This is the third part of a series of articles discussing Shari’ah compliant structures used in project financing transactions. In the second part of this series, we discussed two Sukuk (i.e., Shari’ah compliant capital markets instruments) structures used to finance particular projects. In this article, we will discuss the third structure, namely, the Sukuk al-Musharakah structure and the different ways in which it can be used in project financing transactions.
Sukuk al-Musharakah
The term Musharakah literally means sharing. This term is derived from the Arabic word Shirkah, which means partnership. In Shari’ah, Musharakah means a partnership arrangement formed between two or more partners for some business purpose where each partner makes a contribution (in cash or in kind) to the Musharakah (i.e., the partnership). The profits of the Musharakah are shared amongst the partners according to an agreed ratio whereas the losses are shared according to the ratio of their respective contributions.
Musharakah can be divided into two structures, namely, the Shirkat-ul-Aqd structure and the Shirkat- ul-Milk structure for the purposes of Sukuk issuance for financing a particular project. We are discussing below the salient features of the said structures and the key principles involved in their utilization in project financing transactions.
A. Shirkat-ul-Aqd (Partnership by contract)
In this type of Shirkah, Musharakah is created by a mutual contract between the originator and the trustee where the originator and the trustee agree to contribute their efforts and resources towards achieving a common business purpose.
For the purposes of structuring a Sukuk issuance based on the Shirkat-ul-Aqd structure, a special purpose vehicle (“SPV”) is established to hold the Sukuk holders’ interest in the Musharakah. The SPV issues Sukuk certificates representing an undivided ownership interest in the underlying Musharakah and the Sukuk holders contribute towards the capital of the Musharakah by contributing cash to the SPV in exchange for Sukuk certificates.
A trust is declared by the SPV over the proceeds and any asset(s) acquired therefrom. The SPV acts as a trustee for and on behalf of the Sukuk holders. Subsequently, the trustee enters into a Musharakah agreement with the originator where both the trustee and the originator contribute towards the capital of the Musharakah. In return, both the trustee and the originator receive a proportionate number of units in the Musharakah. Contribution from the trustee comes in the form of proceeds from the Sukuk issuance. The respective contributions of the trustee and the originator are used for the purposes of the Musharakah.
The profits generated from the Musharakah are shared between the originator and the trustee in an agreed proportion. The said proportion may not necessarily be the same as the proportion of their respective contributions to the Musharakah. The trustee’s share of the profits is calculated in such a manner so as to be enough to pay the periodic distribution amounts to the Sukuk holders.
The losses, on the other hand, are shared strictly in proportion to the respective contributions of the trustee and the originator to the Musharakah.
The trustee and the originator also enter into a purchase undertaking pursuant to which the trustee is granted the right to require the originator to purchase the Musharakah asset at an agreed exercise price on the maturity of the Sukuk or upon the occurrence of an event of default; thereby dissolving the Musharakah. The exercise price is equal to the Sukuk holders’ subscription amount plus any accrued but unpaid periodic distribution amounts.
In some cases, the originator is granted a call option by the trustee under a sale undertaking pursuant to which the originator can require the trustee to sell the Musharakah asset to the originator prior to the maturity of the Sukuk. The sale price in such cases is equal to the Sukuk holders’ amount of contribution to the Musharakah plus any accrued but unpaid periodic distribution amounts.
Under a management agreement, the trustee appoints the originator as the managing agent to manage the joint venture according to an agreed business plan. In consideration for its services, the originator is paid a nominal management fee.
B. Shirkat-ul-Milk (Partnership by joint ownership)
Under this structure, Musharakah is created by the joint ownership of the originator and the trustee in a particular asset. This joint ownership can be created in two ways, either by both the originator and the trustee making cash contributions to the Musharakah for jointly acquiring an asset, or by the originator selling its ownership interest in an asset to the trustee.
There are three essential ingredients of this structure. The first is that both the originator and the trustee are the joint owners of the relevant Musharakah asset. Secondly, the originator (in the capacity of a lessee) utilizes the share of the trustee (in the capacity of a lessor) in the Musharakah asset. Lastly, the originator buys back the share of the trustee in the Musharakah asset.
