Category: Austria

  • Brandl & Talos and CMS Advise Martens Management Group on Proposed Takeover of Cinkarna Celje

    Brandl & Talos and CMS Advise Martens Management Group on Proposed Takeover of Cinkarna Celje

    Brandl & Talos and CMS Slovenia have advised the Martens Management Group on its proposed takeover of Cinkarna Celje, a Slovenian corporation listed on the Ljubljana Stock Exchange.

    Anatol S.a r.l., a company of the Austrian Martens Management Group, announced its intention to take over the entire outstanding shares of Cinkarna Celje d.d. with the financial support of KKR.

    According to Brandl & Talos, “Cinkarna is one of the largest producers of titanium dioxide, a product used in chemicals, plastics, and paper industries, and the only independent player in Europe. The company is the largest Slovenian chemicals processing company with revenues of more than EUR 200 million and 900 employees.”

    The Martens Management Group is a private industrial holding company, with strong experience and knowledge in international and Slovenian chemical and coating industries.

    Anatol intends to publish a voluntary takeover bid for the acquisition of Cinkarna’s shares within thirty days following official notification of the takeover intention on June 4, 2018, subject to satisfactory confirmatory due diligence. According to Brandl & Talos, “Martens Management Group with the support of the renowned investment firm KKR intends to provide an attractive offer to the existing shareholders of Cinkarna. Anatol proposes to offer EUR 220 per share. Including the proposed dividend of EUR 26.52 per share, the total value offered to the current shareholders of Cinkarna is EUR 246.52 per share. This value represents a substantial premium of 26.1% to the 12-months average share price of Cinkarna and would value Cinkarna at around EUR 200 million.”

    Brandl & Talos advised the Martens Management Group on both the proposed takeover procedure and on financing arrangements with KKR. The firm’s team was led by Partner Roman Rericha, supported by lawyers Markus Arzt, Christopher Schrank, Sabine Schmidt, Julie Sugay, and Alexander Stucklberger.

    The CMS Slovenia team advising on Slovenian law aspects was supervised by Partner Ales Lunder.

     

  • The In-House Perspective: Austrian General Counsel Share Thoughts on the Outlook for Business

    Widely recognized as an entry point for investors seeking opportunities in Eastern Europe and as a hub for the region, Austria is home to a large number of regional General Counsel and Heads of Legal. We reached out to a number of them to get their perspectives on this critical gateway to CEE.

    The Good Life

    Austria’s proximity and historical ties both to the Vysehrad countries and to the countries of South Eastern Europe is hardly the only reason companies set up shop in the country. Austria is also, simply, among the beautiful countries in the world, and well-known for its Alpine beauty and remarkable views. And Vienna, the country’s capital, is widely acknowledged as being among the best cities in the world to live in, recently winning the top rank for Quality of Life in the Mercer Study for the ninth consecutive year. 

    More practically, the Austrian economy has long been among the strongest in CEE, with a 2016 GDP per capita of approximately USD 44,757 (See table). Indeed, even during the now-concluded global financial crisis of the past decade Austria did not suffer as severely as many others, with GDP in the country actually increasing in 2010 by two percent (according to the International Labour Office in Geneva).

    Ingo Steinwender, Group Head of Legal at CA Immobilien Anlagen AG, for one, agrees that things have been good for a long time. “From my personal perspective it was true ten years ago too, because we have a very good social security system,” he says. “And of course the environment was great ten years ago and still is.” In recent years, he says, the growth of the Austrian economy can be tied to the country’s significant 2016 tax reform. (Taxes are still too high, he says, but he admits to hopes that the new government will decrease them).

    Similarly, unemployment figures in the country (5.7% in 2017 according to the World Bank), while not ideal, are still better than in much of Europe. “Unemployment is quite high for Austria,” says Mirna Zwitter-Tehovnik, the Head of Group Legal at state-owned Heta Asset Resolution AG. “But in comparison to other European jurisdictions rather low.”

    “There is a positive mood, and at the moment I am optimistic for the future,” says Steinwender. “In particular in our industry, the real estate industry. There is lots of money in the real estate market – demand is higher than the offer leading to really high prices.” 

