Ask HN: What is the best jurisdiction for internationally distributed teams?
Say you want to set up a startup and the founders live in Germany, the US, Australia and Singapore. Your team will be fully remote from day one.
You are looking for a solution where
- the company is fully operational within days or weeks and can be set up without all founders having to come together in person
- day to day business can managed remotely (e.g. together with local tax advisor / lawyer)
- the jurisdiction has a solid good reputation
- the legal frameworks are understood and accepted by US / EU investors and VCs
- complying with all requirements around hiring employees is not too much of a burden
- official language of documents is English
- you have a good framework for rewarding employees with equity
Where would you incorporate and why?
I've looked into the US (obviously..), UK, Cayman (I know YC allows Cayman legal entities), Hong Kong, Cyprus etc. and see at lot of pros and cons for each option.
If you've gone through the process, can you share some insights and whether you'd do it again this way?
207 comments
[ 4.6 ms ] story [ 269 ms ] threadFrom doing a lot of research I get that the general recommendation is to avoid tax havens (at least the obvious, shady ones - US, Ireland, Netherlands etc. are of course fine).
It really depends on how you want to grow. If you’re bootstrapping on profits then tax implications can become very important. You can have a subsidiary in ‘non shady’ jurisdictions for any squeamish customers.
> Why is it that we try to advise all companies, no matter who or where, that Delaware C Corp is the right thing to do?
src: https://www.ycombinator.com/library/5C-tips-on-company-forma...
Delaware has long-specialized in making themselves an attractive place to incorporate. California... has a different mix of priorities, let's say.
As far as states, if you don't care, Delaware is probably the most common. Nevada and Wyoming have no state corporate income taxes, so they are also popular. More on that: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesnycouncil/2019/03/04/the-... . To incorporate, check out Firstbase (https://www.firstbase.io/) or Stripe Atlas.
Keep it simple.
Note that I am part of an LLP that a group of us use for investing and consulting projects and it’s a Wyoming corporation with company office in Kentucky and no legal presence in California. These kinds of specialized entities are not worth the hassle except in unusual cases, and almost certainly you aren’t a specialized case. For example this setup doesn’t have much of a benefit for me (though it doesn’t hurt) but it does for a couple of my partners. Also: I don’t mind paying taxes.
High % taxes are where things get way dicier, e.g., some US states have high capital gains / transaction taxes while others are basically 0, which vastly changes how good exits are for employees
"Penny wise, pound foolish" => optimize for low opex overhead on growth. Another example: $1K to setup a new state registration for an employee sucks, but is fine relative to their salary, so not the the # to optimize on.
“Abbreviated governance - shareholders may agree in writing to treat the corporation as a partnership, operate without a board of directors, dispense with annual meetings, and make a shareholder agreement.
Advantages
• Limited liability - the law says shareholders don’t have personal liability even though they relax corporate formalities in operations.
• Ease of operation - operates without pomp and circumstance required in regular corporations where hundreds of shareholders must receive information and vote.
• Cost of operation - relaxed corporate governance means lower legal, accounting and administrative fees for lower total costs of operation.
• Deadlock prevention - provides access to court when shareholders are deadlocked and harm could befall the corporation through lack of action.
• Buy-out provisions - shareholders may buy out a deceased shareholder’s interest according to shareholder agreements”
https://sos.wyo.gov/Forms/Publications/ChoiceIsYours.pdf
Many of the disadvantages listed are no different than for other corporate entities.
And the point is that once you are established the laws are well known and understood by corporate lawyers (in other words the opposite of arcane, at least for lawyers) and so will be easier to deal with for all parties.
If you’re starting a small business just incorporate in the state you live in. If you’re starting a startup, don’t go for a false economy.
http://letsdeel.com
That’s not a unique feature of the USA. It doesn’t matter what country you’re incorporated in. You’re still obligated to follow the local laws and tax codes of any foreign country you hire in. Technically some companies (shady crypto plays especially) will try to incorporate in a weird location and then flaunt laws and pay people “under the table”, but they’re just breaking those laws, not escaping them.
This means, that eg as a pass-through partnership incorporated as an llc, getting money out from the company will incur a 30% tax plus state plus local taxes.
There's additionally a problem (more for small corps), that the paperwork on the above will involve at least 2 accontants -one from US, one locally, meaning non-trivial startup costs.
