Limited Liability Partnerships in the United Kingdom-Do They Have a Role for Small Firms?

J. Freedman
{"title":"Limited Liability Partnerships in the United Kingdom-Do They Have a Role for Small Firms?","authors":"J. Freedman","doi":"10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199264353.003.0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I. INTRODUCTION The emergence of a new legal form, the limited liability partnership (LLP), in the United Kingdom, in 2001, may be depicted by some as part of a general, evolutionary movement towards new limited liability vehicles, influenced by such moves in the United States.1 Some are also suggesting that this new legal form, the first such innovation in the United Kingdom for over a century, will provide a more suitable vehicle for small, owner-managed firms than the ordinary limited company.2 This view of the LLP's development and potential will be questioned here. It will be shown that the U.K. LLP resulted entirely from political pressure from professional firms for limited liability in respect to their activities and from their unwillingness to incorporate. Although this new legal form has now been made available to all firms, not just the professions, it has not been designed with small trading businesses in mind, nor in response to small business concerns. The LLP legislation is complex and leaves much uncertainty, for example on the question of liability. It offers possibilities for tax reduction, but as such may distort commercial decisions due to this lack of tax neutrality between different legal forms. It will be argued that the LLP is an unsuitable vehicle for most small, owner managed, non-professional firms, at least in its present form and state of development. It will be some time, if ever, before it is of value to this type of small firm. Its importance should not be exaggerated. Prior to work on the LLP commencing, the Law Commission and Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) had both concluded, after consultation, that no new small business vehicle with limited liability was needed,3 The U.K. limited company (the usual form of incorporation in the United Kingdom, used by small and large, private and public firms alike) is already flexible. The tax pressures that resulted in the growth of the LLP and the LLC in the United States, for example, do not apply in the United Kingdom. The Law Commission was reviewing general partnership law during the time the LLP was under consideration. In addition, a major review of company law was under way (the Company Law Review), which included amongst its tasks a review of the appropriateness and need for simplification of company law for small, private firms. Regrettably, the LLP proposals, consultation, and implementation were conducted by the Department of Trade and Industry on a \"fast track\" outside either of these other law reform exercises. This fragmented approach to business law reform is not ideal. In order to provide a framework and reference point for the discussion that follows, Part II of this article briefly examines the needs of small businesses in relation to legal structure and outlines the arguments against the notion that the LLP will be an important new vehicle for ordinary small businesses. Part III then examines the pressures that led to the introduction of the LLP in the United Kingdom, and Part IV evaluates the characteristics of the resulting legal vehicle. It is argued in conclusion, in Part V, that this new legal creature is not the result of an evolutionary and competitive process that has produced an efficient result, but rather is the outcome of a political reaction to pressures which has brought forth a strange legal vehicle of restricted value for small firms. II. LIMITED LIABILITY, SMALL FIRMS AND LLPS-AN OVERVIEW A. LLPs--A New Corporate Form Open to All. The U.K. LLP was proposed initially to meet the perceived needs of professional firms, primarily auditors, who were complaining of unrealistic expectations and \"deep pockets\" syndrome due to their inability to limit their liability.4 As the legislation was consulted upon and debated, it became clear that it was very difficult to sustain an argument that this new legal form should be limited to certain regulated groups of professionals. …","PeriodicalId":83094,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of corporation law","volume":"26 1","pages":"897"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of corporation law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199264353.003.0010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