    And Real Estate isn’t the only strong area, of course. Tourism – of particular importance for a mountainous country with the most extensive nature reserves in the region – remains a dependable source of business as well. And Steinwender believes the importance of the professional services sector, including banks and insurances companies, will increase in the near future too.  

    Although Germany, not surprisingly, has long been the largest single trading partner, Austria has capitalized on its historical and geographic ties to the just-emerging-from-communism economies of Eastern Europe. These days, Steinwender reports, “dependency on Germany is decreasing and our ties with Eastern Europe are increasing. This is reflected by the successful Austrian companies being main players in Eastern Europe.” (Indeed, CA Immo itself, though based in Austria, has branches in Germany, Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary, and Romania). 

    As a result, Steinwender says, many of the law firms with the most extensive footprints in the region are based in Vienna. “Austria has major law firms [that are] players in the international market – in particular CEE: Schoenherr, Wolf Theiss, CHSH, CMS, all of which grew after the fall of the communism. They were the first movers in Eastern Europe, invested in the region, and they had anenormous upside from this and they still have.” What’s more, says Zwitter-Tehovnik, “in comparison to many Western European countries, fees are still quite moderate. In English or Italian markets, fees in comparison to Austria are double.”

    Many believe that Austrian law in general is favorable for business as well. “From a civil law perspective Austrian law […] is quite effective,” Roland Schreiner, General Counsel CEE at Atos, says. “It is not formal, and it is straightforward and easily adjustable and suitable for any business.”

    This in contrast to the judicial systems of many of the country’s neighbors to the east and south, according to Zwitter-Tehovnik, which “seem to lack funding or resources and … work slowly.”

    Keeping it Real

    Nothing is perfect, of course. Christopher Fischer, EU Region VP and Associate General Counsel at Western Union, says that the current government “has not made the business climate worse – but they have not yet made it better.” Indeed, Fischer reports dissatisfaction with the government’s relatively conservative views on immigration. “The current government has expressed the desire to reduce the amount of immigration to Austria, which might have an impact on our business and our ability to attract the best possible talent,” he says.

    Schreiner agrees. “The reduction of inflow of foreign workers is not making the market attractive,” although he notes that Atos may not be as affected as others, because, although the company employs people from abroad, the company has offshoring facilities allowing people to work remotely.

    Immigration aside, the country’s labor laws “have been relaxed,” says Schreiner. “The previous and current governments have realized that Austrian labor laws generally have been too rigid,” he says, so “there has been improvement, making the law more operational and adjusted to the requirements of the market.”

    Fischer, at Western Union, does not disagree. He defines Austrian employment law as “quite advantageous,” and relatively flexible for companies needing to hire or dismiss employees. “From that perspective, Austrian employment law is good for internationally active companies.” Still, he describes Austrian working hours as another area of concern, reporting that “the law reflects 20th century thinking and not 21st century reality,” since it does not consider the shift in work culture, in regard to the type of the work people do today, time flexibility, or the businesses operating globally. “The expectation that people will work ‘9 to 5’ is not realistic in today’s world,” he says. 

    And of course Austria shares the challenge of preparing for the General Data Protection Regulation’s May 25, 2018 effectiveness date – complicated, Schreiner says, by some conflicts with Austria’s own data protection law. “In Austria the law amending the Data Protection Act 2000 did not abolish the express protection of data of legal persons,” he says, explaining that this protection does not correspond to the GDPR’s focus on natural persons. “[That] has caused an unclear situation with regard to the applicability of the law. Everybody is now waiting for a clarification from the legislation.”

    Steinwender rolls his eyes about the GDPR as well, even though his company is, for obvious reasons, less concerned than others about the GDPR. “Real estate companies in general do not have sensitive data, apart from certain personal data related to employees. Nevertheless, we need to comply with the legal procedures required, and it causes a lot of bureaucratic efforts and costs,” he continues, “the law does not focus on a company´s reasonable and justified business needs.”

