Lifting the corporate veil

[motorbiking]

Baroness Mone among individuals sued to recover PPE Medpro millions

The Baroness and her husband Doug Barrowman are among individuals being sued in a bid to recover some of the money owed to the government by the business.

www.bbc.co.uk

Government attempts to go after directors by trying to lift the corporate veil.

Seizing their personal assets directly from the company’s former dividends is going to be extremely difficult.

 

[Brigadier]

Seizing their personal assets directly from the company’s former dividends is going to be extremely difficult.

Perhaps.
Does that make it the "wrong" thing to do though?

 

[blup]

Seems a fruitless waste of taxpayers money, just change the law to give far more powers to make directors personally liable for specified wrongdoing.

 

[Brigadier]

Seems a fruitless waste of taxpayers money, just change the law to give far more powers to make directors personally liable for specified wrongdoing.

Which is what I was leading to.

Unless the OP thinks it is wrong to pursue the personal assets of directors who have been found to have profited from their nefarious actions.

 

[noseall]

Baroness Mone among individuals sued to recover PPE Medpro millions

The Baroness and her husband Doug Barrowman are among individuals being sued in a bid to recover some of the money owed to the government by the business.

www.bbc.co.uk

Government attempts to go after directors by trying to lift the corporate veil.

Seizing their personal assets directly from the company’s former dividends is going to be extremely difficult.

Why should thieving scroungers like Mone et al get to keep their stolen loot, just because they moved it into a different account.
Proceeds of crime anyone?

 

[blup]

Which is what I was leading to.

Unless the OP thinks it is wrong to pursue the personal assets of directors who have been found to have profited from their nefarious actions.

I imagine he might have that in mind as a successful entrepreneur. But your question whether pursuing the directors/beneficiaries personally is not wrong, raises moral issues about state sponsored SLAP lawsuits. If there is no likelihood of success, should the state be pursuing individuals for political reasons. At the very least It smacks of money for the lawyers making money from an argument that won’t ultimately stand up to legal scrutiny

 

[Brigadier]

I imagine he might have that in mind as a successful entrepreneur. But your question whether pursuing the directors/beneficiaries personally is not wrong, raises moral issues about state sponsored SLAP lawsuits. If there is no likelihood of success, should the state be pursuing individuals for political reasons. At the very least It smacks of money for the lawyers making money from an argument that won’t ultimately stand up to legal scrutiny

I see that point, but it's that then not evidence that the law is ripe for review?

It may have been well - meaning when it was first written (I am being generous there though : I fully expect it was written by the likely beneficiaries, for the likely beneficiaries), but it cannot stand that we continue to facilitate "privatise the profits, and socialise the losses".

 

[SPLINE]

This is just more creeping communism; commies hate private businesses.

If a company director has stolen money it is theft, no extra laws or powers needed.