via Latest articles for Corporate Secretary http://bit.ly/2tRyoDp
Featured Post
Twenty Practical Steps to Better Corporate Governance | The Corporate Secretaries International Association (CSIA)
Twenty Practical Steps to Better Corporate Governance | The Corporate Secretaries International Association (CSIA) Please click the li...
Showing posts with label 2017 at 08:56PM. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2017 at 08:56PM. Show all posts
Friday, July 14, 2017
Tuesday, June 13, 2017
Offshore Company – Going Global | Muzaffar Alvi | Pulse | LinkedIn
An offshore company is registered or incorporated outside the country where it has its main offices and operations, or where its principal investors reside. The term “offshore” can refer to any country, but it is mostly associated with certain countries, or jurisdictions, where the local laws offer asset protection, business flexibility, tax minimization and privacy protection. Forming an offshore company begins with choosing a business structure and jurisdiction. Then, the business owners must appoint a registered agent or trustee, incorporate the company and fulfill all financial reporting responsibilities.
Characteristics of offshore companies:
Offshore companies differ depending upon the corporate law in the relevant jurisdiction. All offshore companies have certain characteristics:
They are broadly not subject to taxation in their home jurisdiction.
The corporate regime will be designed to promote business flexibility.
Regulation of corporate activities will normally be lighter than in a developed country.
The absence of taxation or regulation in the home jurisdiction does not exempt the relevant company from taxation or regulation abroad.
Another common characteristic of offshore companies is the limited amount of information available to the public. This varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Most jurisdictions have laws which permit law enforcement authorities (either locally or from overseas) to have access to relevant information, and in some cases, private individuals.
Most offshore jurisdictions normally remove corporate restraints such as thin capitalization rules, financial assistance rules, and limitations on corporate capacity and corporate benefit. Many have removed rules relating to maintenance of capital or restrictions on payment of dividends. A number of jurisdictions have also enacted special corporate provisions to attract business through offering corporate mechanisms that allow complex business transactions or reorganizations.
Uses of offshore companies:
There are allegations that offshore companies are used for money laundering, tax evasion, fraud, and other forms of white collar crime. Offshore companies are also used in a wide variety of commercial transactions from holding companies, to joint ventures and listing vehicles. Offshore companies are also used widely in connection with private wealth for tax mitigation and privacy. The use of offshore companies, particularly in tax planning, has become controversial in recent years, and a number of high-profile companies have ceased using offshore entities in their group structure as a result of public campaigns for such companies to pay their “fair share” of Government taxes.
Tax Haven:
A tax haven is a jurisdiction that offers favorable tax or other conditions to its taxpayers as relative to other jurisdictions. Particular taxes, such as an inheritance tax or income tax, are levied at a low rate or not at all. Maintains a system of financial secrecy, which enables foreign individuals to hide assets or income to avoid or reduce taxes in the home jurisdiction.
The following jurisdictions are considered the major destinations:
(1.) Bermuda:
Bermuda earned the dubious distinction of ranking No.1 on Oxfam’s 2016 list of the world’s worst corporate tax havens. Bermuda features a zero percent corporate tax rate, as well as no personal income tax rate. Due to the lack of corporate taxes, multinational companies have raked in huge amounts of money in Bermuda.
(2.) Netherlands:
The most popular tax haven among the Fortune 500 is the Netherlands, with more than half of the Fortune 500 reporting at least one subsidiary there. Oxfam’s list of the worst corporate tax havens placed this Benelux country at No.3.
National governments often use tax incentives to lure businesses to invest in their country. However, far too often tax incentives have been found to be ineffective, inefficient and costly, according to Oxfam.
(3.) Luxembourg:
This tiny EU member state remains a center of relaxed fiscal regulation through which multinationals are helped to avoid paying taxes. It’s the leading banking center in the Euro zone, with 143 banks that manage assets of around 800 billion dollars.
Pros: In Luxembourg, disclosure of professional secrecy may be punished with imprisonment. Asides from that, many international corporations choose Luxembourg as location for their headquarters and logistics centers, due to low taxes and excellent European location.
Cons: Tax exemptions on intellectual property rights may come up to 80% in Luxembourg, which is why many companies choose to manage their IP rights from here. However, it’s important to note that the tax exemption applies only to intellectual property rights instituted after December 31 2007.