    Conclusion

    Things could always, everywhere, be better. But none of the Chief Legal Counsel we spoke to suggested that, on balance, the outlook in Austria was anything but positive. “The Austrian market has picked up and improved considerably over the last few years,” says Roland Schreiner. “And it is stable now again.” 

    This Article was originally published in Issue 5.3 of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.

  • How Concession Can Improve the Sleepy Rollout of Broadband Internet-Access in Austria

    Austria is definitely lagging behind in terms of Fiber-to-the-Home (FTTH) penetration: According to recent data of the FTTH Council Europe, only one country worldwide has a worse penetration rate than Austria, while other sources suggest there are two countries below Austria. For this reason many initiatives have been implemented on municipal and provincial levels to provide Austrian households and undertakings with high-speed Internet access in parts of the country where a purely commercial assessment would not justify such investments. Obviously this is not yet enough.

    Many CEE jurisdictions, including Serbia, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Poland, Ukraine, and Macedonia, are not much better than Austria at keeping their citizens waiting for up-to-date FTTH connections. Perhaps some of the points discussed below also apply to these countries.

    An example how to be succesful in comparable circumstances can be found in three recent French projects involving a total of almost 2.2 million households which will be connected by 2024. Each of the three projects was implemented by means of a concession contract. A major portion of the equity capital is going to be provided by investment funds, not by the state. The largest part of the gap between commercially viable investments and total investment costs is financed by state subsidies under a national broadband plan. This plan has been notified under the EU state aid regime, in particular the EU Guidelines for the application of state aid rules in relation to the rapid deployment of broadband networks. The Commission decided not to raise objections against the French plan. The same result has already been achieved for the Austrian subside scheme – the “Breitbandmilliarde“ – as well as for Bulgarian, Croatian, Polish, Romanian, and Slovak broadband subsidy schemes. Additional subsidy schemes may be possible too.

    Although EU law does not provide a comprehensive legal framework for PPP laws in general, or concession laws in particular, Directive 2014/23/EU at least provides clearer rules for the award procedure of concession contracts. Almost all EU member states have already transposed the concession directive; Austria is (hopefully) going to catch up with the compliant member states in 2018.

    However, the EU concession directive is inapplicable to most broadband projects because it specifically excludes concessions made for the principal purpose of permitting the contracting authorities to provide or exploit public communications networks. However, the very purpose of the kinds of broadband infrastructure projects described in this article is to enable a state/province/municipality/public entity to provide a network (i.e. wholesale services) to Internet service providers or to hire an active network operator to do this for the state. So broadband concessions fall outside the scope of the concession directive. 

    This does not mean that concessions are not allowed; but it does mean that legal uncertainties may exist.

    Concessions have important advantages for broadband projects. The (private) concessionaire accepts the operating risk in exploiting the broadband network. This means that the concessionaire operating such a network will try to contract as many ISPs as possible in order to generate more income. For the public side this means that the network will be open to all service providers and will therefore have a stimulating effect on the entire economy. 

    Secondly, a concession contract is an effective way of requiring the active network operator to maintain high quality levels and a high level of availability of the network. Sometimes such quality levels can be achieved solely via the demand of the service providers. If they are not strong enough or have no alternative network to which they can switch, the public concession contract must provide for quality and availability requirements.

    In short, a private concessionaire is more likely to permanently improve the public network or to maintain the intended level of service over the whole concession period. Austria lacks a statutory basis for such concessions, so only good contract drafting will help.

    A broadband project must be feasible and bankable. Without a PPP or concession law that requires this, however, awarding authorities have to tackle these issues in their project preparation and contract drafting. Although Austria has no PPP law and (currently) no concession law, its budgeting rules contain standards of project preparation. These include the requirement that estimates be made prior to project realization of financial and economic consequences and the affordability and long term consequences for public finances, and the approval of these estimates by the Minister of Finance. Necessary securities on project assets or direct agreements providing lenders with cure rights and/or step in rights must be based on contractual provisions and civil law.

    In Austria internationally accepted standards or acknowledged best practices give further guidance. Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Latvia, Montenegro, Russia, Serbia, Slovenia, and Ukraine have PPP and/or concession laws which provide binding guidance. 

