España | Modificación de la ‘Ley Beckham’ en favor de emprendedores y directivos

3 mayo 2023

  • España
  • Start-up

La llamada “Ley de Startups” (Ley de Fomento del Ecosistema de las Empresas Emergentes), tras pasar los filtros correspondientes, ha sido aprobada por el Senado.

Entre sus diversas disposiciones sobre startups -que serán objeto de otro artículo posterior-, la citada Ley de Startups también modificó la que se conocía popularmente como “Ley Beckham” (por ser este deportista el más conocido de cuantos se acogieron ya en su día a sus beneficios fiscales), es decir, el régimen fiscal especial aplicable a los trabajadores, profesionales, emprendedores e inversores desplazados a territorio español.

El citado régimen concede enormes ventajas fiscales a aquellas personas, no residentes en España, que trasladan su residencia a territorio español bajo ciertas circunstancias que, de forma resumida, paso a reseñar:

  • desplazamiento como consecuencia de un contrato de trabajo;
  • desplazamiento que sea ordenado por el empleador extranjero con carta de desplazamiento a España;
  • desplazamiento sin ser ordenado por el empleador y la actividad laboral se preste a distancia mediante el uso exclusivo de medios electrónicos;
  • adquisición de la condición de administrador de una sociedad;
  • para la realización en España de una actividad económica calificada como actividad emprendedora;
  • profesional altamente cualificado que preste servicios a empresas emergentes.

La gran novedad es que, hasta la entrada en vigor de la nueva regulación, se requería que el interesado hubiera sido no residente fiscal en España por un plazo superior a 10 años, de forma que muchos directivos desplazados transitoriamente fuera de España no podían acogerse a este régimen por no haber estado fuera de territorio español más de 10 años (los desplazamientos no suelen ser tan largos) y con la entrada en vigor del nuevo texto legal el plazo previo de no residencia se ha reducido a cinco (5) años.

La gran ventaja de este régimen es que los beneficiarios del mismo (personas físicas) pueden optar por tributar por el Impuesto sobre la Renta de no Residentes (IRNR), durante el periodo impositivo en el que se efectúe el cambio de residencia y durante los cinco periodos impositivos siguientes. Lo anterior supone que en la determinación de la base liquidable quedan sin gravar parte de las rentas que el interesado pueda obtener a nivel mundial y, además, que hasta 600.000€ de base liquidable el tipo impositivo aplicable sería de un 24% (todo ello supone sin duda una enorme ventaja fiscal con respecto al régimen fiscal aplicable, en iguales circunstancias de rendimientos, a un residente fiscal en España sin la cobertura de este régimen especial).

En todo caso es importante destacar que la aplicación de este régimen fiscal tan ventajoso requiere previa y expresa solicitud por parte del interesado, es decir, primero “hay que llamar a la puerta” de Hacienda y, por ello, es muy importante asegurarse de que se cumplen muy escrupulosamente todos los requisitos exigidos por la Ley, por lo que siempre es especialmente recomendable solicitar de forma previa y con el detalle debido el adecuado asesoramiento al respecto.

Startups and Trademarks – Get it right from the Start

As a lawyer, I have been privileged to work closely with entrepreneurs of all backgrounds and ages (not just young people, a common stereotype on this field) and startups, providing legal advice on a wide range of areas.

Helping them build their businesses, I have identified a few recurrent mistakes, most of them arising mainly from the lack of experience on dealing with legal issues, and some others arising from the lack of understanding on the value added by legal advice, especially when we are referring to Intellectual Property (IP).

Both of them are understandable, we all know that startups (specially on an early stage of development) deal with the lack of financial resources and that the founders are pretty much focused on what they do best, which is to develop their own business model and structure, a new and innovative business.

Nevertheless it is important to stress that during this creation process a few important mistakes may happen, namely on IP rights, that can impact the future success of the business.

First, do not start from the end

When developing a figurative sign, a word trademark, an innovative technology that could be patentable or a software (source code), the first recommended step is to look into how to protect those creations, before showing it to third parties, namely investors or VC’s. This mistake is specially made on trademarks, as many times the entrepreneurs have already invested on the development of a logo and/or a trademark, they use it on their email signature, on their business presentations, but they have never registered the trademark as an IP right.

A non registered trademark is a common mistake and opens the door to others to copy it and to acquire (legally) rights over such distinctive sign. On the other hand, the lack of prior searches on preexisting IP rights may lead to trademark infringement, meaning that your amazing trademark is in fact infringing a preexisting trademark that you were not aware of.

Second, know what you are protecting

Basic mistake arises from those who did registered the trademark, but in a wrong or insufficient way: it is very common to see startups applying for a word trademark having a figurative element, when instead a trademark must be protected “as a whole” with their both signs (word and figurative element) in order to maximize the range of legal protection of your IP right.

Third, avoid the “classification nightmare”

The full comprehension and knowledge of the goods and services for which you apply for a trademark is decisive. It is strongly advisable for startup to have (at least) a medium term view of the business and request, on the trademark application, the full range of goods and services that they could sell or provide in the future and not only a short term view. Why? Because once the trademark application is granted it cannot be amended or added with additional goods and services. Only by requesting a new trademark application with all the costs involved in such operation.

The correct classification is crucial and decisive for a correct protection of your IP asset, especially on high technological startups where most of the time the high added value of the business arises from their IP.

On a brief, do not neglect IP, before is too late.

The author of this post is Josè Varanda

The fourth Industrial Revolution, currently experienced by global economy, displays a melting-pot of a wide range of new technologies combined one another, impacting on every aspect of economy, industry and society by progressively blurring the borders of the physical, digital and biological spheres.

The growth of robotics, of artificial and virtual intelligence, of connectivity among objects and of the latter with humans, is contributing to strengthening the virtual side of economy, made of its intangible assets. Even trade is tending more and more towards a trade of intellectual property rights rather than trade of physical objects.

In such a scenario, protection of intellectual property is becoming increasingly important: the value of innovation embedded in any product is likely to increase as compared to the value of the physical object itself. In other words, protection of intellectual property could significantly affect economic growth and trade and shall necessarily go forward as the economy becomes more and more virtual.

Future growth of the 4.0 economy depends on maintaining policies that, on one hand allow connectivity among millions of objects and, on the other, provide for strong patent protection mechanisms, thus, encouraging large and risky investments in technology innovation.

Are SMEs, which represent the beating heart of the Italian economy, ready for all this? Has Italy adopted any policy aimed at boosting innovation and the relevant protection for SMEs?

After more than four years since the launch of the Startup Act (Decree Law No 179 of 18 October 2012), Italian legislation confirms being among the most internationally advanced programs for innovative business support strategies. If we look at the Start Up Manifesto Policy Tracker Startup Manifesto Policy Tracker (a manifesto for entrepreneurship and innovation to power growth in the European Union), published in March 2016, Italy is in second place among the 28 EU Member States, in terms of the take up rate of recommendations made by the European Commission on the innovative entrepreneurship issue.

The Annual Report to Parliament on the implementation of legislation in support of innovative startups and SMEs (Edition 2016) confirms the results of the Startup Manifesto Policy Tracker: Italian ecosystem has grown in terms of number of startups recorded (+41% on the previous year), of human resources involved (+47,5%), of average value of production (+33%) and, finally, of funding raising (+128%, considering access to credit via the SME Guarantee Fund).

This growth is the outcome of both the inventiveness and the attention to innovation that have always characterized Italian entrepreneurs as well as of the progress made by Italian legislation over the past years: changes were introduced in order to boost the national system for business startups and, in some cases, to promote innovative entrepreneurship as a whole.