(4.) Cayman Islands:
Assets of 1.4 trillion dollars are managed through the banks in this country right now. Being a British territory, which has 200 banks and more than 95,000 companies registered, the Cayman Islands is the world leader in hosting investment funds and the second country in the world where captive insurance companies are registered (designed to ensure the assets of a parent company having another object of activity). Over half of GDP is provided by the Cayman Islands financial services sector.
Pros: The Cayman Islands is one of the few countries or territories in which the law allows companies to be formed and manage assets without paying tax. This is considered legal and it’s not seen as a strategy to avoid taxes.
Cons: The tax benefits for incorporating in the Cayman Islands exists mainly for companies who are doing business in several countries, in order to avoid the hassle of dealing with various taxation systems.
(5.) Singapore:
Strategically located, the Republic of Singapore has a reputation as a financial center that’s really attractive to “offshore” funds of Asian companies and entrepreneurs.
Pros: Legislation on the confidentiality of banking information entered into force in 2001 and since then, the electrifying city-state is recognized by the strictness with which it implements that law. And Singapore does not waive these rules, in spite of pressure from foreign governments.
Cons: Singapore is not a country used by wealthy individuals seeking important tax benefits, as most countries from this region offer a relaxed tax regime.
(6.) Channel Islands:
Located between England and France, the Channel Islands host hundreds of international corporate subsidiaries.
The Channel Islands consist of two British Crown dependencies:
- The Bailiwick of Jersey, consisting of Jersey
- The Bailiwick of Guernsey, consisting of three separate jurisdictions: Guernsey, Alderney and Sark
Crown dependencies are not part of the United Kingdom, but are instead self-governing territories.
There is no inheritance tax, capital gains tax or standard corporate tax. This has made Jersey a popular tax haven, and the island now houses $5 billion worth of assets per square mile. Maybe you should add the Channel Islands to your list when you look for cheap places to retire.
(7.) Isle of Man:
The Isle of Man is considered somewhat of a financial center for low taxes. This tiny island, located between England and Ireland has a very low income tax, of maximum 20% and no more than 120,000 pounds.
Pros: Low tax rates are not the only advantages offered by this small island. Their pension plan is also really great, which is way many companies choose to have their employee pension plans held in accounts in this country. It’s possible to benefit from these pension plans starting from the age of 50 and onwards.
Cons: Establishing companies in the Isle of Man may be costly, especially for non – commercial activities and the registration process can be quite complex.
(8.) Ireland:
Ireland is often referred to as a tax haven, despite Irish officials asserting that is not the case. However, a Congressional Research Service report found that American multinational companies collectively reported 43 percent of their foreign earnings in five small tax haven countries: Bermuda, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Ireland.
(9.) Mauritius:
Located in the Indian Ocean, near Madagascar, Mauritius is another island that attracts many foreign investments. A large number of international corporations have subsidiaries established in Mauritius.
Pros: The corporate tax levied in Mauritius is really low, compared with other jurisdictions, of only 15%. Capital gains and interest are not taxed in Mauritius and residents can also benefit from various tax exemptions, due to double tax treaties.
Cons: Mauritius was used as a location for investments, especially for those directed towards India, but in May 2016, a new protocol amending the double taxation treaty between India and Mauritius was signed. This gives India a source based right to tax capital gains, which arise from alienation of shares of Indian resident companies acquired by Mauritius residents.
(10.) Monaco:
This tiny state has only 36,000 residents, but it attracts many entrepreneurs and companies willing to invest in this small country. Why? Because the income tax for residents hasn’t changed since 1869.
Pros: Once a person has become a Monaco resident, they are allowed to keep all the income they make, without any limitations. It’s no wonder that most of the world’s millionaires are residents of Monaco. Corporate taxes are also really low, which makes Monaco a great location to start a company.
Cons: In order to become a Monaco resident, a person needs to be a citizen of an EU – member state or have a long-term French visa. It’s also necessary to deposit at least 100,000 Euro in a bank in Monaco, to have private health insurance and to buy a property in Monaco.
(11.) Switzerland:
Switzerland has in its banks right now the equivalent of 6.5 trillion dollars of assets under management, and 51% of that comes from abroad, so it’s not really a surprise the country is also a global leader in asset management, with a market share of 28%.
Under international pressure, Switzerland has relaxed slightly in recent years its laws on fiscal secrecy, but the lobby for keeping these regulations remains strong as evidenced by the aggressive policy of the country against pressures for disclosure of information in this sector.