I. INTRODUCTION The emergence of a new legal form, the limited liability partnership (LLP), in the United Kingdom, in 2001, may be depicted by some as part of a general, evolutionary movement towards new limited liability vehicles, influenced by such moves in the United States.1 Some are also suggesting that this new legal form, the first such innovation in the United Kingdom for over a century, will provide a more suitable vehicle for small, owner-managed firms than the ordinary limited company.2 This view of the LLP's development and potential will be questioned here. It will be shown that the U.K. LLP resulted entirely from political pressure from professional firms for limited liability in respect to their activities and from their unwillingness to incorporate. Although this new legal form has now been made available to all firms, not just the professions, it has not been designed with small trading businesses in mind, nor in response to small business concerns. The LLP legislation is complex and leaves much uncertainty, for example on the question of liability. It offers possibilities for tax reduction, but as such may distort commercial decisions due to this lack of tax neutrality between different legal forms. It will be argued that the LLP is an unsuitable vehicle for most small, owner managed, non-professional firms, at least in its present form and state of development. It will be some time, if ever, before it is of value to this type of small firm. Its importance should not be exaggerated. Prior to work on the LLP commencing, the Law Commission and Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) had both concluded, after consultation, that no new small business vehicle with limited liability was needed,3 The U.K. limited company (the usual form of incorporation in the United Kingdom, used by small and large, private and public firms alike) is already flexible. The tax pressures that resulted in the growth of the LLP and the LLC in the United States, for example, do not apply in the United Kingdom. The Law Commission was reviewing general partnership law during the time the LLP was under consideration. In addition, a major review of company law was under way (the Company Law Review), which included amongst its tasks a review of the appropriateness and need for simplification of company law for small, private firms. Regrettably, the LLP proposals, consultation, and implementation were conducted by the Department of Trade and Industry on a "fast track" outside either of these other law reform exercises. This fragmented approach to business law reform is not ideal. In order to provide a framework and reference point for the discussion that follows, Part II of this article briefly examines the needs of small businesses in relation to legal structure and outlines the arguments against the notion that the LLP will be an important new vehicle for ordinary small businesses. Part III then examines the pressures that led to the introduction of the LLP in the United Kingdom, and Part IV evaluates the characteristics of the resulting legal vehicle. It is argued in conclusion, in Part V, that this new legal creature is not the result of an evolutionary and competitive process that has produced an efficient result, but rather is the outcome of a political reaction to pressures which has brought forth a strange legal vehicle of restricted value for small firms. II. LIMITED LIABILITY, SMALL FIRMS AND LLPS-AN OVERVIEW A. LLPs--A New Corporate Form Open to All. The U.K. LLP was proposed initially to meet the perceived needs of professional firms, primarily auditors, who were complaining of unrealistic expectations and "deep pockets" syndrome due to their inability to limit their liability.4 As the legislation was consulted upon and debated, it became clear that it was very difficult to sustain an argument that this new legal form should be limited to certain regulated groups of professionals. …
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
英国的有限责任合伙企业——它们对小企业有作用吗?
2001年,英国出现了一种新的法律形式——有限责任合伙企业(LLP),一些人可能将其描述为受美国此类举措的影响,向新的有限责任公司发展的普遍演变运动的一部分。一些人还认为,这种新的法律形式是英国一个多世纪以来的第一次此类创新,将为小型企业提供更合适的工具。业主管理的公司比普通的有限责任公司这种关于LLP的发展和潜力的观点在这里将受到质疑。本文将表明,英国有限责任合伙完全是由于专业公司在其活动方面的有限责任的政治压力和他们不愿意合并而产生的。虽然这种新的法律形式现在已经适用于所有公司,而不仅仅是专业公司,但它的设计并没有考虑到小型贸易企业,也没有考虑到小型企业的担忧。LLP的立法是复杂的,留下了很多不确定性,例如在责任问题上。它提供了减税的可能性,但由于不同法律形式之间缺乏税收中立性,因此可能会扭曲商业决策。有人认为,对于大多数小型的、所有者管理的非专业公司来说,LLP是一种不合适的工具,至少在目前的形式和发展状态下是这样。这将是一段时间,如果有的话,是有价值的这种类型的小公司。它的重要性不应被夸大。在LLP的工作开始之前,法律委员会和贸易和工业部(DTI)在咨询后都得出结论,不需要新的有限责任的小型商业工具,3英国有限公司(在英国,小型和大型,私营和上市公司都使用的常见公司形式)已经很灵活。例如,导致美国LLP和LLC增长的税收压力在英国并不适用。在审议LLP期间,法律委员会正在审查普通合伙法。此外,正在对公司法进行一项重大审查(公司法审查),其任务之一是审查为小型私营公司简化公司法的适当性和必要性。遗憾的是,LLP的提案、咨询和实施都是由贸易和工业部在这些其他法律改革活动之外的“快速通道”上进行的。这种分散的商业法改革方法并不理想。为了为接下来的讨论提供一个框架和参考点,本文的第二部分简要地考察了小企业在法律结构方面的需求,并概述了反对LLP将成为普通小企业重要新工具的观点。第三部分考察了导致英国引入LLP的压力,第四部分评估了由此产生的法律工具的特征。第五部分的结论认为,这种新的法律生物不是产生有效结果的进化和竞争过程的结果,而是对压力的政治反应的结果,这种压力产生了一种对小公司价值有限的奇怪法律工具。2有限责任公司、小型公司和有限责任合伙——综述A.有限责任合伙——向所有人开放的新公司形式。英国LLP最初是为了满足专业公司(主要是审计师)的感知需求而提出的,他们抱怨不切实际的期望和“财大鳄”综合症,因为他们无法限制自己的责任由于对立法进行了磋商和辩论,很明显,很难维持这种新的法律形式应限于某些受管制的专业人员群体的论点。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The nature of profits Conclusion Investment Corporate governance How to Enhance Directors’ Independence at Controlled Companies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1