Foreign companies and shell companies: which structure can actually be evidenced?

Few employees do not establish fictitious activity

A holding company, vehicle or outsourced business can have few employees and a genuine economic purpose. Connect the people controlling the structure, the parties performing the service and the recipients of the money. An overseas address does not by itself establish wrongdoing; a corporate chart does not by itself prove effective control.

Two chains, one explanation

Proposed method: reconcile the commercial and financial chains. Ownership and control are the shared lens used to understand both. Each discrepancy needs corroboration without predetermining the decision.

• Customer → supplier → subcontractor: contract, delivery capacity and deliverables.
• Payer → receiving account → beneficiary: amount, reference, timing and economic role.
• Ownership → control → natural persons: registers, rights, authority and independent corroboration.

Four lists, four different questions

Classifications are not interchangeable and must be checked at the decision date.

• EU tax list: tax transparency and governance, with consequences assessed under applicable law.
• FATF: strategic AML/CFT deficiencies. Increased monitoring does not automatically require EDD; read the relevant statement.
• EU high-risk third-country AML list: the specific EU scope and measures applying to the obliged entity.
• Sanctions: persons, control, country, sector or activity; apply the specific regime rather than a generic geographic label.

The legal distinction that prevents an error

Shell company and shell institution are not synonyms. AMLR Article 39 controls on relationships with shell institutions do not ban every corporate vehicle. The AMLR generally applies from 10 July 2027, with a specific 2029 date for in-scope football agents and clubs. Current controls start with the rules applicable today.