Pros: Combining low taxes with a top – notch banking system, it’s no wonder that Switzerland is one of the most popular tax havens in Europe. Opening a Swiss company is a relatively fast process, compared with the legal hurdles of other European states.
Cons: Although any individual or legal entity is allowed to register a company in Switzerland, one of the conditions required by Swiss law is to have at least one Swiss company director. To solve the Swiss directorship issue and tackle company formation Switzerland you should talk to experts.
(12.) Bahamas:
Pros: In the Bahamas, the personal income tax rate is zero. It can’t get any lower than that, right? There is also no wealth tax, no capital gains tax, no withholding tax and various other tax benefits both for individuals and for companies.
Cons: Not everyone can take advantage of a tax exemption on personal income, just those who are also residents of the Bahamas. Obtaining the residence here requires, in particular, the realization of an investment in a local property of a minimum value of $500, 000 (or a minimum of $1,5 million for the accelerated procedure).
The Bahamas doesn’t levy direct taxes, so there are no double tax treaties with other countries, but this tiny country has signed tax information agreements with 29 other countries, including USA, UK and Canada. However, information disclosure is limited to criminal matters.
(13.) Hong Kong:
Hong Kong is one of the emerging tax havens, as here assets of 2.1 trillion dollars are managed right now. It has the second largest stock market in Asia, after Tokyo, and shows the highest density of people with fortunes of more than 100 million dollars. Just under half of foreign investment in China went to Hong Kong in 2012 for example.
Pros: Companies incorporated in Hong Kong pay tax only on profits sourced in Hong Kong and the tax rate is currently at 16.5%. There is no withholding tax on dividends paid to foreign shareholders and no tax on capital gain.
Cons: China’s control over Hong Kong hinder initiatives to increase transparency and further enables the holders of bearer securities – instruments for some of the most harmful criminal activity – to remain unidentified. This damages somewhat the credibility and the reputation of companies registered in Hong Kong.
(14.) Malta:
Malta makes it on the top of the list of the countries with the lowest taxes in the world in 2016, which is why is one of the best tax havens in 2017. Living on the small Mediterranean island makes it possible to gain the status of resident and to be thus taxed only on income from local sources.
Pros: One of the best tax advantages for individuals and companies is that there is no tax levied in Malta for revenues obtained abroad.
Cons: Maltese nationality can also be obtained through a citizenship by investment program, for those who want a faster process. However, in order to obtain Maltese citizenship, it is necessary to make investments in Malta worth about 1 million Euros.
(15.) Panama, which is a significant international maritime centre. Although Panama (with Bermuda) was one of the earliest offshore corporate domiciles, Panama lost significance in the early 1990s. Panama is now second only to the British Virgin Islands in volumes of incorporations.
(16.) New Zealand, the remotest jurisdiction, has the advantage of being a true primary jurisdiction but with a tough but practical regulatory regime. It is well positioned for the Asian market but retains close ties to Europe.
(17.) Nevis: the offshore companies located in this Caribbean island of the Federation of Saint Kitts and Nevis are exempt from all local taxes, including income, withholding, capital gain taxes, stamp duties and other fees or taxes based upon income or assets originating outside of Nevis or in connection with other activities outside of Nevis.
Opinion: There are only two other times in history when stocks were more expensive than today – MarketWatch
MarketWatch |
Opinion: There are only two other times in history when stocks were more expensive than today
MarketWatch For us, this is not an academic frustration. We are constantly looking for new stocks by running stock screens, endlessly reading (blogs, research, magazines, newspapers), looking at holdings of investors we respect, talking to our large network of … |
June 13, 2017 at 08:29PM
from
What Investors Keep Missing About Tesla Stock
Take a Closer Look at TSLA Stock If I asked you to describe Tesla Inc (NASDAQ:TSLA), what would you say? Most people would give the stock answer; that Tesla is a maker of electric cars. It would appear they have good reason to say so, too. Yahoo! Finance classifies Tesla under “Major – Auto Manufacturers.” And Google Finance lists Daimler AG (OTCMKTS:DDAIY), Ford Motor Company (NYSE:F), and General Motors Company (NYSE:GM) as Tesla’s main competitors. Not a single solar energy firm makes the list.
