Skip to main content

Sebi scraps ´ brightline´ control test proposal

Sebi scraps ´ brightline´ control test proposal
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) on Friday said it has dropped the proposal of adopting the “brightline test” to determine acquisition of “control”.
In March 2016, the market regulator had floatedadiscussion paper on “brightline tests for acquisition of ´control´ under Sebi Takeover Regulations”.
The brightline test isadifferent approach to defining control, which prescribesalist of protective rights which do not amount to acquisition of control.The current framework, is largely formulaebased, with one of the criterion being acquisition of 25 per cent stake or voting rights.
Determining change of control is critical as it triggers an open offer to the public shareholders.
“The relevant issues have been examined intensively and in view of the aforesaid comments received and considering the current regulatory environment, it has been decided to continue with the practice of ascertaining acquisition of ´control´ as per the extant definition in the Takeover Regulations,” Sebi said inarelease. “It is felt that any change or dilution in the definition of control would have farreaching consequences sinceasimilar definition of ´control´ is used in the Companies Act, 2013, and other laws,” the regulator further said.
Sebi had received “mixed response” on the discussion paper with some supporting the idea for the “brightline” test, terming it asasubstantial step towards ease of doing business.
However, key stakeholders including the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) recommended against it.The MCA told the Sebi that changing the current definition of ´control´ may reduce regulatory scope and may be prone to abuse.
It told Sebi that it would be more appropriate to take decisions onacasetocase basis.
Moving to the “brightline” method would have entailed preparing an exhaustive list of situations, which could have posedabig challenge to the Sebi. “Even though debates have done the rounds among various stakeholders in the last couple of years, defining control is like defining honesty.
One cannot say thataperson is 99 per cent honest and one per cent dishonest.
Either one is honest or not at all. Similarly inagiven set of facts, Sebi has to say if it feels there is control or not, and then you havearight to appeal.
Defining negative or positive control based on various protective rights may beabad policy.
It has to be principlebased to be applied onacasetocase basis.
Let the jurisprudence develop from courts and judgments rather than being influenced,” said Sumit Agrawal, partner, Suvan Law Advisors.
The Business Standard, New Delhi, 09th september 2017


Popular posts from this blog

Shrinking footprints of foreign banks in India

Shrinking footprints of foreign banks in India Foreign banks are increasingly shrinking their presence in India and are also becoming more conservative than private and public sector counterparts. While many of them have sold some of their businesses in India as part of their global strategy, some are trying to keep their core expertise intact. Others are branching out to newer areas to continue business momentum.For example, HSBC and Barclays Bank in India have got out of the retail business, whereas corporate-focused Standard Chartered Bank is now trying to increase its focus on retail “Building a retail franchise is a huge exercise and takes a long time. You cannot afford to lose it,” said Shashank Joshi, Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ’s India head.According to the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) data, foreign banks’ combined loan book shrunk nearly 10 per cent from Rs 3.78 trillion in fiscal 2015-16 to Rs 3.42 trillion last financial year. The banking industry, which includes foreign banks…

New money laundering norms stump jewellery sector

New money laundering norms stump jewellery sector Dealers with turnover of Rs 2 crore and above covered; industry says threshold too low The central government has notified the money laundering rules for the gems and jewellery sector with immediate effect. Now, any entity deals in precious metals, precious stones, or other high-value goods and has a turnover of Rs 2 crore or more in a financial year will be covered under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA, 2002). The limit of Rs 2 crore would be calculated on the basis of the previous year’s turnover, said the notification. The directorate general of goods and service tax intelligence has been appointed under the Act. Sources said the government’s move to apply the PMLA to the jewellery sector was a fallout of income-tax raids on jewellers soon after demonetisation last November, when it was found that they sold gold and jewellery at a huge premium and accepted old currency notes as payment. The notification, issued on Augus…

Confusion over branded food GST

Confusion over branded food GST The GST Council's statement over the weekend on applying tax on branded food items has left most of the trade confused.

Even though the Council has not changed the rates on food -0 per cent on unbranded stuff and 5 per cent on brands -many small traders who didn't levy GST earlier said they could come under the 5 per cent slab after the clarification.

While they predicted some increase in consumer prices, large players said they can absorb GST in many ways and keep prices steady.

"Trade is confused and hence on behalf of our chamber, we have asked our members to go ahead and charge 5 per cent GST," said Sushil Sureka, general secretary of the Ahilya Chamber of Commerce and Industry in Indore.

The statement clarifying the application of GST came after some businesses were found deregistering their brands and selling under corporate brand name without paying tax, after the Council exempted unbranded food from the new all-encompassing indirec…