Adopted measures include, for example: the implementing Ministerial decrees on tax credits for R&D investments; the ITA Service Card for innovative SMEs, the multimedia, bilingual online platform #ItalyFrontiers (the aim of which is to promote capital investment and encourage open innovation projects involving innovative Italian businesses); Italia Startup Visa and Italia Startup Hub (the renewal, under the 2016 Decree on Immigration Flows, of a preferential procedure for the granting of visas and the conversion of permits to stay for self-employed for non-EU citizens wanting to move to Italy or remain there to start up an innovative enterprise); the launch of a new simplified online company incorporation procedure that enables innovative startups to be opened as limited liability companies, granting significant time and cost reductions; the extension (until 2016) and the reinforcement of fiscal incentives available for investment in innovative startups; finally, the extension of the free, simplified access to the Guarantee Fund to include innovative SMEs in order to make it easier for them to obtain credit.

The importance of Intellectual Property in the modern economy

A national policy that has a target of incentivizing the use of Intellectual Property is a policy that will have beneficial effects on the entire national (and international) economy.

Proof of this, are the results of the studies carried out by the European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights and the European Patent Office (EPO) on the contribution of intellectual property rights (IPR) on the EU economy.

The study analyzed the effects of intellectual property on the EU in terms of gross domestic production, occupation, wages and trade. Here are some of the most interesting data:

– 42% of the total economic activity in the EU (approximately EUR 5.7 trillion) and 38% of occupation (approximately 82 million workplaces) is attributable to IPR-intensive industries;

– IPR-intensive industries pay significantly higher wages than other industries, with a wage premium of 46%;

– IPR-intensive industries tend to be more resilient against the economic crisis;

– IPR-intensive industries account for about 90% of EU trade with the rest of the world, generating a trade surplus for the EU of EUR 96 billion;

– about 40% of large companies own IPRs.

The data gathered by this study should raise social and political awareness as to the importance of stimulating not only large companies, SMEs and startups in general, but also those, which use intellectual property.

The innovation criteria

An interesting measure that is showing good results in relation to the dissemination of IPR companies in Italy is the introduction, thanks to the Startup Act, of the concept of innovative startup.

The Startup Act provides facilitating measures (e.g.: incorporation and following statutory modifications by means of a standard model with digital signature, cuts to red tape and fees, flexible corporate management, extension of terms for covering losses, exemption from regulations on dummy companies, exemption from the duty to affix the compliance visa for compensation of VAT credit) applicable to companies which have, as well as other requirements, at least one of the following requirements:

– at least 15% of the company’s expenses can be attributed to R&D activities;

– at least 1/3 of the total workforce are PhD students, the holders of a PhD or researchers; or, alternatively, 2/3 of the total workforce must hold a Master’s degree;

– the enterprise is the holder, depositary or licensee of a registered patent (industrial property), or the owner and author of a registered software.

The Startup Act is still having positive effects on the startups demographic trends. As a matter of fact, during the first six months of 2016 there has been a growth rate of 15,5% in the number of registered companies.

The success of the Startup Act brought the Italian legislator to extend with the Investment Compact (Decree Law No 3 of 24 January 2015)  most of the benefits provided for innovative startups also to innovative SMEs.

By the Investment Compact the Italian Government recognized that innovative startups and innovative SMEs represent two sequential stages of the same continuous and coherent growth path. In a context as the Italian one, dominated by SMEs, it is fundamental to strengthen this kind of enterprises.

The measures in question apply only to SMEs, as defined by the European Commission Recommendation 361/2003 (companies with less than 250 employees and with a total turnover that does not exceed € 43 million), which have, as well as other requirements, at least two of the following requirements:

– at least 3% of either the company’s expenses or its turnover (the largest value is considered) can be attributed to R&D activities;

– at least 1/5 of the total workforce are PhD students, PhD holders or researchers; alternatively, 1/3 of the total workforce must hold a Master’s degree;

– the enterprise is the holder, depositary or licensee of a registered patent (industrial property) or the owner of a program for original registered computers.

Unfortunately to this day the Investment Compact has not produced the expected results: on one hand, there is a problem connected to the not well-defined concept of “innovative SMEs”, differently from what happened with startups; on the other hand, there are structural shortcomings in the communication of government incentives: these communication issues are particularly significant if we consider that the policy on innovative SMEs is a series of self-selecting, non-automatic incentives.

Patent Box

Another important measure related to the IP exploitation is the Patent Box, the optional tax rule applicable to income derived from the exploitation of intellectual property rights.

The Patent Box rules were introduced by the 2015 Stability Act and give to businesses, from 2015 onwards, the option of tax-exempting up to 50% of the income derived from the commercial exploitation of software protected by copyright, industrial patents for inventions, utility models and complementary protection certificates, designs, models, company information and technical/industrial know-how, provided that they can be protected as secret information according to the Italian Code of Industrial Property: meaning patented intangibles or assets that have been registered and are awaiting a patent.

Originally, also the exploitation of trademarks allowed entrepreneurs to choose the Patent Box optional tax rule, but a very recent Decree  erased that provision by excluding trademarks from the Patent Box regime. This exclusion has just been introduced in order to align the Italian Patent Box to the prescriptions of the Organization for Economy Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Said policy has a dual purpose: on one hand, it seeks to encourage Italian entrepreneurs to develop, protect and use intellectual property; on the other hand, it intends to make the Italian market more attractive for national and foreign long-term investment, while protecting the Italian tax base. The incentive encourages the placement, and preservation in Italy, of intangibles that are currently held abroad by Italian or foreign companies and also fosters investments in R&D.

The Patent Box is certainly of great importance for Italian economy and has relevant merits, but it can be further improved. During the convention held on the 8th of May 2017 in Milan entitled “Fiscal levers for business development: the patent box example”, organized by Indicam, the institute for fight against counterfeiting established by Centromarca, it was highlighted that one aspect to improve is that of the Patent Box’s appeal to SMEs: there is a need for this policy, which was thought mainly for large companies, to be really effective. One solution, proposed by the Vice-Minister of Finance and Economy Luigi Casero, guest of the convention, is to «introduce some statistical clusters, a kind of sector studies, an intervention of analysis and evaluation of the fiscal indicators of a specific type of company».

UPC

The last matter that deserves to be mentioned is that of the Unified Patent Court: Italy has ratified the United Patent Court Agreement on the 10th of February 2017.

As it is known, in order to start its operations the Unified Patent Court needs the ratification also of United Kingdom. Moreover, one of UPC central division should be located in London in addition to the ones in Paris, Munich. After Brexit this maintaining of the London Court appears inappropriate both under a juridical and an EU opportunistic point of view.

As provided for the UPC Convention a section of the central division should be in Italy because it is the fourth EU member state (after France, Germany and the UK) as to the number of validated European patents in its territory: the London Court should be therefore relocated to Milan.

Moreover Italy is one of the main countries in the EU applying for not only European patents but also trademarks and designs (and so contributes substantial fees) yet it does not host any European IP institutions.

An Italian section of the UPC would certainly bring a higher awareness, also of smaller enterprises, in relation to the importance of IP protection.

Conclusion

A disruptive and unprecedented transformation is taking place, involving industry, economy and society, with its main whose main driver being the relentless ascent of its intangible component.

What we have to do, as a society, is follow this transformation by changing our way of thinking and working, abandoning the old paradigms of the analogic era.

Policy measures as the Startup Act, the Investment Compact and the Patent Box are surely important initial steps that are bringing certain positive effects, but they are not enough and they have not yet achieved the maximum results.