To begin with, the SPV issues Sukuk into the capital markets. The Sukuk holders subscribe to the Sukuk by contributing cash to the SPV in return for Sukuk certificates. The Sukuk certificates represent the proportionate ownership of the Sukuk holders in the underlying Musharakah asset.
The SPV declares trust over the Sukuk issuance proceeds and acts as a trustee for and on behalf of the
Sukuk holders.
The trustee and the originator then enter into a Musharakah agreement pursuant to which they jointly acquire the Musharakah asset or the trustee acquires the ownership interest of the originator in the Musharakah asset (as the case may be). Following such acquisition, the originator and the trustee become co-owners of the Musharakah asset.
Under a rental agreement, the originator (in the capacity of a lessee) uses the trustee’s share in the Musharakah asset against periodic rental payments. Such rental payments are then passed on by the trustee to the Sukuk holders as periodic distribution amounts.
The originator, pursuant to a purchase undertaking, purchases the units or the ownership interest of the trustee in the Musharakah asset on specified dates. Such purchase can be either during the tenor of the Sukuk or at maturity.
Where the Sukuk is structured on a diminishing Musharakah basis, the units are purchased during the term of the Sukuk. With each such purchase, the ownership interest of the trustee in the Musharakah asset decreases with corresponding increase in the originator’s ownership interest.
The originator and the trustee also enter into a management agreement under which the trustee appoints the originator as its agent to manage the Musharakah asset and to carry out the services pertaining to the major maintenance, takaful and payment of ownership-related taxes and expenses in
respect of the Musharakah asset.
Wednesday, September 14, 2016
Islamic Finance - Part 3
Wednesday, September 7, 2016
Commercial Name Reservations
The Ministry of Commerce and Industry (“MOCI”) has recently issued a Ministerial Decision No. 124 of 2016 on issuing the regulation regulating to Commercial Names (“MD 124/16”).
In order for an investor (i.e., a company or individual) to set up a new company in Oman, the investor shall first identify and seek approval on the proposed name of the new company. Previously, whilst the MOCI permitted investors to include the foreign investor’s name, it has generally prevented the investors from including the word “Oman” in the new company name, unless the minimum capital invested in the company was RO 500,000 or more. However, under the new MD 124/16 only joint stock companies have the right to include the word “Oman” in the commercial name. This means that limited liability companies would not be able to include the word “Oman” in the commercial name, regardless of whether the limited liability company has a capital investment of RO 500,000.
The MOCI has recently taken the initiative in implementing rules and regulations relating to company’s name reservation. MD 124/16 cancels all provisions or rules that contradict the regulations. Article 4 of MD 124/16 provides that the investor is not permitted to reserve or register the company name unless the name has a meaning or expression in Arabic, and must not include a term or a word that cannot be translated into Arabic. Such rule however does not apply to foreign branches that are registered in Oman or Omani companies that have joint foreign ownership or foreign companies that have full ownership.
Further, it is not permitted for any branch of a company to hold an independent commercial name different to that of the name of the company. Any trademark of the establishment or its branches may be registered as per the Intellectual Property Law.
MD 124/16 provides that any names that fall under the following categories are not permitted to be registered:
- plural of a tribe name, which includes the two letters (AL);
- a name that is identical to a commercial name of an establishment which has a local and an international reputation;
- a name which may indicate or include a religious, political, military meaning or content;
- a demonstrative pronoun, an honorary sign or a special character in any of the regional, Arab or international organizations or one of its institutions;
- a name that resembles a name of an authority or organisation, a social institution, local charities or international institutions;
- a name that resembles a registered trademark or its name, or contains one of its components;
- a name that carries a synonymous meaning to the commercial name of an establishment or pluralizes or singularizes the name of a registered establishment;
- a name that carries the word “Oman” or “Omani” or one of its derivatives or implications, except for the joint stock companies; and
- a name that indicates an incorrect geographical division of the Sultanate.