    By Thomas Hamerl, Partner, CMS

    This Article was originally published in Issue 5.3 of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.

  • Brandl & Talos Advises Aphria on Entrance into Medical Cannabis Market

    Brandl & Talos has advised Aphria Inc., a Canadian medical cannabis company listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange, on the forming of a joint venture with South Africa’s Verve Group of Companies. As part of the transaction, the new entity, CannInvest Africa Ltd, acquired an interest in Verve Dynamics Inc., a licensed producer of medical cannabis extracts in Lesotho. Verve Group of Companies was advised by Spoor & Fisher.

    Brandl & Talos reports that it advised Aphria on legal matters relating to the company’s European and international business development, noting that it was brought on board “due to our sector-specific know-how and extensive experience in highly regulated industry sectors, such as in the case of medical products.”

    The joint venture will allow Aphria to benefit from a supply of high-grade, low-cost cannabis isolates, while allowing Verve to take advantage of Aphria’s international distribution network.

    According to Brandl & Talos, “as the Kingdom of Lesotho is the first African country to introduce licenses for the cultivation, extraction, sale and exportation of cannabis for medical use, this deal allows Aphria to position itself as an innovator in a nascent market that is sure to grow quickly.”

    The Brandl & Talos team included Founding Partner Thomas Talos, Senior Associate Nicholas Aquilina, and Legal Counsel Nikolaus Barta.

    The Spoor & Fisher team was led by Mark Kemp

  • Binder Groesswang and Wolf Theiss Advise on UniCredit Bank Austria Financing for The Student Hotel Vienna

    Binder Groesswang has advised UniCredit Bank Austria AG in connection with financing provided for the construction of The Student Hotel Vienna, which was represented by Wolf Theiss.

    The Dutch group The Student Hotel, based in Amsterdam, is currently constructing its first Austrian location in Nordbahnstrasse in Vienna’s second district.

    According to Binder Groesswang, The Student Hotel Vienna will offer modern fully-furnished rooms for hotel, short stay (young professionals and expats), and student guests, along with co-working areas and retail and service areas of over 37,000 square meters of usable space.

    The Student Hotel operates hotels at 11 locations, including Amsterdam, Paris, and Barcelona with 14 additional locations currently under development throughout Europe. The opening of The Student Hotel Vienna is expected in the second quarter of 2020.

    The Binder Groesswang team consisted of Partner Emanuel Welten, Senior Associate Robert Wippel and Associate Adrian Zuschmann.

    The Wolf Theiss team was led by Partner Karl Koller and Counsel Leopold Hoher and included Associates Elias Pressler and Patricia Backhausen.

  • Tax Austria: Are you Still Buying or Already Mining? Mining Cryptocurrencies as a Permanent Establishment

    The taxation of cryptocurrency transactions is a hot topic. The Austrian Ministry of Finance recently issued an interesting ruling outlining when mining for cryptocurrencies in Austria by a non-resident taxpayer may trigger a permanent establishment.

    Income tax treatment of cryptocurrencies

    In general, capital gains from the sale of cryptocurrency units held as business assets and income from commercial activities related to cryptocurrencies (e.g. mining, brokerage) are subject to progressive income tax rates of up to 55 % for individuals and 25 % for corporations.

    Special rules apply to cryptocurrency units treated as investment assets and other (non-business) assets:

    • Units are treated as investment assets in case the taxpayer uses them to generate income in the form of interest. In this case, capital gains from a subsequent sale are taxed at 27.5 % for individuals (taxation at lower progressive income tax rates optional) or at 25 % for corporations.
    • In case the units are not used to generate income from interest, only acquired and sold occasionally (private sales) and not part of a business (non-business assets), capital gains are only subject to taxation of up to 55 % for individuals if the units are acquired and sold within 12 months. A tax exemption applies if the capital gains do not exceed EUR 440 per calendar year. In case the units are held longer than 12 months, capital gains are not taxable.

