and Several Liquidators of Yes! E-Sports Asia Holdings Limited (In Liquidation) v Holman Fenwick Willan (A Firm) [2024] HKCFI 1197, the court criticized the respondent law firm for imposing unwarranted conditions for compliance with a document production request made by the liquidators of their former client.  The liquidators stood in the shoes of the former client upon its liquidation, and there can be no question that the client is entitled to the return of its own files.  The court further made clear that there is no basis for the recipient of a document production request to insist on payment on account before compliance.

See full judgment here.