Article 8 of MD 124/16 grants the MOCI the power to cancel, or request an applicant to change or amend the commercial name of the establishment if it does not comply with these rules and regulations. The applicant will bear its costs and expenses associated in amending or changing the name.
An applicant may appeal the MOCI’s decision to cancel the registration or its request to amend the name by submitting a written request to the undersecretary of the MOCI within sixty (60) days from the date of notification of its decision. The MOCI shall decide on the appeal within thirty (30) days from the date of submission. If no decision is made within thirty (30) days, the decision shall be deemed to have been rejected.
Therefore, in light of the new MD 124/16, it is important for an investor to understand the rules relating to name reservation. The investor must ensure that they comply with MD 124/16 prior to forming a company in Oman, as it will clearly mitigate any additional expenses (and time) that may be incurred by the investor if it is required to amend or change its proposed name.
Wednesday, August 31, 2016
The Competition Protection and Monopoly Prevention Law
Few people are aware of the Competition Protection and Monopoly Prevention Law, RD 67 of 2014 (“CPMPL”). Yet its scope of operation is very broad, and the consequences of being in breach are severe. It is particularly important that any chairman, CEO, director or authorised senior manager of any major company be aware of the CPMPL and its potential consequences.
The CPMCL applies to all activities of production, trade, services, intellectual property rights and other economic activities that may have a damaging effect on competition.
What is unlawful?
The CPMCL sets out a new merger control regime and prohibits restrictive agreements and abuse of market dominance. Private sector businesses with a position of dominance in the market are prohibited from engaging in practices that would undermine, lessen or prevent competition.
The new law does not apply to wholly owned government entities. However, it otherwise has significant implications for private sector businesses that have a dominant market share. In broad terms, any of the following behaviour is likely to be prohibited:
- entering into an agreement to create a monopoly in the importation, production, distribution, sale or purchase of any commodity (Art 8);
- engaging in monopolistic behaviour (Art 8);
- entering into an agreement concluded with the intent to prevent, limit or weaken competition (Art 9); and
- any act to reduce or limit competition by a person or company that is in a “dominant position” (Art10).
Each of these activities is separately defined as a criminal offence, although there is considerable potential overlap between them. For the purposes of the CPMPL, a person or company is in a “dominant position” if it has control, or has an influence over, the relevant market, including the acquisition of the market volume by more than 35%.
Articles 9 and 10 of the CPMPL give a series of examples of what may constitute limiting, weakening competition or reducing competition. The examples are very broad, and include things such as:
- predatory pricing;
- refusing to deal with specific people to prevent market entry;
- creating artificial shortages by reducing quantities;
- suddenly increasing the quantities of products available;
- fixing prices or conditions of resale;
- colluding in tenders;
- making it a condition that a purchaser also purchase another commodity or service; and
- forcing a manufacturer to not deal with a competitor.
The effect is that the CPMPL could have an operation in relation to a whole range of businesses, from selling basic goods, providing transport, providing labour, construction, pharmaceuticals, quoting for services or even consultancy services.
Criminal Penalties
Penalties for breach of Articles 8, 9 or 10 include:
- imprisonment for between 3 months and 3 years;
- a fine equivalent to the profits on the sales of the relevant products; and
- fines of between 5% and 10% of total annual sales.
Where a corporation is involved, the Chairman, members of the Board of Directors, the Chief Executive Officer and authorized managers can all be potentially penalized if they are aware of the breach.
In any of these violations a court may also require the company or individual to rectify the violation, dispose of shares or assets or make the payment of OMR 100 – 1,000 until the violation has been stopped.
In the case of a second offence, the above penalties may be doubled, and the business may be closed for up to 30 days. The CPMPL includes other penalties relating to procedural issues as well.
Authorisation
If a person or corporation wishes to carry out any step or enter into any agreement that may potentially be in breach of the CPMPL, there is a procedure available under the CPMPL to apply to the Public Authority for Consumer Protection for permission to do so under Article 11. The Authority must issue a decision within 90 days. The Authority can not permit any procedure that would result in an acquisition of more than 50% of a relevant market.