    VAT treatment of cryptocurrencies

    The exchange of cryptocurrency units (e.g. Bitcoin) into traditional currencies (e.g. euros) and vice versa is VAT-exempt (CJEU 22 October 2015, C-264/14, Hedquvist; VAT guidelines para. 759).

    Bitcoin mining as such is not subject to VAT (CJEU 22 October 2015, C-264/14, Hedquvist).

    Supplies of goods or services that are subject to VAT and paid for with cryptocurrencies are treated no differently from payments with traditional currencies. The assessment basis for transactions subject to VAT is the fair market value of the units.

    Does mining result in a permanent establishment?

    The Austrian Ministry of Finance recently issued a ruling (EAS 3401, 30 April 2018) in regard to the income tax treatment of (cloud) mining in Austria carried out by a Swiss corporation (AG). The ruling comes to the conclusion that a permanent establishment only exists if the non-resident taxpayer itself has a physical presence in Austria.

    The ruling states that currently no guidance exists in regard to (cloud) mining projects at the OECD level. However, it answers the question by referring to the long-standing opinion that a server located in Austria may suffice to trigger a permanent establishment. Apart from the server through which the taxpayer’s commercial activity is carried out, there is no need for personnel to be physically present in Austria. The taxpayer must, however, dispose of the server as the owner or lessee in order to be treated as having a permanent establishment.

    If the taxpayer only uses processing power from a third-party provider (cloud mining), rather than owning or leasing the server in Austria, such an arrangement does not result in a permanent establishment for the taxpayer due to the lack of a physical presence in Austria.

    Booming cryptocurrencies open new opportunities – but also trigger tax risks 

    Although tax authorities are publishing more and more guidelines on how to tax cryptocurrency transactions, in most cases the tax courts have yet to confirm these interpretations.

    Cross-border transactions and activities bear an increased risk of double taxation due to the lack of guidance by the OECD, which may result in a different tax treatment in the countries involved. In case the country of residence denies the existence of a permanent establishment in the source country and, as a consequence, the taxing right of the source country, double taxation related to the activity may not be avoided by a double tax treaty.

    Taxpayers should seek tax advice prior to venturing into the new business of cryptocurrencies – especially in cross-border situations.

    By Mario Perl, Attorney at Law, Clemens Grassinger, Associate, Schoenherr 

  • Wolf Theiss and Norton Rose Fulbright Advise Canadian Tire Corporation on Helly Hansen Acquisition

    Wolf Theiss and Norton Rose Fulbright have advised Canadian Tire Corporation Limited on its CAD 985 million acquisition of a majority stake in Norwegian sportswear and workwear brand Helly Hansen from the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan. Kirkland & Ellis advised the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan on the sale.

    Closing of the transaction is expected in the third quarter of 2018.

    According to Norton Rose Fulbright, “the acquisition of Helly Hansen is expected to strengthen Canadian Tire’s core retail banners, such as Sportchek, Atmosphere, Sports Experts, National Sports, and Mark’s, which have a long-standing history with the Norwegian brand as some of its leading clients.”

    Canadian Tire Corporation is a family of businesses founded in 1922. The company sells a wide range of automotive, hardware, sports and leisure, and home products.

    According to Kirkland & Ellis, the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan acquired Helly Hansen in 2012 and helped the company expand into 40 countries and provide apparel to over 50,000 ski professionals.

    The Wolf Theiss team was led by Vienna-based Partner Horst Ebhardt and Senior Associate Jiayan Zhu and included Partner Christian Mikosch and Associates David Gschaider and Lukas Slameczka. The Prague team consisted of Counsel Jan Kotous and Associates David Simek and Tomas Sletcha. The Budapest team involved Partner Janos Toth and Associates Zoltan Bodog and Peter Ihasz.

    The Norton Rose Fulbright cross-border team was led by Toronto-based Managing Partner Terence Dobbin and Partners Walied Soliman and Troy Ungerman and included Partners Pierre Dagenais, Adrienne Oliver, Bruce Sheiner, Christopher Hunter, Lisa Cabel, Robert Percival, Kevin Ackhurst, and Michael Lieberman, Senior Associates Seemal Patel and Sara Josselyn, and Associates Trevor Zeyl and Noah Schein. The London team consisted of Partners Chris Pearson, Jon Perry, Mike Knapper, Dominic Stuttaford, and Matthew Findley. The Amsterdam office was represented by Partner Remco Smorenburg.