I find this odd. Less than a year has passed since Tesla acquired SolarCity Corp (NASDAQ:SCTY). The $2.6-billion deal made Tesla one of the leading solar providers in North America, so why are we still pretending that TSLA stock is a pure-play on vehicles? Full Article: http://ift.tt/2sX5uPI
submitted by /u/rogerdrago
[link] [comments]
June 13, 2017 at 08:19PM
from /u/rogerdrago
Thursday, June 8, 2017
Trump’s Climate Withdrawal Is An Impeachable Offense
When President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the Paris climate agreement, he acted in concert with 22 Republican senators, who collectively receive $10,694,284 in contributions from the coal and oil industries.
These 22 senators wrote to Trump, asking him to pull out of the accord. The president and the senators put their own political and economic interests above the safety, security and indeed survival of the American people and the entire planet.
The climate accord is a landmark deal, in which 195 countries responsible for 95 percent of carbon emissions worldwide agreed to voluntarily reduce their greenhouse gas emissions in order to slow down global warming.
Under the pact, the Obama administration promised to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 26 percent to 29 percent lower than 2005 levels by 2025.
But according to the Rhodium Group, Trump’s new policies will only cut emissions 15 percent to 19 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, considerably lower than the commitment made by the Obama administration.
The United States is the second largest purveyor of fossil fuels. China, which is first, and India, third, made significant commitments to cut their emissions as well. China is shutting down coal mines and plants and replacing them with solar plants and wind turbines. India is substituting solar panels for expansion of its coal companies.
The Climate Action Tracker (CAT), a consortium of four European research organizations, determined that “without any further action, the [United States, under the Obama pledge] will miss its commitment ‘by a large margin.’” The 2015 Clean Power Plan, which would shut down hundreds of coal-fired power plants, freeze construction on new ones, and replace them with new wind and solar farms, was one of the most significant programs in US climate action, according to the CAT.
But Trump signed an executive order in March, directing the Environmental Protection Agency to begin withdrawing from the Clean Power Plan.
Both China and India, on the other hand, are on track toward meeting their emissions goals, CAT found.
A study by the Grantham Research Institute concluded that the existence of the Paris climate agreement has caused dozens of countries to pass new laws requiring the use of clean energy.
The United States is now only one of three countries in the world that will not be party to the climate accord. Nicaragua did not join because the agreement wasn’t strong enough. Syria did not join because it is embroiled in a war and operates under a severe sanctions regime.
Withdrawing From the Climate Agreement Is a Political Offense
Trump’s withdrawal from the climate agreement constitutes an impeachable offense.
The Constitution provides for impeachment of the president when he commits “High Crimes” and misdemeanors. They include, but are not limited to, conduct punishable by the criminal law.
Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist No. 65 that offenses are impeachable if they “proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust.”
“They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”
“The Abuse or Violation of Some Public Trust”
No individual embodies the trust of the public more than the president, who is elected by the people. When the people choose their president, they are entrusting that person with their security, well-being and survival. The voters trust the president to act in their best interests and protect them from harm. By withdrawing from the climate agreement, Trump is violating the trust that “We the People” have placed in him.
Timothy Wirth, under secretary of state in the Clinton administration, told The Nation that Trump’s withdrawal from the pact was “a stunning moral abdication of responsibility to future generations.”
“Injuries Done Immediately to the Society Itself”
“We’ve watched Arctic sea ice vanish at a record pace and measured the early disintegration of Antarctica’s great ice sheets,” Middlebury College environmental studies professor Bill McKibben wrote in the New York Times. “We’ve been able to record alarming increases in drought and flood and wildfire, and we’ve been able to link them directly to the greenhouse gases we’ve poured into the atmosphere.”
In his analysis for Truthout, Dahr Jamail cites a recently published study showing that “the depletion of dissolved oxygen in Earth’s oceans is occurring much faster than previously believed.” Thus, he writes, anthropogenic climate disruption (ACD) “is now recreating the conditions that caused the worst mass extinction event on Earth, the Permian mass extinction that took place approximately 250 million years ago and annihilated 90 percent of life. Dramatic oceanic warming and acidification were key components of this extinction event, and these conditions align with what we are seeing today.”
Jamail adds, “Scientists have said that the U.S. withdrawal [from the climate accord] could add up to 3 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere on an annual basis.”