None of this is to disencourage you to go with US; just do so with open eyes, and it's worth sitting down with an accountant in potential target country _before_ incorporation.
So for OP, for operational simplificity, a domicile with the least number of treaties would be best (but possibly horrendous for tax efficiency).
The witholding rate is not the tax rate... if your actual tax burden is less than 30%, you file a tax return in April and Uncle Sam writes you a check for the difference. There's a time-value-of-money cost, but not an actual cost.
See my old comment for some service options
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31254615
To name a few:
I have a long history with e-Residency and know many e-Residents (e-Resident since 2015, 3 companies, member of EERICA.ee). Happy to chat about it. Email in bio.My situation is complex, but, generally, the advantages of Estonian registration are found in drastically simplified and lower-cost business registration and processing (vs say a GmbH in Germany or Switzerland with high share capital and accounting costs) or ease of operation for digital nomads or fully remote companies. A OÜ isn't for everyone in every life situation, but when it fits, it tends to work really well.
A LLC or C Corp in the US could work just as well (or better), depending on the situation.
Since Switzerland is currently the only country in Europe without CFC rules[1], it seems that an Estonian company can only be managed from Estonia or Switzerland without being considered as local for tax purposes in another jurisdiction.
[1] https://taxfoundation.org/controlled-foreign-corporation-cfc...
> My situation is complex
This means my situation pretty much does not apply to anyone else, and the tax residency question is very complex in my case, as well. I won't bore you with details. :)
Here's a few examples:
In Germany, it reduces the overhead of owning a company dramatically (the overhead of a German GmbH is quite a bit more than just taxes, including mandatory registrations, etc.).
In Switzerland, it reduces necessary share capital from 25'000CHF to 2,500EUR (which can be deferred).
In the US, it probably doesn't make sense unless your situation is very special.
As a digital nomad, it gives you a clear business home while traveling the world (and running everything online is essential).
Estonian accounting and business management is all electronic, so you can essentially run your business 99% in Estonia, do yearly tax reports in your resident, all while reducing the day-to-day complexity of running your business significantly. (No more paper or faxing!)
For non-EU residents, an Estonian entity gives them a clear legal path to marketing and selling in the EU with proper VAT, etc. reporting.
Every one I know has had slightly different reasons while Estonia made sense for them. I'm also purposefully not addressing the intangibles of registering a business in a well-functioning, well-regulated, forward-looking jurisdiction, which is a large component for many of my friends. (We care about Estonia, like its ideals, and want to see it succeed on a global scale.)
Multi-country taxation is very complicated. You can get a general idea from asking online, but then you REALLY need to talk to an expert in those specific countries unless your business is just so small that the governments involved would never care.
If you don't want to do that, the best/simplest situation is almost certainly incorporating in the place where the founders actually live permanently.
IANAL, of course.
In general, I strongly agree.
In the particular case, however, there could be aspects that speak against it. Planing to have employees from another country might be such an aspect. If your company resides in country A and wants to employ someone from a country B, there are typically three options, but what is actually possible and which rules apply depents on the actual regulation in both countries: a) The easiest is as a contractor. But this might not be legal, if the work-relation has the characteristics of an employment. b) The person from country B gets an employment contract of the company in country A, but is despatched to country B. This often requires that the person has a work visa for country A (unless inside the EU for EU citizens). c) The company establishes a subsidiary company in country B that employs the person.
The first thing I would do is seeking for advise from your local chambers of commerce and then from the foreign chambers of commerce of the countries you are planning to employ people from.
Open the company anywhere the founder(s) is/are. Just pick a reasonable location if you have many options.
The reasons being that you should never run a business without accounting and legal advice, so you will have someone take care of it for you, and the cost will always cover the risk of doing it yourself poorly.
And when you’re successful, you can always hire more legal/accounting or relocate.
I’ll conclude a bit more harshly: If you’re somehow relying on the costs of operations to balance the success of your company, you might as well just reconsider.
Do you need a subsidiary or some legal entity in the foreign country in order to pay employment taxes? If they're direct employees of the US entity, what's their legal status in the US? Can you avoid all these questions by using foreign contractors rather than hiring foreign employees?
2. If you want to hire someone abroad (outside of the business' country) then contractor.
3. If you hire enough contractors, you may be forced to set up an entity or use a PEO. Local governments see that as skirting employment law.