As pointed out by the #StartupSurvey, the first national statistical survey of innovative startups, launched by the Italian National Institute of Statistics and the Ministry of Economic Development (the data were gathered by a mass mailing to all the innovative startups listed in the special section on 31 December 2015), the majority of Italian startups and SMEs (52,3%) have not adopted any formal mechanism, as the ownership of an industrial patent, to protect their innovation. Only 16,1% of the respondents owned a patent and only 11,8% owned a registered software.

Among the reasons that bring startups to not adopt protection mechanisms, the majority of the entrepreneurs (48,4%) claimed to be convinced that the innovation of their enterprise could not be taken away by third parties. On the other hand, a considerable number (25,5%) said that they were not aware of the necessary strategies.

The data gathered by the survey confirm that there is a communication and information issue, as noted in the paragraph above, to be solved.

An interesting initiative relating to this problem is the new questionnaire realized by the Head Office for the fight against counterfeiting of the Ministry of Economic Development. This new and free service has been conceived, in particular, for startups and SMEs, allowing them to carry out an online self-assessment in relation to intellectual property.

The aim of the questionnaire is to make the enterprises aware of their intellectual property range and to direct them towards the adoption of appropriate strategies for the valorization of their intangible assets.

Convertible notes, SAFE Agreements, participative financial instruments: the growing interest in start-up investing has led to a progressive differentiation both in investment strategies and, as a consequence, in legal/contractual instruments so to best suit the investors’ needs.

The introduction of these tools, specific to foreign ecosystems such as the Silicon Valley, and the difficulties in sourcing sufficient capitals to back the development of start-up companies, in particular with regard to the early/seed stage, has encouraged several players to opt for instruments alternative to equity investment, either developed “nationally” or under common law systems.

This mind-set has many positive side effects since it opened up the capital raising landscape that now includes venture capital funds, business angels networks, family offices and even club deals composed of small investors willing to buy into start-ups (mostly over the incubation/acceleration stage) with an injection of capital for a relatively small amount of shares.

In Italy, this trend towards non-equity or demi-equity instruments had two major results: it contributed to dust off legal instruments first introduced by the latest comprehensive reform of the Italian company law in 2004 (e.g. participative financial instruments – in Italian: Strumenti Finanziari di Partecipazione or SFP – art. 2346, par. 6 of the Italian Civil Code); and it fostered the creation of new contractual models plainly inspired by well-known instruments used in the Silicon Valley. That is the case of Convertible Notes and SAFE Agreements (Simple Agreement for Future Equity).

These instruments, together with the SFPs, have a trait in common: they all require a cash investment which is meant to be converted to equity at a specific milestone or on a pre-set date. On the other hand, none of them entails the possibility for an investor to hold a participation as a shareholder (at least not straightaway). Investors become stakeholders instead and they may hold as many administrative/patrimonial rights as they manage to negotiate with the company or with the founders themselves as well as depending on the specific contractual instrument they selected. It is important to point out that profits distribution rights are not included among those subject to negotiation since innovative start-ups (namely early-stage companies that meet certain criteria set by the law: i.e. high level technology of the company’s scope, R&D expenditure or number of graduates employed, etc.) are prevented from distributing profits for the first five years according the pertaining Italian regulation (see art. 25, par. 2 of the D.L. 179/2012).

Convertible Note and SFP

Starting off with convertible notes: these instruments are extremely flexible and mainly used by club deals and family offices. They are structured as a hybrid between convertible obligations and traditional loans. Investors in facts lend money to a start-up on a specific interest rate and according to a contract where the parties have previously set out terms and conditions that would preside over their relationship. The investment is classified as a liability of the company to third parties and, more specifically, as a long term liability.

The parties set two different dates, one for the conversion of the credit to equity and another one for the possible payback (in case the conversion has not been exercised). Sometimes the parties decide to leave the payback aside and set directly the date of the conversion to equity thus transforming the instrument from a demi-loan to an option on a prospective capital increase, where the money invested in the company would be considered as the price of the option; or even an obligation that can be converted to shares, an hypothesis admitted by eminent scholars not only for corporations, but also for limited liability companies.

The conversion date is usually set before the reimbursements, for the latter is meant as the last resort in the event the capital increase has not been approved by the company and provided that the parties had previously agreed upon such possibility. Furthermore, the reimbursement might be considered as a consequence of certain events, in particular when there is a payback request for cause or when a party violates any of the representations and warranties set out in the contract. In order to avoid unpleasant surprises, it is “customary” to provide for a future capital increase specifically dedicated to the investor – as well as an obligation for the investor to convert his loan – directly in the contract. The parties are free to determine whether the conversion should take place on a certain date or subject to the company meeting specific milestones such as: turnover goals, the achievement of specific results both economically and with reference to the development of its tangible/intangible technological assets (for instance, the development of software or the patenting of an invention). The actual conversion may take place at once or in instalments through a resolution of the shareholders to schedule the capital increase in two or more tranches. The convertible note must provide for a price per share for the conversion based on the so-called pre-money valuation; it is quite usual to set also a conversion discount, that is a price per share lower than the per share price paid by other investors in that round.

SAFE Agreement

The SAFE Agreement – developed and used by the world-renowned California-based incubator “Y Combinator” – is neither a debt instrument, unlike convertible notes, nor an equity one since it does not give its holder the right to profit sharing or the right to vote as a shareholder. It is rather a financial instrument that incorporates a prospective right to buy out preferred shares.

Although SAFE Agreements do not have an Italian counterpart, SFPs may look alike when they are “designed” as semi-equity participative instrument (without payback) and used to collect capitals to be allocated in a specific equity reserve, which should be used only to cover the company’s operating losses and be considered otherwise unavailable. However, the extent of this unavailability is still a matter of debate among scholars and the possibility for the parties to a SFP agreement to determine that the reserve at issue might only be used upon depletion of the others (legal reserve fund included) is not undisputed as well. In one of the latest ruling on the matter, the judge has indeed opted for the availability of the reserve created upon issuance of the SFPs on account of its statutory nature, stating that it can therefore be depleted before legal reserve fund and equity (Court of Naples, 25/2/2016). This is basically the main reason why SAFE agreements cannot be implemented tout court in Italy.

In any case, the Italian Civil Code allows the possibility to design the SFPs so as to meet specific requirements since they are essentially “empty boxes” that can be filled by the parties based on the needs of either the issuing start-up company and/or the investors willing to fund it. In fact, the law only sets two guidelines: i) it excludes that the SFP could grant its holder the right to vote as a shareholder; ii) it establishes that these instruments can be endowed with patrimonial or even administrative rights. The possibility for a company to issue SFPs must be specified in the articles of association/bylaws, which refers to a future extraordinary meeting of the shareholders for the adoption of the pertaining regulation, which will also set out the functioning rules of the special assembly dedicated to the holders of SFPs.

Turning to the SAFE Agreement, the American model sets a conversion price that cannot exceed a certain cap, according to which the company assigns shares on a capital increase (i.e. SAFE preferred) with privileged rights and with restrictions closely similar to those typical of standard “preferred shares”. Furthermore, it also sets a discounted conversation price which, in the US experience, is in the range of 15-20%, while there no provision as to a future deadline for paying the investment back.

