Comments on: New law would remove personal protections afforded by S.A.’s

By: John J. Vallier

John J. Vallier — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 13:03:36 +0000

Governed by the few , the elite, is another story

By: John J. Vallier

John J. Vallier — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 12:48:38 +0000

Costa Rica is losing business and consideration because the other central and south American countries have much better deals on residency, taxes and roads.

By: Max Jackson

Max Jackson — Sun, 21 Oct 2012 02:18:56 +0000

IF the condition is “If, during a trial, abusive or fraudulent activity is found to exist in a legal association in order to mock the law” then much of the advantage of the SA is retained.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 20 Oct 2012 18:03:38 +0000

the primary benefit for gringos with an S.A. is to avoid probate when you die. making sure your kids get your property hassle free.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 20 Oct 2012 14:18:52 +0000

What about LLC’s? Could not a savvy lawyer build a “Chinese” wall for a client?

By: Walter Steve Freeman

Walter Steve Freeman — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 19:03:35 +0000

There has never been a law or “right” afforded by any government that does not stand in constant jeopardy of revision or recension. Laws are made by men and can and will be altered for any purpose or reason.

You should never expect that the situation will remain static or that justice will prevail. What will prevail will be the need for government to constantly enlarge itself and seek the means to do so.

Those that have the means and mobility to do so should look for alternatives to the traditional stores of value.

By: Mary Hogan

Mary Hogan — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 18:18:37 +0000

IMO, “abusive” or “fraudulent” applies more liberally to governments who strip rights of “personal protection” legitimately provided by S.A.’s at the time those S.A.’s were legally formed and sanctioned by the government and for which they now have lost the “Anonima” portion, and have to pay annual Corporation taxes for the right to exist. Yes, there are those who use S.A.’s for nefarious dealings, but why throw the baby out with the bathwater. This is yet another nail in the coffin for those wishing to invest in CR and do so through the formation of a Corporation. If the government can willy-nilly change the initial rules, where else might they impact the right to protect oneself from litigative-hungry actors.