(I work at an all-remote company that is pretty transparent, and people lambast us all the time because they are upset we don't hire in $a_country_they_think_we_should and it's almost always "tax and labor law is complex, we can't hire there until we understand the implications better.")
Ps most people set up their own company and we contract with that.
Edit: add ps
Also, where in the US did you incorporate? Delaware?
I would absolutely do the same in future. The contract to individual or individual's company is a standard model for remote companies like us that work on open source software. Some of our staff just have email & github access and that's it.
My email is in my profile. Send me email if you want to discuss. I'm happy to share details directly.
The setup sounds great! I assume that you flipped to a C-Corp? Are most of the founders in the US or are you living abroad? How long did it take to flip the UK LTD? Do you force your contractors to set up companies or is it up to them?
At least if the contractors are in Germany and are working full-time for you then I think they would get issues with “Scheinselbständigkeit” if they don’t have a company, that’s why I am asking.
We're a US C-Corp. Our founders are spread out over the US and Europe. I'm not one of them myself, but rather joined later.
The flip from UK to US took 2 months end-to-end and cost close to $100K all-in. This might seem like a lot, but we had a working company with contracts and needed to be careful to avoid creating a taxable event. We also had to arrange transfer payments as we kept the UK company as a subsidiary to avoid the aforesaid event. (A real headache--it's better to keep just the US company if you can, post-flip.) If anybody is coming out of the UK I strongly recommend Ashfords LLP on the UK side and Wilson, Marshall, Taylor on the US side. They are both super and guided us well.
As far as staff--we don't force them to do anything in countries where we don't have a legal presence. We leave it up to them to make whatever arrangements they find reasonable and route payments accordingly. In general having your own company seems to be the best route across many companies. I used that myself in the US before we flipped, because I was being paid from the UK.
I can't speculate on German labor law as I've not had experience with it. Our approach is to take things a day at a time and work things out as they arise. It has worked well so far.
To be honest we've probably had more issues with US jurisdictions than non-US. The state and local tax regime in the US is very complicated and requires accounting and tax advice on a regular basis. I was surprised how much attention it needs.
Happy to answer more questions if it helps people.
Similarly, I often had just a Google (email, calendar, docs, etc) and GitHub account. Legal agreements were like 3 pages total (mostly an NDA).
I've used Velocity Global to handle local laws, compensation (401K in USA but Pension Plan in UK/Ireland etc.), currency, and hiring requirements. There are others recommended elsewhere in the comments.
We are US based and used them for almost 8 countries so far (UK, Mexico, Hong Kong, Germany...)
https://velocityglobal.com
Nice weather too.
>raised money
If you want to raise VC funds with no revenue there really is no better option than Delaware. Malta/Isle of Man/Jersey are meant for businesses that generate so much cash you don't know what to do with it.
Because of the US FATCA law you may have trouble opening a bank account in some countries (smaller entities simply can’t be bothered with the paperwork the US demands on accounts for “US Persons”, a term which has specific meaning). In practice this just means you have to deal with larger banks.
Note I’ve been a US resident for decades, and started several companies here, but am not a US citizen and have lived and worked on three other continents as well so had no prior bias.
* Note 2: this business is intended to be quite profitable relatively soon, rather than a “focus on user growth and toggle the profit switch later business.
You mean opening a bank account personally or for the company? Because for the company I'd simply use Wise or Mercury and be done with it.
Wise has been great for managing my personal payments, but I still have personal bank accounts in a couple of countries where I hold property because it just makes things easier there.
I think getting a German bank to open a business account for a U.S. startup would be a nightmare at best.
which would be a local company registered in the Netherlands?
That only counts for companies with operations in the US. My wife is a US citizen, and my bank - a medium-sized Danish bank - did not care, because they don't operate any business in the US, so they do not need to provide any paperwork for her to US authorities.
Many Dutch financial institutions hate people who have the "US person" status. If you own a US-incorporated company then I believe you will gain that status. Banks, lenders, stock brokers, etc will either refuse to do business with you, or will give you a lot of paperwork headache and/or charge you more tax. I think this has to do with the fact that US persons have to comply with FACTA.
For example I have 3 stock brokerage accounts (1 for personal, 1 for pension, 1 for business). They all ask me whether I have the US person status, and 2 of them just flat out tell me that they won't do business with me if I answer yes.