Nothing prohibits to adapt the regulation of the SFPs to the best practice resulted from the implementation of the SAFE Agreement in the US. That is the case of the “acceleration” clauses that allow the investor to convert its investment before the original date set out in the agreement in case of equity-financing/liquidity events, namely the acquisition of the start-up or a capital increase that brings new investors in. This type of clauses is also often used in convertible notes. Some clauses, on the contrary, cannot be transferred into a SFP. That is the case of the clauses that regard the payback in relation to dissolution events such as: (i) the voluntary suspension of the business activity of the company; (ii) the transfer of the company’s assets to benefit the creditors or (iii) the company’s winding-up process both voluntary and not. According to Italian law, the winding-up due to a total loss of equity implies the possibility to use the reserve destined to SFPs with the consequent loss of the money invested by the SFP holders. Hence the common practice – still debated among scholars – that sees the possibility to use the reserves created upon issuance of the SFPs subordinated to the complete depletion of the other reserves, legal reserve fund included.

Eventually, these practices have taken hold over the last few years since they are meant to provide the investors with more and more flexibility when dealing with financial/investment instruments as those described above. They represent in fact an opportunity for both start-ups, that can obtain capital on the short period, and investors, who can grade their entrepreneurial risk allocating their investment as a debt or not – depending on the chosen instruments – with a view to a conversion to equity that will eventually depend on several factors, not least the company’s business metrics and economical standing.

In conclusion, the dynamism of this sector and the recent intervention of the Italian legislator show that there is plenty of room for growth in the Italian start-up ecosystem.

The author of this post is Milena Prisco.

In this post we will briefly outline some legal aspects related to e-commerce in Iran, starting from the definition of the average Iranian user and main characteristics and advantages of e-commerce in the Islamic Republic, which is attracting several foreign investors.

We will then analyze the requirements for the issuance of online business licenses in Iran, which is mandatory in order to open an e-shop. Finally we will take a look at some successful examples of online business in Iran.

The average Iranian user

Some statistics regarding Iranian users active in the virtual space are useful for understanding the size of the Iranian market, and why it is attracting several investors.

According to the “Internet Data and Statistics”, Iran is the thirteenth country for number of internet users, as 57 million of Iranian (on 83 million of Iran’s population) have access to internet (approximately the 68% of the population), but Government sources believe these numbers are  underestimated.

What matters for the purpose of this analysis, however, is that approximatively the 58% of the internet users search on the Internet is about information on goods and services and that – until the end of Azar 1394 (December 2015) – the average internet users are male (58%) and young (47% between 20 and 29 years old).

In addition, the 42% of the Iranian internet users are involved in electronic commerce and the 13% use the e-banking services.

Online Business Licenses in Iran

Whether carried out in the traditional way or electronically, all the businesses need a business-license to operate on the Iranian market. The most important law governing  is the Union System Act 1971, amended in 1980, 2003 and in 2013, which provides that the business license is issued by the competent union or legal authority.

E-commerce is no exception, therefore all those who intend to sell goods or provide services using the virtual space must acquire a business license.

On February 19th, 2017 the Iranian Government issued an Executive Regulation in regard to the Issuance of License and Supervision on Businesses in Virtual Space and Network Marketing, dividing the activities in virtual space into two categories:

  1. Virtual Business;
  2. Network Marketing.

According to Paragraph 1 in Article 1, Virtual Business is a business established by any natural or legal person in order to provide products (goods or services) directly or indirectly on a wholesale or retail basis, to wholesalers, retailers and consumers through telecommunication means such as websites and digital software (applications).

According to Paragraph 2 of Article 1, Network Marketing is a method for selling products based on which the Network Marketing company uses its website to organize the sellers in order to sell their products directly to consumers in a place far from the regular business location. Through this method, each seller can introduce another marketer as it subset and create a multi-product sales group in order to increase sales.

The competent authority for issuance of licenses in this regard is the National Union. Therefore, any person who intends to acquire a license in order to have its activities carried out online, must apply on the website of Center for Development of Electronic Commerce (an organ of the Ministry of Industry, Mine and Commerce, hereinafter: “CDEC” – www.enamad.ir) in order to acquire the Reliance Symbol, which is a symbol necessary to certify the identity and competence of online activities.

Requirements for the Online Business License

Article 3  of the Executive Regulation on Issuance of License and Supervision on Businesses in Virtual Space and Network Marketing, which governs the Issuance of Online Business Licenses in Iran, provides that business licenses shall be issued according to the following procedure:

  1. Establishment of the virtual business conforming to the checklists provided by the CDEC.
  2. Registration of application in E-Namad website (then the CDEC automatically submits the application to the unions’ website).
  3. Upload of the required documents, which we will list below.
  4. Issuance and submission of the license (after verifying the uploaded documents and the original copies thereof) to the applicant within 15 days and submission of the license information to E-Namad website.
  5. Grant of Electronic Reliance Symbol concurrent with issuance of the license.

Furthermore, the said Regulation specifies the required documents for issuance of business license, as follows:

  1. Office or legal domicile address of the applicant;
  2. Negative criminal record from the Police;
  3. Certificate of the relevant Tax Organization regarding tax compliance;
  4. Certificate for attendance in educational courses of commerce and business;
  5. Confirmation of specialized features regarding virtual business issued by the CDED;
  6. Photocopy of ID-card/Company-Registration number, plus passport/work-permit for foreigners;
  7. Photocopy of Military Service Termination Card or Permanent or Medical Exemption Card for men under 50 or a Student Certificate.

In addition to those, the Regulation provides some other documents for particular sectors, so it is advisable to contact an Iranian expert in the matter to verify the compliance with all applicable regulations. For instance, the Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism Organization of Iran has set out some specific criteria for travel and tourism activities in the virtual space, so travel agency services, accommodation centers, private entities and other tourism services must follow a special procedure to render their services on virtual space.

Successful Examples of Iranian Start-ups

In order to become familiar with this sector, hereinafter we would like to report some inspirational examples of investments.

  1. Snapp

Snapp is an Iranian ride hailing company which renders its services online. The Snapp application automatically connects the users to the nearest driver and shows the driver the user’s location. Afterwards, the nearest ready driver will pick up the users from their location, and Snapp calculates the price beforehand. This price is normally lower than the Taxi Agency Unions prices and can be received either in cash or via online payment or credit card.

  1. Digikala

Digikala is the name of one of the biggest e-marketplaces in Iran. Cellphones, laptops and computers, digital cameras, office appliances, automobiles, watches, home appliances, instruments, jewelry, toys, clothes and books are some of the items sold on this website. One of the features of this website is the detailed and comprehensive reviews of different types of digital goods which can be a reliable source for purchasers.

  1. Pintapin

Pintapin is a comprehensive tool for rendering travel services online. Accommodation services are listed in Pintapin and users can book online their desired location. It is also possible to submit the information regarding your destination, duration of stay and number of companions in order to receive suitable suggestions from Pintapin.

  1. Bamilo

Bamilo is probably the most important Marketplace businesses in Iran. It started its activity in 2014 and is now among the most viewed websites in Iran. Based on the Amazon-model, the online store is considered as the main Iranian middleman between suppliers and consumers.

  1. Eskano

Eskano is a smart system for searching real estate in Iran which is performed under international standards. With its huge database of transferable real estates divided between several Iranian cities, Eskano facilitates the sale and lease process, also with the possibility of setting up appointments directly through the website.

The author of this post is Mohammad Rahmani.

Javier Gaspar Álvarez-Novoa

Áreas de práctica

  • Arte
  • Contratos
  • Derecho Societario
  • Reclamación de deudas
  • Inversiones extranjeras
Contáctanos Javier
Startup - Legalmondo

Startups and Trademarks
  • Propiedad Industrial e Intelectual
  • Start-up
  • Portugal
padova - legalmondo

Italy – The importance of IP for Startups and SMEs
  • Propiedad Industrial e Intelectual
  • Start-up
  • Italia
torino - legalmondo

Italy – Start-up investments
  • Inversiones
  • Start-up
  • Italia
Iran - Legalmondo

Iran – Online business and eCommerce
  • e-commerce
  • Inversiones
  • Irán

Contacta con Javier





    Lea la política de privacidad de Legalmondo.
    Este sitio está protegido por reCAPTCHA y se aplican la Política de privacidad de Google y los Términos de servicio.