If the climate continues to change at a rapid rate, society itself will be injured. As the glaciers melt and the oceans swell, the land will recede. Crops will die. Mosquitos will increasingly carry diseases. The Earth will be hit with massive floods, devastating heat waves and drought. Polar bears will become extinct. People will lose their lands, their homes and their lives. Indeed, life as we know it will come to an end.
“To refuse to act against global warming is to condemn thousands of people to death and suffering today and millions more tomorrow. This is murder,” Mark Hertsgaard wrote in The Nation.
A Crime Against Humanity
Moreover, by withdrawing the United States from the climate accord, Trump has committed a crime against humanity, which also constitutes a High Crime.
Trump has been aided and abetted in his crime against humanity by the following 22 GOP Senators: Inhofe (Oklahoma), Barrasso (Wyoming), McConnell (Kentucky), Cornyn (Texas), Blunt (Missouri), Wicker (Mississippi), Enzi (Wyoming), Crapo (Idaho), Risch (Idaho), Cochran (Mississippi), Rounds (South Dakota), Paul (Kentucky), Boozman (Arkansas), Shelby (Alabama), Strange (Alabama), Hatch (Utah), Lee (Utah), Cruz (Texas), Perdue (Georgia), Tillis (North Carolina), Scott (South Carolina) and Roberts (Kansas).
Crimes against humanity can be committed even without a state of war. The Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court (ICC) defines crimes against humanity as “inhumane acts … intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.” They must be “committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack.”
Since taking office, Trump has mounted a methodical assault on the people of the United States. He has systematically endeavored to destroy the social safety net, including the rights to healthcare, public education and a clean environment, as well as the rights of workers, immigrants, women and LGBTQ people.
By withdrawing from the climate agreement and refusing to shoulder the United States’ share of responsibility for slowing climate change, Trump has intentionally committed an inhumane act that will ultimately cause great suffering to the people of the world.
Although the ICC cannot directly prosecute and try climate crimes, the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC said in a policy paper last year that it would construe crimes against humanity more broadly to include “destruction of the environment” and make prosecution of those crimes a priority.
According to the Center for Climate Crime Analysis (CCCA), a new nonprofit established to support the ICC prioritization of environmental crimes, “Climate crimes are criminal activities that result in, or are associated with, the emission of significant amounts of greenhouse gases (GHG). The CCCA does not aim to criminalize GHG emissions per se. Most emissions are legal. However, a significant share of GHG emissions results from, or is associated with, conduct that violates existing criminal law.”
The CCA notes, “Climate crimes are often intertwined with other serious international crimes. As a result of this link, as well through their impact on climate change, climate crimes may represent a threat to international peace and security and potentially affect all of humankind and the very foundations of civilization.”
Richard Harvey, a specialist in international criminal and environmental law, told Truthout, “Given what the ICC prosecutor and the Center for Climate Crime Analysis consider environmental crimes against humanity, Trump’s attempt to renege on this international agreement is a clear invitation to his Big Carbon cronies to continue policies designed to consign humanity to the greenhouse gas chamber. Is that conspiracy to commit a crime against humanity? You be the judge.”
By pulling out of the climate accord, Trump “makes himself guilty of what looks like a grave crime against humanity, the planet Earth, and future generations,” Uffe Elbæk, former Danish minister of culture and leader of Denmark’s Green Party, said.
Tom Engelhardt at TomDispatch calls the “system of destruction on a planetary scale … the ultimate ‘crime against humanity.’” He writes, “It is becoming a ‘terracide.’”
The House of Representatives Should Impeach Trump
It takes 51 percent of the House of Representatives to impeach the president. Republicans control a majority of the seats in the House. But imperiling the planet should not be a partisan issue.
The fact that virtually every other country in the world, as well as U.S. states and cities, corporations and activists worldwide are taking steps on their own to slow the changing climate does not absolve Trump from his crime.
It is incumbent upon the House of Representatives to vote for the impeachment of Trump.
Meanwhile, we must, and will, continue to build the global climate justice movement.
Copyright Truthout. Reprinted with permission.
Marjorie Cohn is professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and former president of the National Lawyers Guild. Follow her on Twitter.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
June 08, 2017 at 08:53PM
from Marjorie Cohn
Hybrid Energy Storage Capacity to Exceed 2 GW in 2026
http://ift.tt/eA8V8J
The total capacity is expected to grow from 78.6 MW as of 2017.