Not sure whether financial institutions in other European companies also come with this caveat. But since it's related to FACTA, I believe they do.
However, are you sure that simply by owning a US company you become a US person? Because according to my understanding if you don't live in the US (and don't spend more than 4 months / year there) you wouldn't actually be tax resident in the US and therefore also not be a "US person".
But I'm not 100% sure.
HSBC had the most succinct summary I’ve seen: https://www.fatca.hsbc.com/-/media/fatca/pdfs/global---commo...
The Australian Tax Office has a reasonable guide on the overall scheme and how it applies: https://www.ato.gov.au/General/International-tax-agreements/...
My initial assumption that seems to be confirmed by HSBC and the ATO is “no”.
The banks deal with FATCA with checkboxes. If you cross one incorrectly, I can imagine they need documentation for that. And no bank wants that.
This is purely a procedural thing for a bank. If you qualify as a US Person then the bank is going to withhold additional tax on your accounts and you’ll have to get a rebate for any discrepancies you are owed when you file your returns. While I hate the whole process and think it’s a gross overreach by the US gov, it’s governance 101 stuff for a bank. If you’re dealing with a bank that is incapable of doing this I’d recommend finding different bank. This is like the “no brown m&ms” basic competency check in a band’s tour rider. If they’re not getting this right then who knows where else they’re incompetent.
For non-VC funded companies HK is great, allows for tax minimization, minimal headaches, access to international banks and potential access to Chinese market if that is important for your business.
What you see in the media is one thing, the reality on the ground (for business at least) is very much the same as it always has been.
If anything HK is even more like Singapore than it was in the past.
The cost of a limited company is £12. It’s formed in a day. Use https://www.ukpostbox.com if you need an address.
The legal system is well known and entrepreneur friendly. Accountancy and company admin are simple and relaxed. HMRC is supportive. You can pay dividends on a flexible schedule.
There’s a very large ecosystem of financial support, innovation grants, incubators, accelerators, angel networks and VC firms.
Flip to the US for later stage funding. Nice problem to have.
Needless to say, IANAL, this is not financial advice, crayons, etc.
Just out of curiosity - did you experience any issues selling to EU customers because of Brexit?
The UK is still a relative good countries for starting up, just not as good as it used to be.
(if you're selling beef, cars or washing machines then yes there's potential uncertainty)
Accountants, if you can get one to take you on, they do what they want, I always wanted my accounts done within a few months of year end but they always dragged it out to the last minute. Poor advice at best.
Layers, had a good one once but he retired to France.
The Police are absolutely useless when they want to be but they will fuck you over when they see fit. Dont ever speak out against the British, you'll get done over in more ways that one, and thats from someone who was born in the UK!
From what I could find, using a service company to sort everything out - company registration, bank account, legal address, first year taxes filed etc - the cost was around €1000. The same service in the UK is much cheaper.
I guess this only matters relative to the size of your business. At the time I was only looking for a small holding company, with not much revenue initially.
We do global remote contractors for those reasons + unclear equity, but would like to do more. Per-state US registrations / benefits / payroll are getting easy enough so minor overhead, equity is clear, and all states at-will. But getting that international is unclear.
And.... IANAL, we pay people to figure this stuff out or stay away from it.
afaik for example for blockchain related stuff switzerland, especially the canton/city of zug is a very good choice - for legal reasons etc.
br, v
This approach exploded fairly spectacularly in the UK for many of those deemed by the tax office (HMRC) to be using it purely as a device to attempt to avoid being "on payroll"
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/understanding-off-payroll-workin...
Even BBC presenters were setting up "personal service companies" to try and avoid taxes (allegedly at the urging of the BBC) and ended up owing the tax office a bunch of back taxes.
This might not be an issue if the corporate income tax + financial gains tax comes out the same as payroll tax. The bigger issue here is that you can use the remaining funds to invest and losses form a tax deduction base. More commonly however people just cram as much personal consumption inside the companies before paying out the salary, even things like travel and dining out. In the EU, VAT is commonly quite high and you get refunds on that if the expenses are on the company.
What you should check is what's the best way for each person to own their share in the company. Straight ownership might have some issues. Having each one have a company that then owns the parent company might be a way. Or having a company own your company then the founders own the parent company.