    Startups and Trademarks

    2 octubre 2019

    • Portugal
    • Propiedad Industrial e Intelectual
    • Start-up

    La llamada “Ley de Startups” (Ley de Fomento del Ecosistema de las Empresas Emergentes), tras pasar los filtros correspondientes, ha sido aprobada por el Senado.

    Entre sus diversas disposiciones sobre startups -que serán objeto de otro artículo posterior-, la citada Ley de Startups también modificó la que se conocía popularmente como “Ley Beckham” (por ser este deportista el más conocido de cuantos se acogieron ya en su día a sus beneficios fiscales), es decir, el régimen fiscal especial aplicable a los trabajadores, profesionales, emprendedores e inversores desplazados a territorio español.

    El citado régimen concede enormes ventajas fiscales a aquellas personas, no residentes en España, que trasladan su residencia a territorio español bajo ciertas circunstancias que, de forma resumida, paso a reseñar:

    • desplazamiento como consecuencia de un contrato de trabajo;
    • desplazamiento que sea ordenado por el empleador extranjero con carta de desplazamiento a España;
    • desplazamiento sin ser ordenado por el empleador y la actividad laboral se preste a distancia mediante el uso exclusivo de medios electrónicos;
    • adquisición de la condición de administrador de una sociedad;
    • para la realización en España de una actividad económica calificada como actividad emprendedora;
    • profesional altamente cualificado que preste servicios a empresas emergentes.

    La gran novedad es que, hasta la entrada en vigor de la nueva regulación, se requería que el interesado hubiera sido no residente fiscal en España por un plazo superior a 10 años, de forma que muchos directivos desplazados transitoriamente fuera de España no podían acogerse a este régimen por no haber estado fuera de territorio español más de 10 años (los desplazamientos no suelen ser tan largos) y con la entrada en vigor del nuevo texto legal el plazo previo de no residencia se ha reducido a cinco (5) años.

    La gran ventaja de este régimen es que los beneficiarios del mismo (personas físicas) pueden optar por tributar por el Impuesto sobre la Renta de no Residentes (IRNR), durante el periodo impositivo en el que se efectúe el cambio de residencia y durante los cinco periodos impositivos siguientes. Lo anterior supone que en la determinación de la base liquidable quedan sin gravar parte de las rentas que el interesado pueda obtener a nivel mundial y, además, que hasta 600.000€ de base liquidable el tipo impositivo aplicable sería de un 24% (todo ello supone sin duda una enorme ventaja fiscal con respecto al régimen fiscal aplicable, en iguales circunstancias de rendimientos, a un residente fiscal en España sin la cobertura de este régimen especial).

    En todo caso es importante destacar que la aplicación de este régimen fiscal tan ventajoso requiere previa y expresa solicitud por parte del interesado, es decir, primero “hay que llamar a la puerta” de Hacienda y, por ello, es muy importante asegurarse de que se cumplen muy escrupulosamente todos los requisitos exigidos por la Ley, por lo que siempre es especialmente recomendable solicitar de forma previa y con el detalle debido el adecuado asesoramiento al respecto.

    Startups and Trademarks – Get it right from the Start

    As a lawyer, I have been privileged to work closely with entrepreneurs of all backgrounds and ages (not just young people, a common stereotype on this field) and startups, providing legal advice on a wide range of areas.

    Helping them build their businesses, I have identified a few recurrent mistakes, most of them arising mainly from the lack of experience on dealing with legal issues, and some others arising from the lack of understanding on the value added by legal advice, especially when we are referring to Intellectual Property (IP).

    Both of them are understandable, we all know that startups (specially on an early stage of development) deal with the lack of financial resources and that the founders are pretty much focused on what they do best, which is to develop their own business model and structure, a new and innovative business.

    Nevertheless it is important to stress that during this creation process a few important mistakes may happen, namely on IP rights, that can impact the future success of the business.

    First, do not start from the end

    When developing a figurative sign, a word trademark, an innovative technology that could be patentable or a software (source code), the first recommended step is to look into how to protect those creations, before showing it to third parties, namely investors or VC’s. This mistake is specially made on trademarks, as many times the entrepreneurs have already invested on the development of a logo and/or a trademark, they use it on their email signature, on their business presentations, but they have never registered the trademark as an IP right.

    A non registered trademark is a common mistake and opens the door to others to copy it and to acquire (legally) rights over such distinctive sign. On the other hand, the lack of prior searches on preexisting IP rights may lead to trademark infringement, meaning that your amazing trademark is in fact infringing a preexisting trademark that you were not aware of.

    Second, know what you are protecting

    Basic mistake arises from those who did registered the trademark, but in a wrong or insufficient way: it is very common to see startups applying for a word trademark having a figurative element, when instead a trademark must be protected “as a whole” with their both signs (word and figurative element) in order to maximize the range of legal protection of your IP right.

    Third, avoid the “classification nightmare”

    The full comprehension and knowledge of the goods and services for which you apply for a trademark is decisive. It is strongly advisable for startup to have (at least) a medium term view of the business and request, on the trademark application, the full range of goods and services that they could sell or provide in the future and not only a short term view. Why? Because once the trademark application is granted it cannot be amended or added with additional goods and services. Only by requesting a new trademark application with all the costs involved in such operation.

    The correct classification is crucial and decisive for a correct protection of your IP asset, especially on high technological startups where most of the time the high added value of the business arises from their IP.

    On a brief, do not neglect IP, before is too late.

    The author of this post is Josè Varanda

    The fourth Industrial Revolution, currently experienced by global economy, displays a melting-pot of a wide range of new technologies combined one another, impacting on every aspect of economy, industry and society by progressively blurring the borders of the physical, digital and biological spheres.

    The growth of robotics, of artificial and virtual intelligence, of connectivity among objects and of the latter with humans, is contributing to strengthening the virtual side of economy, made of its intangible assets. Even trade is tending more and more towards a trade of intellectual property rights rather than trade of physical objects.

    In such a scenario, protection of intellectual property is becoming increasingly important: the value of innovation embedded in any product is likely to increase as compared to the value of the physical object itself. In other words, protection of intellectual property could significantly affect economic growth and trade and shall necessarily go forward as the economy becomes more and more virtual.

    Future growth of the 4.0 economy depends on maintaining policies that, on one hand allow connectivity among millions of objects and, on the other, provide for strong patent protection mechanisms, thus, encouraging large and risky investments in technology innovation.

    Are SMEs, which represent the beating heart of the Italian economy, ready for all this? Has Italy adopted any policy aimed at boosting innovation and the relevant protection for SMEs?

    After more than four years since the launch of the Startup Act (Decree Law No 179 of 18 October 2012), Italian legislation confirms being among the most internationally advanced programs for innovative business support strategies. If we look at the Start Up Manifesto Policy Tracker Startup Manifesto Policy Tracker (a manifesto for entrepreneurship and innovation to power growth in the European Union), published in March 2016, Italy is in second place among the 28 EU Member States, in terms of the take up rate of recommendations made by the European Commission on the innovative entrepreneurship issue.

    The Annual Report to Parliament on the implementation of legislation in support of innovative startups and SMEs (Edition 2016) confirms the results of the Startup Manifesto Policy Tracker: Italian ecosystem has grown in terms of number of startups recorded (+41% on the previous year), of human resources involved (+47,5%), of average value of production (+33%) and, finally, of funding raising (+128%, considering access to credit via the SME Guarantee Fund).