Conclusion
The primary rationale for laws of this type is to protect the consumer from unfair market practices that exist in many countries. For example, Federal Law 4 of 2012 (also known as the “UAE Competition Law”) performs a similar function in the United Arab Emirates. The CPMPL is broader than the laws in some countries, as it protects other businesses, not just consumers. We are not aware of any prosecutions so far, under the CPMPL, but we are aware of one case where an Omani Court held that an agreement was void as it breached the CPMPL.
The most important point to note is that if your business is proposing to enter into any agreement or carry out any act which may lessen competition, you should seek legal advice and consider applying to the Public Authority for Consumer Protection for permission.
Monday, August 22, 2016
Health and Safety in Oman
(ii) Ministerial Decision 286/2008 – the Regulation of Occupational Safety and Health for the Establishments.
- investigate any breach;
- impose penalties on entities in breach of the Law;
- take necessary measures for the closure of the place of work, fully or partially, or the suspension of the use of equipment until it is satisfied that the causes of the risk have disappeared; and
- refer violations to the Royal Oman Police.
- working in extreme temperatures;
- working at heights;
- working in confined spaces;
- working with dangerous substances, radiation and chemicals;
- manual handling of heavy goods;
- noise, vibration and lighting;
- equipment and machinery; and
- transportation of dangerous goods and substances.
Monday, August 15, 2016
The MOCI Invest Easy System
Monday, August 8, 2016
The Establishment of US Companies and Branches Under the Oman/United States Free Trade Agreement
Monday, August 1, 2016
Introduction to Knowledge Oasis Muscat
- KOM companies may have 100% foreign ownership.
- Another major advantage is that KOM companies, even those with 100% foreign ownership, are only required to have a minimum share capital of OMR 20,000.
- The Omanization target in KOM currently starts at 10% for the first year, with 5% incremental annual increases up to a maximum of 25% within five years. (This compares with a figure of 35% outside KOM.)
- KOM companies may be registered with the Tender Board regardless of their share capital and classification and are not required to fulfil the minimum capital requirements for such registration.
- No personal income tax is payable, and there are no foreign exchange controls.
- The cluster of information technology-related companies in KOM is in itself an incentive for other technology-oriented companies to establish their presence in the estate.
- They must operate within a technology or knowledge-based enterprise sector, and must commit to the research, development or commercial exploitation of information and communications technologies (“ICT”) in any genuine technology field.
- They must specialize in the design or development of products or processes in areas such as telecoms, IT, the internet, new media, etc.
- The workforce must comprise a high proportion of “knowledge workers”. A minimum of 25% of the workforce must be qualified technologists, scientists or engineers.
- Finally, there is a further category of secondary tenants whose business is to provide services to primary tenants. Permissible activities include financial services and other convenience and professional services.
- The application process involves the submission of a duly completed application form with supporting documents followed by an invitation for an interview/presentation before the selection committee of KOM.
- If the application is approved, an offer letter is sent detailing the terms and conditions.
- The main condition is the payment of advance rent for one year (minimum OMR 5, 400 for a space of 50 square metres).
- Once the rent has been paid, the company can then be registered as a KOM company with the Ministry of Commerce & Industry (the “MOCI”).
Wednesday, July 20, 2016
Airline Carrier Liability for Flight Delays
In recent years, there have been numerous commercial claims brought by airline passengers who seek compensation for alleged damages arising from flight delays. This article will discuss the circumstances under which a passenger may be entitled to compensation for a flight delay, in scenarios involving both domestic and international travel.
It is important to note that Omani domestic law will apply to all domestic journeys. Conversely, and as discussed below, the provisions of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air (the “Montreal Convention”) will apply to all international journeys.
Remedies for flight delays for domestic flights
Passengers who pursue claims for flight delays for domestic flights frequently cite Articles 183 and 204 of the Sultani Decree 55 1990 (the “Law of Commerce”) when attempting to establish an airlines’ purported legal liability:
- Article 183 requires airline carriers “to carry the passenger…to the place of arrival at the time agreed, or as stated in the schedules of carriage.”
