Clarifications on the beneficial owners’ communication
Relating to the beneficial owners’ communication (for AML purposes) expiring on 11.12, the Manual prepared by Unioncamere occurs as an operational support – please, refer to the recalled manual for any specific and appropriate reference.
The clarifications about the transmission methods are remarkable; among the other provisions, it is declared that if the communication is transmitted by a third party (for example, the company consultant), this person must apply her/his digital signature near the declarant’s signature on the “accompanying bill”.
In addition, there are some relevant provisions about the trusts and the other legal entities related to them. In particular, the expression “legal entities related to trusts” refers to “fiduciary mandate”. Only referring to the declarant, it is disposed that this one has to coincide with the trustee both in the case of trusts and in the case of fiduciary mandates.
Furthermore, still referring to this type of institute (fiduciary mandate), it is declared that the transmission of the beneficial owner’s communication is compulsory only in case of contracts stipulated with fiduciary companies – the Register of Companies responsible is the one located in the area where it’s possible to find the headquarter of the fiduciary company responsible for the communication. In addition, for each stipulated fiduciary mandate arises the transmission obligation of a single and separated practice – in fact, there’s not the provision of cumulative practices.
On the other hand, only referring to the beneficial owner in case of fiduciary mandate, the specific figure is identified in the settlor and in the beneficiary.