    This growth is the outcome of both the inventiveness and the attention to innovation that have always characterized Italian entrepreneurs as well as of the progress made by Italian legislation over the past years: changes were introduced in order to boost the national system for business startups and, in some cases, to promote innovative entrepreneurship as a whole.

    Adopted measures include, for example: the implementing Ministerial decrees on tax credits for R&D investments; the ITA Service Card for innovative SMEs, the multimedia, bilingual online platform #ItalyFrontiers (the aim of which is to promote capital investment and encourage open innovation projects involving innovative Italian businesses); Italia Startup Visa and Italia Startup Hub (the renewal, under the 2016 Decree on Immigration Flows, of a preferential procedure for the granting of visas and the conversion of permits to stay for self-employed for non-EU citizens wanting to move to Italy or remain there to start up an innovative enterprise); the launch of a new simplified online company incorporation procedure that enables innovative startups to be opened as limited liability companies, granting significant time and cost reductions; the extension (until 2016) and the reinforcement of fiscal incentives available for investment in innovative startups; finally, the extension of the free, simplified access to the Guarantee Fund to include innovative SMEs in order to make it easier for them to obtain credit.

    The importance of Intellectual Property in the modern economy

    A national policy that has a target of incentivizing the use of Intellectual Property is a policy that will have beneficial effects on the entire national (and international) economy.

    Proof of this, are the results of the studies carried out by the European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights and the European Patent Office (EPO) on the contribution of intellectual property rights (IPR) on the EU economy.

    The study analyzed the effects of intellectual property on the EU in terms of gross domestic production, occupation, wages and trade. Here are some of the most interesting data:

    – 42% of the total economic activity in the EU (approximately EUR 5.7 trillion) and 38% of occupation (approximately 82 million workplaces) is attributable to IPR-intensive industries;

    – IPR-intensive industries pay significantly higher wages than other industries, with a wage premium of 46%;

    – IPR-intensive industries tend to be more resilient against the economic crisis;

    – IPR-intensive industries account for about 90% of EU trade with the rest of the world, generating a trade surplus for the EU of EUR 96 billion;

    – about 40% of large companies own IPRs.

    The data gathered by this study should raise social and political awareness as to the importance of stimulating not only large companies, SMEs and startups in general, but also those, which use intellectual property.

    The innovation criteria

    An interesting measure that is showing good results in relation to the dissemination of IPR companies in Italy is the introduction, thanks to the Startup Act, of the concept of innovative startup.

    The Startup Act provides facilitating measures (e.g.: incorporation and following statutory modifications by means of a standard model with digital signature, cuts to red tape and fees, flexible corporate management, extension of terms for covering losses, exemption from regulations on dummy companies, exemption from the duty to affix the compliance visa for compensation of VAT credit) applicable to companies which have, as well as other requirements, at least one of the following requirements:

    – at least 15% of the company’s expenses can be attributed to R&D activities;

    – at least 1/3 of the total workforce are PhD students, the holders of a PhD or researchers; or, alternatively, 2/3 of the total workforce must hold a Master’s degree;

    – the enterprise is the holder, depositary or licensee of a registered patent (industrial property), or the owner and author of a registered software.

    The Startup Act is still having positive effects on the startups demographic trends. As a matter of fact, during the first six months of 2016 there has been a growth rate of 15,5% in the number of registered companies.

    The success of the Startup Act brought the Italian legislator to extend with the Investment Compact (Decree Law No 3 of 24 January 2015)  most of the benefits provided for innovative startups also to innovative SMEs.

    By the Investment Compact the Italian Government recognized that innovative startups and innovative SMEs represent two sequential stages of the same continuous and coherent growth path. In a context as the Italian one, dominated by SMEs, it is fundamental to strengthen this kind of enterprises.

    The measures in question apply only to SMEs, as defined by the European Commission Recommendation 361/2003 (companies with less than 250 employees and with a total turnover that does not exceed € 43 million), which have, as well as other requirements, at least two of the following requirements:

    – at least 3% of either the company’s expenses or its turnover (the largest value is considered) can be attributed to R&D activities;

    – at least 1/5 of the total workforce are PhD students, PhD holders or researchers; alternatively, 1/3 of the total workforce must hold a Master’s degree;

    – the enterprise is the holder, depositary or licensee of a registered patent (industrial property) or the owner of a program for original registered computers.

    Unfortunately to this day the Investment Compact has not produced the expected results: on one hand, there is a problem connected to the not well-defined concept of “innovative SMEs”, differently from what happened with startups; on the other hand, there are structural shortcomings in the communication of government incentives: these communication issues are particularly significant if we consider that the policy on innovative SMEs is a series of self-selecting, non-automatic incentives.

    Patent Box

    Another important measure related to the IP exploitation is the Patent Box, the optional tax rule applicable to income derived from the exploitation of intellectual property rights.

    The Patent Box rules were introduced by the 2015 Stability Act and give to businesses, from 2015 onwards, the option of tax-exempting up to 50% of the income derived from the commercial exploitation of software protected by copyright, industrial patents for inventions, utility models and complementary protection certificates, designs, models, company information and technical/industrial know-how, provided that they can be protected as secret information according to the Italian Code of Industrial Property: meaning patented intangibles or assets that have been registered and are awaiting a patent.

    Originally, also the exploitation of trademarks allowed entrepreneurs to choose the Patent Box optional tax rule, but a very recent Decree  erased that provision by excluding trademarks from the Patent Box regime. This exclusion has just been introduced in order to align the Italian Patent Box to the prescriptions of the Organization for Economy Co-operation and Development (OECD).

    Said policy has a dual purpose: on one hand, it seeks to encourage Italian entrepreneurs to develop, protect and use intellectual property; on the other hand, it intends to make the Italian market more attractive for national and foreign long-term investment, while protecting the Italian tax base. The incentive encourages the placement, and preservation in Italy, of intangibles that are currently held abroad by Italian or foreign companies and also fosters investments in R&D.

    The Patent Box is certainly of great importance for Italian economy and has relevant merits, but it can be further improved. During the convention held on the 8th of May 2017 in Milan entitled “Fiscal levers for business development: the patent box example”, organized by Indicam, the institute for fight against counterfeiting established by Centromarca, it was highlighted that one aspect to improve is that of the Patent Box’s appeal to SMEs: there is a need for this policy, which was thought mainly for large companies, to be really effective. One solution, proposed by the Vice-Minister of Finance and Economy Luigi Casero, guest of the convention, is to «introduce some statistical clusters, a kind of sector studies, an intervention of analysis and evaluation of the fiscal indicators of a specific type of company».

    UPC

    The last matter that deserves to be mentioned is that of the Unified Patent Court: Italy has ratified the United Patent Court Agreement on the 10th of February 2017.

    As it is known, in order to start its operations the Unified Patent Court needs the ratification also of United Kingdom. Moreover, one of UPC central division should be located in London in addition to the ones in Paris, Munich. After Brexit this maintaining of the London Court appears inappropriate both under a juridical and an EU opportunistic point of view.

    As provided for the UPC Convention a section of the central division should be in Italy because it is the fourth EU member state (after France, Germany and the UK) as to the number of validated European patents in its territory: the London Court should be therefore relocated to Milan.

    Moreover Italy is one of the main countries in the EU applying for not only European patents but also trademarks and designs (and so contributes substantial fees) yet it does not host any European IP institutions.

    An Italian section of the UPC would certainly bring a higher awareness, also of smaller enterprises, in relation to the importance of IP protection.