- Article 204 states that airline carriers are liable for any “detriment resulting from delay in the arrival of the passenger.”
However, whilst Articles 183 and 204 establish certain travel obligations upon airline carriers, Article
205 of the Law of Commerce sets out the mitigating factors which will absolve an airline carrier from any legal liability for purported damages arising from a passenger delay.
Article 205 of the Law of Commerce provides that an airline will be “absolved from liability” if it can prove that it had taken “all measures necessary to avert the detriment, or that it was impossible” for it to have prevented the delay.
Furthermore, the amount of compensation to which a passenger may be entitled will depend on whether the airline is considered to be responsible for having caused the delay by virtue of some “unreasonable” act. Therefore, it is of critical importance to understand what occurrences, or types of causes for delays, may be attributed to the airlines.
Delays arising from and caused by extenuating circumstances, such as inclement weather or air traffic, cannot be reasonably attributed to the carrier. Therefore, in these scenarios, because it is “impossible” for the airline to have mitigated the causes for the delay, the airline would not ordinarily be held legally responsible in these circumstances.
Remedies for flight delays for international flights, as set out by the Montreal Convention
The Montreal Convention is a multinational treaty, which establishes certain international norms and guidelines regarding international travel. The Montreal Convention has been incorporated into Omani law by way of Article 3 of the Civil Aviation Law (promulgated by Sultani Decree 93 2004).
As set out in Article 1.1 of the Montreal Convention, the Montreal Convention will apply to “all international carriage of persons.” Furthermore, as set out in Article 1.2 of the Montreal Convention:
Article 19 of the Montreal Convention provides that airline carriers may be liable for “damages” occasioned by a flight delay only if the carrier has failed to take all measures that were “reasonably required to avoid the damage or that it was impossible for it, or them, to take such measures.” Therefore, as is the case under Omani domestic law, airline carriers will only be liable for damages occasioned if an “unreasonable” act by the carrier caused the delay.
Further, under international law, it is likewise understood that an airline cannot be considered to have acted unreasonably if the cause of a delay results from an overriding event, such as inclement weather, airport traffic, security threats, or even a mechanical delay. Therefore, in such cases, the airline cannot be held liable for any resulting excess “damages” incurred.
Wednesday, July 13, 2016
Ramadan Timing and Calculation of Overtime During Ramadan
The Ministry of Manpower has formulated certain regulations to be followed during the holy month of Ramadan. The Omani Labour Law, promulgated by Sultani Decree 35 2003 and its amendments, specifies in Article 68 that the working hours for Muslims during the Holy Month of Ramadan shall be six hours per day, or a maximum of thirty hours per week.
Article 70 of the Omani Labour Law further provides that an employee may be required to work for more hours than prescribed by Article 68, if the nature of work necessitates working more hours. However, under no circumstances may the total working hours exceed the prescribed working hours. Further, as part of the employee’s entitlement, the employer must grant the employee not less than two consecutive days of rest per week after five continuous working days.
When it comes to overtime work undertaken by workers, the employer is required to pay the worker an extra payment equal to his/her basic salary against the extra work hours plus 25% at least for daytime working hours, and 50% for nighttime working hours. Additionally, if such work is performed during the weekly day of rest or during the official holidays, the employee shall, unless compensated with another day, be entitled to double of his/her gross salary for such a day. The Ministry of Manpower has, by way of Ministerial Decision 1 1976, provided that such overtime payment provisions will not apply to senior private sector employees, such as professionals including “doctors, engineers and those of similar standard” or those persons who undertake dual roles involving “administrative and supervisory work.”
Notwithstanding the above, the Omani Labour Law also provides that those employers engaged in works carried out at ports and airports or on board ships, vessels, or aircraft may agree to pay employees an allowance in lieu of overtime, subject to the approval of the Ministry of Manpower. It may be possible for companies in this instance to seek the approval of the Ministry of Manpower to provide an allowance to the employees in lieu of overtime.