June 08, 2017 at 08:50PM
from
Story Stocks: Alibaba sales growth forecast draws gasps at Investor Day (BABA)
http://ift.tt/eA8V8J
Alibaba (BABA 138.05, +12.41 +9.88%) notched new all-time highs earlier in the session today in ligh
June 08, 2017 at 08:55PM
from
Wednesday, June 7, 2017
Money milestones: This is how your finances should look when your kids go to college
http://ift.tt/1b1m047
Don’t neglect retirement savings in favor of college tuition.
June 07, 2017 at 08:50PM
from
Is Apple requiring a new second level of security protection?
You’re stoked to try out the new gaming app you heard about at work, but no so fast. Angeli Kakade (@angelikakade) looks into reports that Apple is requiring a second level of security.
June 07, 2017 at 08:21PM
from Buzz60
Monday, June 5, 2017
The Best Budgetwise Bucket List Girlfriend Getaway: Arizona
http://ift.tt/eA8V8J
Live life to the fullest while watching your wallet. The best budget conscious bucket list girlfriend getaway.
June 05, 2017 at 08:55PM
from Kerri Zane, Contributor
Wednesday, May 24, 2017
Amyris: 90 Days To Build The Future
http://ift.tt/2rhmTVG
Jim Lane
![BD-TS-052217-Amyris-cover[1].png](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_sZyQgLmvxv5uRDHlYd7W44eLttgmOWAPzFYNJNKIsbwRISWevytPu2GeNg8-ex4X_yQ42eM1aa=s0-d)
In California, Amyris (AMRS)
reported Q1 revenues of $13.0M compared with $8.8M for Q1 2016,
and touted the “significant increase in product sales, primarily
in the personal care and health and nutrition markets, offset by a
slight decline in collaboration revenue.” Collaboration revenues
contributed $4.7M and product sales added $8.3M for the quarter.
Big Q1 miss vs analyst expectations
As Jeff Osborne at Cowen & Co noted, “Amyris reported revenue
of $13.0mn, well below our estimate of $37.1mn due to much lower
collaboration payments than we had anticipated. Management has
highlighted that these payments can be very lumpy in nature, and
attributed the miss to a failed milestone payment from Ginkgo
Bioworks. Gross Margin of 2% was well below our estimate of 40%
due to the lower collaboration payments.”
A turning point of interest
We liked one item more than anything.
In Q1 2016, product sales were $5.2M and the cost of product
sales were $11.2M, and a number of informed observers became
alarmed that the company was losing money on every product
produced, and that growth would be unsustainable. The company
noted the concerns but said that future sales would arrive with
stronger gross margins.
So, let’s look at Q1 2017.
And indeed, the company has staged a turnaround in that critical
metric. In Q1 2017, product sales were $13.2M and the cost of
product sales were $12.8M. IIt’s a rretunr to the kind of gross
margins that company had achieved by Q3 2016 — but with a 50% jump
in revenues. Long ways to go before the company is out the
financial woods, but we may see here a turning point.
The big hit is Biossance
The company recorded record quarterly Biossance sales following
successful launch into Sephora with the brand delivering high
growth and expected to drive much better than expected 2017
results — growing from approximately $500,000 in 2016 total retail
sales to over $10 million expected for 2017
The big miss is Ginkgo
There wasn’t much insight offered regarding the Ginkgo situaiton,
excepting that a mysterious milestone payment was missed —
apparently, a huge one, because the miss on revenues compared to
analyst expectations was almost $24M.
Indeed, the scale-up news from the Ginkgo universe this past week
went in a completely different direction. Ginkgo Bioworks and
Robertet USA completed the commercial-scale fermentation of “a key
flavor and fragrance ingredient” – which one, we don’t yet know.
The specific scale was 50,000 liters.
But think along the lines of rose oil ingredients and lactone
ingredients — that’s the Robertet sector. Overall, Ginkgo has a
portfolio of over 40 products under contract with 20 customers.