    Conclusion

    A disruptive and unprecedented transformation is taking place, involving industry, economy and society, with its main whose main driver being the relentless ascent of its intangible component.

    What we have to do, as a society, is follow this transformation by changing our way of thinking and working, abandoning the old paradigms of the analogic era.

    Policy measures as the Startup Act, the Investment Compact and the Patent Box are surely important initial steps that are bringing certain positive effects, but they are not enough and they have not yet achieved the maximum results.

    As pointed out by the #StartupSurvey, the first national statistical survey of innovative startups, launched by the Italian National Institute of Statistics and the Ministry of Economic Development (the data were gathered by a mass mailing to all the innovative startups listed in the special section on 31 December 2015), the majority of Italian startups and SMEs (52,3%) have not adopted any formal mechanism, as the ownership of an industrial patent, to protect their innovation. Only 16,1% of the respondents owned a patent and only 11,8% owned a registered software.

    Among the reasons that bring startups to not adopt protection mechanisms, the majority of the entrepreneurs (48,4%) claimed to be convinced that the innovation of their enterprise could not be taken away by third parties. On the other hand, a considerable number (25,5%) said that they were not aware of the necessary strategies.

    The data gathered by the survey confirm that there is a communication and information issue, as noted in the paragraph above, to be solved.

    An interesting initiative relating to this problem is the new questionnaire realized by the Head Office for the fight against counterfeiting of the Ministry of Economic Development. This new and free service has been conceived, in particular, for startups and SMEs, allowing them to carry out an online self-assessment in relation to intellectual property.

    The aim of the questionnaire is to make the enterprises aware of their intellectual property range and to direct them towards the adoption of appropriate strategies for the valorization of their intangible assets.

    Convertible notes, SAFE Agreements, participative financial instruments: the growing interest in start-up investing has led to a progressive differentiation both in investment strategies and, as a consequence, in legal/contractual instruments so to best suit the investors’ needs.

    The introduction of these tools, specific to foreign ecosystems such as the Silicon Valley, and the difficulties in sourcing sufficient capitals to back the development of start-up companies, in particular with regard to the early/seed stage, has encouraged several players to opt for instruments alternative to equity investment, either developed “nationally” or under common law systems.

    This mind-set has many positive side effects since it opened up the capital raising landscape that now includes venture capital funds, business angels networks, family offices and even club deals composed of small investors willing to buy into start-ups (mostly over the incubation/acceleration stage) with an injection of capital for a relatively small amount of shares.

    In Italy, this trend towards non-equity or demi-equity instruments had two major results: it contributed to dust off legal instruments first introduced by the latest comprehensive reform of the Italian company law in 2004 (e.g. participative financial instruments – in Italian: Strumenti Finanziari di Partecipazione or SFP – art. 2346, par. 6 of the Italian Civil Code); and it fostered the creation of new contractual models plainly inspired by well-known instruments used in the Silicon Valley. That is the case of Convertible Notes and SAFE Agreements (Simple Agreement for Future Equity).

    These instruments, together with the SFPs, have a trait in common: they all require a cash investment which is meant to be converted to equity at a specific milestone or on a pre-set date. On the other hand, none of them entails the possibility for an investor to hold a participation as a shareholder (at least not straightaway). Investors become stakeholders instead and they may hold as many administrative/patrimonial rights as they manage to negotiate with the company or with the founders themselves as well as depending on the specific contractual instrument they selected. It is important to point out that profits distribution rights are not included among those subject to negotiation since innovative start-ups (namely early-stage companies that meet certain criteria set by the law: i.e. high level technology of the company’s scope, R&D expenditure or number of graduates employed, etc.) are prevented from distributing profits for the first five years according the pertaining Italian regulation (see art. 25, par. 2 of the D.L. 179/2012).

    Convertible Note and SFP

    Starting off with convertible notes: these instruments are extremely flexible and mainly used by club deals and family offices. They are structured as a hybrid between convertible obligations and traditional loans. Investors in facts lend money to a start-up on a specific interest rate and according to a contract where the parties have previously set out terms and conditions that would preside over their relationship. The investment is classified as a liability of the company to third parties and, more specifically, as a long term liability.

    The parties set two different dates, one for the conversion of the credit to equity and another one for the possible payback (in case the conversion has not been exercised). Sometimes the parties decide to leave the payback aside and set directly the date of the conversion to equity thus transforming the instrument from a demi-loan to an option on a prospective capital increase, where the money invested in the company would be considered as the price of the option; or even an obligation that can be converted to shares, an hypothesis admitted by eminent scholars not only for corporations, but also for limited liability companies.

    The conversion date is usually set before the reimbursements, for the latter is meant as the last resort in the event the capital increase has not been approved by the company and provided that the parties had previously agreed upon such possibility. Furthermore, the reimbursement might be considered as a consequence of certain events, in particular when there is a payback request for cause or when a party violates any of the representations and warranties set out in the contract. In order to avoid unpleasant surprises, it is “customary” to provide for a future capital increase specifically dedicated to the investor – as well as an obligation for the investor to convert his loan – directly in the contract. The parties are free to determine whether the conversion should take place on a certain date or subject to the company meeting specific milestones such as: turnover goals, the achievement of specific results both economically and with reference to the development of its tangible/intangible technological assets (for instance, the development of software or the patenting of an invention). The actual conversion may take place at once or in instalments through a resolution of the shareholders to schedule the capital increase in two or more tranches. The convertible note must provide for a price per share for the conversion based on the so-called pre-money valuation; it is quite usual to set also a conversion discount, that is a price per share lower than the per share price paid by other investors in that round.

    SAFE Agreement

    The SAFE Agreement – developed and used by the world-renowned California-based incubator “Y Combinator” – is neither a debt instrument, unlike convertible notes, nor an equity one since it does not give its holder the right to profit sharing or the right to vote as a shareholder. It is rather a financial instrument that incorporates a prospective right to buy out preferred shares.

    Although SAFE Agreements do not have an Italian counterpart, SFPs may look alike when they are “designed” as semi-equity participative instrument (without payback) and used to collect capitals to be allocated in a specific equity reserve, which should be used only to cover the company’s operating losses and be considered otherwise unavailable. However, the extent of this unavailability is still a matter of debate among scholars and the possibility for the parties to a SFP agreement to determine that the reserve at issue might only be used upon depletion of the others (legal reserve fund included) is not undisputed as well. In one of the latest ruling on the matter, the judge has indeed opted for the availability of the reserve created upon issuance of the SFPs on account of its statutory nature, stating that it can therefore be depleted before legal reserve fund and equity (Court of Naples, 25/2/2016). This is basically the main reason why SAFE agreements cannot be implemented tout court in Italy.

    In any case, the Italian Civil Code allows the possibility to design the SFPs so as to meet specific requirements since they are essentially “empty boxes” that can be filled by the parties based on the needs of either the issuing start-up company and/or the investors willing to fund it. In fact, the law only sets two guidelines: i) it excludes that the SFP could grant its holder the right to vote as a shareholder; ii) it establishes that these instruments can be endowed with patrimonial or even administrative rights. The possibility for a company to issue SFPs must be specified in the articles of association/bylaws, which refers to a future extraordinary meeting of the shareholders for the adoption of the pertaining regulation, which will also set out the functioning rules of the special assembly dedicated to the holders of SFPs.

    Turning to the SAFE Agreement, the American model sets a conversion price that cannot exceed a certain cap, according to which the company assigns shares on a capital increase (i.e. SAFE preferred) with privileged rights and with restrictions closely similar to those typical of standard “preferred shares”. Furthermore, it also sets a discounted conversation price which, in the US experience, is in the range of 15-20%, while there no provision as to a future deadline for paying the investment back.