First off: There is no such thing as a "remote friendly" jurisdiction. Estonia is trying to market this, but don't drink the Kool Aid. Someone is going to have to make a trip to the bank or the notary every now and then. They'll have to show their faces. They'll have to affix their signature to things. With ink on paper. You will have to deal with business partners who will think this way: "This guy is based where I am based. He knows that if he tries to defraud me, the police will come knocking. So he's probably not trying to defraud me, so it should be safe to do business with them." Versus "This guy is just someone on the other side of the planet sending e-mails. He knows that if he successfully defrauds me, I won't be able to do anything about it. Therefore I don't want to take the risk."
A lot depends on trust and interpersonal dynamics between founders.
If there is a lot of trust between the founders, I'd pick one of the jurisdictions where a founder is actually based. Say you pick the U.S. for ease of access to capital. This means that the person who is physically in the U.S. would probably end up having to liaise, frequently in person, with banks, accountants, government offices, etc. This puts a huge admin burden on that person, and also requires a lot of trust from the founders in the other jurisdictions that this person won't abuse their privileged position. If that founder drops out and there isn't yet any physical presences in the U.S. except for that founder, the others will be in a difficult position, because their own jurisdictions might not recognize that this is legitimately a U.S.-entity if there is no actual person in the U.S. who is connected with this entity. So that's why it requires a lot of trust.
An alternative might be: Set up 4 sole traderships and a "placeholder entity" in a zero tax jurisdiction that kicks into gear when real money starts getting to the table. So:
* Frank Deutschmann registers with German authorities as a German sole tradership.
* John Smith registers with U.S. authorities as a U.S. sole tradership.
* Aussie Australian registers in Australia as an Australian sole tradership.
* Sing Singapore registers in Singapore as a Singapore sole tradership.
* Startup Inc registers in Bermuda, with each of the four holding a 25% ownership stake.
Startup Inc passes the following resolution, and correspondingly makes a contract with each of the other four entities:
Revenues: We intend to sell an API to clients at $1 per 100 calls. To achieve that, Startup Inc will subcontract Deutschmann to run one server, Smith to run one server, Austrialian to run one server, Singapore to run one server. When a request hits a server, the server should use a random number generator: With a 25% probability it will handle the request itself. With a probability of 25% for each of the other three servers, respectively, it will redirect the client to one of the other three servers. Every partner has to pay the costs for their own server (AWS bills etc). Every partner gets to keep revenue of up to $100k per year for requests their server serves. Revenue in excess of that goes to Startup Inc. Intellectual Property: All IP belongs to Startup Inc.
The thing about the API was just an example, but you can think of analogous ways of e.g. splitting sales of widgets. The load balancing algorithm is obviously stupid, this was just for simplicity of exposition.
The great thing about this arrangement:
* As long as your api makes below $400k, Startup Inc doesn't handle any money. The German authorities only deal with a German sole tradership and tax it on its small profits, and don't care about the rest. The U.S. authorities only deal with a U.S. sole tradership and tax it on its small profits, etc.
* The Bermuda entity is t...
Sorry it isn't directly against your constraints but we are foreigners in the US so I thought I'd mention it. More information is always better :)
Good luck! Eager to hear how it goes.
So I should correct this. We did end up with an LLC but the C corp would have worked just fine apparently.
Thanks for bringing that up. I'd forgotten.
US Person problems? Those are just part of the annoyances the US will bring you if it becomes a meeting point through the logistics of the boss needing to go there in person more often. I've met people working in Switzerland for the FAANGs in a tier beyond the people who work out of Canada to get around US travel complications, for additional US made complications for traveling to Canada. An accidental US person by marriage who travels with their partner and has a different income situation might also find they needed to be counting days in the US for tax reasons, etc.
Many companies seem to end up dual homed in Ireland and the US and that seems to work. Personally, I would start with seeing what Ireland alone looks like and delay anything in the US if possible.
So in a bad case as majority owner you will then have to do the taxes and other admin topics in the country of your company AND in Germany and you'll always have a special relationship with a curious tax office.
So the only way to have really a startup in a non-German jurisdiction is to make sure that your management decisions (and usually also some infrastructure) is set up there.
The question that I am wondering about is more like - you have four founders with 25% each who live in four different countries.
Where is the company resident in that situation?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_foreign_corporati...
This is the actual reason why multinationals move headquarters there.