The Q1 developments that will impact 2017 and 2018
The company highlighted three major developments that will
positvely impact the company this year and next:
- Growing Farnesene for Vitamin E oil from around $6 million in
2016 to around $20 million in 2017 - Significant progress in healthy sweeteners with expected
commercial production in 2018 of low cost, best performing
healthy sweetener to focus on sugar replacement market - Announced up to $95 million in anticipated equity financing
led by Royal DSM along with institutional investors over two
tranches and announced in-process reduction of the company’s
debt by approximately $75 million, significantly strengthening
the company’s balance sheet
Happy Campers at Camp Amyris
“We are pleased with our continued execution delivering increased
product sales and very healthy revenue growth for Amyris,” said
John Melo, Amyris President & CEO. “We are very excited to
join with Royal DSM to accelerate product sales in health and
nutrition markets, deliver better performing products and
accelerate market access. With their support and that of our
investors we have significantly strengthened our balance sheet and
the company’s foundation as a leading company in its sector.”
Continued Melo, “Our product portfolio is growing at a faster
rate than we expected within nutraceuticals, skin care and
fragrance ingredients. We have evolved our business to predictable
quarter on quarter product sales and continue to deliver on our
strategic milestones for delivery of our collaboration revenue.
While our competitors struggle to deliver material revenue and
predictable growth we expect to deliver around $60 million of
product revenue for 2017, or more than double from 2016, and we
expect total revenue to be better than our 2017 plan.
The Bottom Line
It’s the 5th consecutive quater of year on year product revemue
growth, and the company is targeting $115-120M in revenue in 2017
and of that $60M is expected to come from product sales.
In 2018, guidance is at $160M for product sales.
All that’s the good news. Here’s the bad news, Amyris has been
pushing back it’s time to $100M in revenue for some time. Back in
May 2016 we heard from AMyris that it was “On track to execute
2016 business plan with expected non-GAAP revenue of $90-$105
million for the year.” The company ended up with $67M for the year
— and with a $13M result in Q1, the company will need to average
out at $33M per quarter to reach its $115M target in 2017.
Needless to say, the next 90 days are perhaps the most important
in the company’s lifespan. There’s a time for building the
long-term future and there’s a time for delivering on stated
goals. Wall Street may well be able to put the past in the past
with all forgive if Amyris can break out and hit that $100M
revenue threshold, and even with a strong second half, the company
will need to reach something like $30M in Q2 revenue to maintain
belief, given the 2016 miss.
Jim Lane is editor and publisher of Biofuels Digest where this
was originally published.
Biofuels Digest is the most widely read Biofuels daily
read by 14,000+ organizations. Subscribe
here.
May 24, 2017 at 08:49PM
from Tom Konrad
Tuesday, May 23, 2017
What makes a successful overdraft program?
For Navigant Credit Union, given their long-standing commitment to the financial well-being of their account holders, it was paramount to find an overdraft provider with a fully compliant solution—along with an abundance of expertise in regulatory compliance, and a track record of great service and results. After completing vendor due diligence—which included obtaining references from several credit unions, they selected the JMFA OVERDRAFT PRIVILEGE® program. Read the entire case study.
“JMFA has a reputation in the credit union community of providing a reliable, turn-key solution that incorporates compliance-tested best practices and a high level of support,” said Navigant CU Chief Retail Banking Officer Kathy Orovitz. After receiving positive recommendations from several of the company’s clients, Navigant was very comfortable choosing JMFA OVERDRAFT PRIVILEGE®.”
Orovitz remains confident that JMFA OVERDRAFT PRIVILEGE® and the company’s compliance expertise continue to support the credit union’s member service philosophy in the following ways:
The post What makes a successful overdraft program? appeared first on CUInsight.
May 23, 2017 at 08:51PM
from Felix Gomez
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of the Candidate Experience
Want to know what is critically important for every recruiter and hiring manager? It’s remembering what it’s like to be on the other side of the table. Yes, everyone who recruits or hires should have to be a job candidate sometime. The candidate experience has been on my mind because I have been on the market for […]
May 23, 2017 at 08:47PM
from johnhollon
Monday, May 22, 2017
Energy companies lobby Theresa May to water down price cap pledge
Electricity and gas suppliers push for compromise that would see price caps for 6 million rather than 17 million households
Energy companies are lobbying the Conservative Party to water down its policy of a price cap on bills, with proposals that would see millions fewer households protected from tariff hikes.
Theresa May has promised to cap electricity and gas costs for 17 million families on default energy deals, called standard variable tariffs, after five of the big six suppliers hiked prices. But under a compromise that has been put to the government, only 6 million households would see their energy bills capped.
May 22, 2017 at 08:54PM
from Adam Vaughan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)