During the month of Ramadan, the employer must ensure, with regard to employees’ extra working hours, that any arrangement that the employer and the employee agree upon can be adopted, as long as it does not violate the provisions of the Omani Labour Law. A Muslim worker must therefore work for a maximum of six hours per day or thirty hours per week, irrespective of whether the work is undertaken during the night or during the day. Though the maximum working hours for Muslim employees during Ramadan is six hours per day, Article 70 of the Oman Labour Law grants an exemption and permits the employee and employer to agree in advance any additional working hours and the consideration in lieu for the same. Accordingly, any additional hours that a Muslim employee will be required to work will be construed as overtime work. The employer will therefore be legally required to compensate the extra hours worked by the Muslim employees during Ramadan in accordance with Article 73 of the Oman Labour Law.
Further, it is also recommended that the employer communicates the Ramadan work timings to the Muslim workers and that the overtime calculation system is explained to them in order to avoid misunderstandings and potential disputes.
Wednesday, July 6, 2016
Oman's New Anti-Money Laundering Law
Sultani Decree 30 2016 (the “New Law”) has recently been promulgated setting out Oman’s new anti- money laundering and terrorism financing regime. The New Law, which provides a more comprehensive set of rules consistent with internationally approved standards, replaces the previous law issued under Sultani Decree 79 2010 (the “Old Law”).
The New Law has largely come about as a result of a desire for the Sultanate to adhere to recognised international standards with regard to anti-money laundering and terrorism financing. The New Law was created with the aim of addressing the concerns raised in Oman’s Mutual Joint Evaluation Report of 2010, amended and issued by the International Financial Action Task Force in 2013. Further, the New Law was issued in compliance with the requirements of various international agreements and treaties ratified by Oman in respect of anti-money laundering and terrorism financing.
National Centre for Financial Information
The New Law establishes the National Centre for Financial Information (“Centre”). Unlike the existing Financial Intelligence Unit (“FIU”), which is part of the Royal Oman Police, the new Centre will have complete autonomy, with financial and legal independence. The Inspector General will decide which employees of the FIU will be transferred to the Centre. The responsibilities of the Centre will include, amongst others, all responsibilities previously held by the FIU.
Areas of focus
The New Law focusses on risk assessment and preventative measures including know-your-client procedures and due diligence on customer identification. Such measures include increasing the responsibility on financial and non-financial institutions to extensively check their accounts, records and employee details as well as anything else that may intimate money laundering or terrorism financing.
The changes also focus on Politically Exposed Persons who represent risks, correspondent banking relationships, financial operations, sanctions on financial institutions and non-financial businesses, professions and financial institutions, with particular regard to those countries that do not adequately apply proper financial standards.
The New Law also contains provisions concerning international cooperation, customs declarations and strengthening sanctions imposed on violators.
Prosecution
The New Law has provided the public prosecutor with wider powers in relation to investigating potential breaches of the law. Such powers include the right to ask for any documents in relation to any entity, be it private or public. The public prosecutor, in conjunction with the Royal Oman Police, may also employ techniques that are used to capture criminals, including wiretapping, staking out, using undercover police, freezing accounts, applying travel bans and several other measures. The New Law provides for greater cooperation with other countries in relation to finding, capturing and extraditing violators.
Penalties
Penalties under the New Law for breach are much more severe than under the Old Law. For example, the minimum prison sentence for breach under the New Law is five years, whereas it was three years under the Old Law. Financial penalties under the New Law are also much higher than under the Old Law. For example, under the New Law, violators face a minimum penalty of OMR 50,000, whereas the minimum penalty under the Old Law was OMR 5,000.
The New Law has given the courts the power of reducing or even potentially excluding liability to those persons who come forward and provide information regarding money laundering or the financing of terrorism.
Conclusion
The New Law has addressed the legislative shortcomings of the Old Law and has created a comprehensive framework combatting money laundering and terrorism financing in line with approved international recommendations.
We expect that the New Law will have a major impact on how the concerned authorities will be able to act in relation to anti-money laundering and terrorism financing types of activities, in light of having been granted broader investigative powers.