    The Kirkland team in London was led by corporate Partner Roger Johnson and Associates Tom Bartram, Niklas Ahlklo, and Irfan Ahmed. The team also included Partners Dulcie Daly, Mark Ingram, and Paula Riedel, as well as Of Counsel Mike Robert-Smith.

  • Act Legal Advises PPGA on Contract with Museum of Islamic Art in Doha

    Act Legal’s Austrian office has provided legal counsel to PPGA Architects in negotiating a contract with Qatari officials after the company won a public tender published by the Museum of Islamic Art in Doha.

    The Museum of Islamic Art published its request for outdoor furniture in 2018. PPAG submitted a bid and won the contract to have its team designing modular outdoor furniture, which, due to its unique form and flexibility, enables a large variety of human body positions.

    The Act Legal team was led by Managing Partner Martin Wiedenbauer.

  • Wolf Theiss, Dentons, CHSH, and Chiomenti Advise on Cross-Border Sale of Lifebrain’s Shares

    Wolf Theiss, working with Italian offices of Dentons, has advised the shareholders of Lifebrain, an Italian laboratory diagnostics services operator, on the cross-border sale of its shares to an investment subsidiary of Investindustrial VI L.P.  Investindustria, which was advised by Italy’s Chiomenti law firm, with CHSH acting as local counsel for Austria, now owns 96% of Lifebrain.

    According to Wolf Theiss, “the Vienna-headquartered Lifebrain is, through its subsidiaries, a leading routine and specialty laboratory testing operator with approximately 220 laboratories across Italy, performing more than 20 million tests annually and serving more than 200 health care facilities.”

    The product portfolio of Lifebrain includes seven main product segments in the field of laboratory diagnostics services: clinical chemistry, hematology, immunochemistry, microbiology, molecular biology, cytology, and pathology. Lifebrain generates revenues in excess of EUR 100 million.

    The Wolf Theiss team included Partner Dieter Spranz, Counsels Carolin Ziegler and Jochen Anweiler, and Senior Associates Clara Gordon and Ivo Stitic. 

    The CHSH team included Partners Johannes Aehrenthal, Johannes Prinz, Thomas Zivny, and Bernhard Kofler-Senoner, Counsel Michael Mayer, Senior Attorney Jakob Hartig, Attorney Stefanie Heimel, Associates Florian Wunscher, Alexander Gruber, Ferdinand Guggenmos, and Katharina Wilding.

  • Freshfields Advises LG Electronics and LG Corporation on Acquisition of ZKW Group

    Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer has advised South Korean LG Electronics and LG Corporation on its acquisition of Austria’s ZKW group for EUR 1.1 billion. The seller was Mommert Holding GmbH.

    The Freshfields team was led by Partners Konrad Groller and Heiner Braun and included around 40 other lawyers from the firm, including Partners Lars Meyer, Martin Schiessl, Katrin Gassner, Karin Buzanich-Sommeregger, Christof Pochhacker, and Wolrad Prinz zu Waldeck und Pyrmont; Principal Associates Sandra Gutmann, Andre Happel, Lukas Bauer, Stephan Dorn, Mathias Lehner, and Gernot Fritz; Principal Consultant Claus Staringer; Counsels Lukas Mechtler, Ninette Dodoo, and Felix Neuwirther, Associates Konstantin von Richthofen, Tatjana Krutzler, Eva-Maria Hoyler, Maria Tumpel, Leonard Kirscht, Katharina Gebauer, Aaron Green, Donghao Cui, Leonhard Prasser, Johannes Samaan, Thomas Deutinger, Andreas Huber, Michael Isak, Georg Lubbehusen, Lukas Treichl, Daniel Lungenschmid, Stephan Rodler, Anahit Gasparyan, and Eileen Siemer; and Jurist Filip Peric. 

    Freshfields was unable to identify counsel for the sellers at this time.