    Nothing prohibits to adapt the regulation of the SFPs to the best practice resulted from the implementation of the SAFE Agreement in the US. That is the case of the “acceleration” clauses that allow the investor to convert its investment before the original date set out in the agreement in case of equity-financing/liquidity events, namely the acquisition of the start-up or a capital increase that brings new investors in. This type of clauses is also often used in convertible notes. Some clauses, on the contrary, cannot be transferred into a SFP. That is the case of the clauses that regard the payback in relation to dissolution events such as: (i) the voluntary suspension of the business activity of the company; (ii) the transfer of the company’s assets to benefit the creditors or (iii) the company’s winding-up process both voluntary and not. According to Italian law, the winding-up due to a total loss of equity implies the possibility to use the reserve destined to SFPs with the consequent loss of the money invested by the SFP holders. Hence the common practice – still debated among scholars – that sees the possibility to use the reserves created upon issuance of the SFPs subordinated to the complete depletion of the other reserves, legal reserve fund included.

    Eventually, these practices have taken hold over the last few years since they are meant to provide the investors with more and more flexibility when dealing with financial/investment instruments as those described above. They represent in fact an opportunity for both start-ups, that can obtain capital on the short period, and investors, who can grade their entrepreneurial risk allocating their investment as a debt or not – depending on the chosen instruments – with a view to a conversion to equity that will eventually depend on several factors, not least the company’s business metrics and economical standing.

    In conclusion, the dynamism of this sector and the recent intervention of the Italian legislator show that there is plenty of room for growth in the Italian start-up ecosystem.

    The author of this post is Milena Prisco.

    In this post we will briefly outline some legal aspects related to e-commerce in Iran, starting from the definition of the average Iranian user and main characteristics and advantages of e-commerce in the Islamic Republic, which is attracting several foreign investors.

    We will then analyze the requirements for the issuance of online business licenses in Iran, which is mandatory in order to open an e-shop. Finally we will take a look at some successful examples of online business in Iran.

    The average Iranian user

    Some statistics regarding Iranian users active in the virtual space are useful for understanding the size of the Iranian market, and why it is attracting several investors.

    According to the “Internet Data and Statistics”, Iran is the thirteenth country for number of internet users, as 57 million of Iranian (on 83 million of Iran’s population) have access to internet (approximately the 68% of the population), but Government sources believe these numbers are  underestimated.

    What matters for the purpose of this analysis, however, is that approximatively the 58% of the internet users search on the Internet is about information on goods and services and that – until the end of Azar 1394 (December 2015) – the average internet users are male (58%) and young (47% between 20 and 29 years old).

    In addition, the 42% of the Iranian internet users are involved in electronic commerce and the 13% use the e-banking services.

    Online Business Licenses in Iran

    Whether carried out in the traditional way or electronically, all the businesses need a business-license to operate on the Iranian market. The most important law governing  is the Union System Act 1971, amended in 1980, 2003 and in 2013, which provides that the business license is issued by the competent union or legal authority.

    E-commerce is no exception, therefore all those who intend to sell goods or provide services using the virtual space must acquire a business license.

    On February 19th, 2017 the Iranian Government issued an Executive Regulation in regard to the Issuance of License and Supervision on Businesses in Virtual Space and Network Marketing, dividing the activities in virtual space into two categories:

    1. Virtual Business;
    2. Network Marketing.

    According to Paragraph 1 in Article 1, Virtual Business is a business established by any natural or legal person in order to provide products (goods or services) directly or indirectly on a wholesale or retail basis, to wholesalers, retailers and consumers through telecommunication means such as websites and digital software (applications).

    According to Paragraph 2 of Article 1, Network Marketing is a method for selling products based on which the Network Marketing company uses its website to organize the sellers in order to sell their products directly to consumers in a place far from the regular business location. Through this method, each seller can introduce another marketer as it subset and create a multi-product sales group in order to increase sales.

    The competent authority for issuance of licenses in this regard is the National Union. Therefore, any person who intends to acquire a license in order to have its activities carried out online, must apply on the website of Center for Development of Electronic Commerce (an organ of the Ministry of Industry, Mine and Commerce, hereinafter: “CDEC” – www.enamad.ir) in order to acquire the Reliance Symbol, which is a symbol necessary to certify the identity and competence of online activities.

    Requirements for the Online Business License

    Article 3  of the Executive Regulation on Issuance of License and Supervision on Businesses in Virtual Space and Network Marketing, which governs the Issuance of Online Business Licenses in Iran, provides that business licenses shall be issued according to the following procedure:

    1. Establishment of the virtual business conforming to the checklists provided by the CDEC.
    2. Registration of application in E-Namad website (then the CDEC automatically submits the application to the unions’ website).
    3. Upload of the required documents, which we will list below.
    4. Issuance and submission of the license (after verifying the uploaded documents and the original copies thereof) to the applicant within 15 days and submission of the license information to E-Namad website.
    5. Grant of Electronic Reliance Symbol concurrent with issuance of the license.

    Furthermore, the said Regulation specifies the required documents for issuance of business license, as follows:

    1. Office or legal domicile address of the applicant;
    2. Negative criminal record from the Police;
    3. Certificate of the relevant Tax Organization regarding tax compliance;
    4. Certificate for attendance in educational courses of commerce and business;
    5. Confirmation of specialized features regarding virtual business issued by the CDED;
    6. Photocopy of ID-card/Company-Registration number, plus passport/work-permit for foreigners;
    7. Photocopy of Military Service Termination Card or Permanent or Medical Exemption Card for men under 50 or a Student Certificate.

    In addition to those, the Regulation provides some other documents for particular sectors, so it is advisable to contact an Iranian expert in the matter to verify the compliance with all applicable regulations. For instance, the Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism Organization of Iran has set out some specific criteria for travel and tourism activities in the virtual space, so travel agency services, accommodation centers, private entities and other tourism services must follow a special procedure to render their services on virtual space.

    Successful Examples of Iranian Start-ups

    In order to become familiar with this sector, hereinafter we would like to report some inspirational examples of investments.

    1. Snapp

    Snapp is an Iranian ride hailing company which renders its services online. The Snapp application automatically connects the users to the nearest driver and shows the driver the user’s location. Afterwards, the nearest ready driver will pick up the users from their location, and Snapp calculates the price beforehand. This price is normally lower than the Taxi Agency Unions prices and can be received either in cash or via online payment or credit card.

    1. Digikala

    Digikala is the name of one of the biggest e-marketplaces in Iran. Cellphones, laptops and computers, digital cameras, office appliances, automobiles, watches, home appliances, instruments, jewelry, toys, clothes and books are some of the items sold on this website. One of the features of this website is the detailed and comprehensive reviews of different types of digital goods which can be a reliable source for purchasers.

    1. Pintapin

    Pintapin is a comprehensive tool for rendering travel services online. Accommodation services are listed in Pintapin and users can book online their desired location. It is also possible to submit the information regarding your destination, duration of stay and number of companions in order to receive suitable suggestions from Pintapin.

    1. Bamilo

    Bamilo is probably the most important Marketplace businesses in Iran. It started its activity in 2014 and is now among the most viewed websites in Iran. Based on the Amazon-model, the online store is considered as the main Iranian middleman between suppliers and consumers.

    1. Eskano

    Eskano is a smart system for searching real estate in Iran which is performed under international standards. With its huge database of transferable real estates divided between several Iranian cities, Eskano facilitates the sale and lease process, also with the possibility of setting up appointments directly through the website.

    The author of this post is Mohammad Rahmani.