About the new laws to set up corporations

Feb 7, 2007
8,005
625
113
I have had more chance to review this law. This law is retroactive and obliges all registered companies to comply with the new law. Many of the provisions will create headaches for small business owners. It will be very expensive to maintain an SA (stock company). Most likely a transformation into SRL will be a more viable option.

All in all this is a VERY VERY BAD law.
 

PICHARDO

One Dominican at a time, please!
May 15, 2003
13,280
893
113
Santiago de Los 30 Caballeros
Not bad at all!
This means that more fiscal rules will be followed by small and medium corporations than before. This all revolves into a future program that seeks to pump billions of public finds into the internal Bolsa de Valores, in order to create a solid and fiscal responsible base the laws have been made retroactive.

Instead on relying on privately created data by companies and biz, the general system will be based on real data each one of those same venues will have to disclose along their financial revenues to the IRS and pertaining gov agencies.

Most corporations today are well known for crating large amounts of liquidity based on prospective gains, while seldom harboring much capital at risk or bonded to satisfy scrutiny.

The creation of a Financial Free Trade Zone, the DR seeks to also involve the home market as well.

These steps are in line to enforce a robust tax revenue collection incidence than today we experience.

Taxes will be cut as more and more biz will comply with the collection of revenues service.

It will simplify the steps and requirements by small biz to enjoy full protection and compliance with the tax laws.

A project to use public funds to stimulate the internal market is soon to be released. This will create a working model for our national banking institutions to engage in loaning more to citizens that seek mortgages, car financing and biz overall.

I told you about much of these changes here in DR1 some months ago.

Instead of the DR developing plans to nationalize banks, we’ll use the vast resources of our reserves and internal income to provide a backbone (sort of policy and title insurer) to the banks at very low rates.

If you think this is something! Wait and see what’s going to be made public in the following weeks!
 
Feb 7, 2007
8,005
625
113
Yeah, but for me, a virtually one-man company, it means that I will no longer be able to have Sociedad Anonima, but will need to transform it to SRL. Because I don't have 3 millions laying around to just "increase" my capital from 100,000 pesos to 30x more.

I don't care about banks having a pool of funds, I don't care that large companies will have access to Bolsa de Valores, what I care about is that MY BUSINESS life will be made more complicated and "I" will have hassles with transformation of my company to comply with the new law. Why couldn't they leave the privately held SA companies alone and not "make them" increase the capital as well? It also means that DGII will charge 300,000 pesos in effect of the 1% of the "authorized" capital, which ahs to be 30 million for SA companies.
And because I have tons of materials (worth thousands of dollars) where my company's name says S.A. I will need to reprint SRL.

Do you think that that is fair to small business owners?

Yes larger businesses will be more "restricted" but will also get more advantages. But small business owners (how many SA or CxA are there which are small businesses - MOST of them) will only have troubles with this new law, new expenses, etc. THAT is what matters to me and not that it will help companies in Financial Free Trade Zone.
 

PICHARDO

One Dominican at a time, please!
May 15, 2003
13,280
893
113
Santiago de Los 30 Caballeros
I don't know if you knew this, but most of the expenses that you listed are recoverable using the same mechanism that is afforded once you switch.

These are tax deductible encumbrances that were not covered using the SA before.

I see you still haven't sought legal assistance on the matter, which you're most than likely to need in order to meet the requirements of such new implementation.

Once you get oriented on how the changes will be achieved, you'll see that the costs associated with the switch are in fact covered within the framework of the law.

This was a subject very well studied and finalized with strong input from the general biz industry of the country. By no means was this done in order to shake down small biz like yourself, but in fact to lower the taxes incurred to you by the sheer volume of tax evaders and misuse of such entities via the law pre-existing the new one.

It may seem onerous at first, but once you put it to work for you, you'll be able to conduct your biz with a much more flexible and robust system that works for you.

As far as the liquidity of capital, it was a need to make small to medium biz more accountable to complaints from clients, often bilked by coin operated SA before.

The changes affect all biz alike and will make things better for all that includes your biz as well! You'll enjoy better legal protection not afforded before to your small biz. Your biz (depending on orientation) could even be able to participate in bidding for gov tenders of multi-million projects in the country. That's part of the scope the changes call for within our internal biz sector.

Please do seek legal assistance in order to implement the changes, as this will afford your biz to deduct much of the costs related to the same!
 
Last edited:
Feb 7, 2007
8,005
625
113
OK, but I ask, why 30 million pesos (almost 1 million US dollars) as a capital for S.A. Sociedad Anonima?

It's the highest in the world!!!!!!!!!!!

Below is the list of the countries and how much minimum "authorized" (not subscribed - that's usually substantially less {10%-25%}) capital they require for the stock companies registered there:

European countries are on the higher side, but still a huge and far cry from this DR law.

Look at LatAm countries - most of them have no minimal capital requirement for SA companies, or very minimum ones:

Germany (AG) - 50,000 Euros
Austria (AG) - 35,000 Euros
Switzerland (AG) - 100,000 Swiss Franks
United Kingdom (Ltd) - No minimum capital
Luxembourg (AG) - 31,000 Euros
Slovakia (AS) - 33,100 Euros
France (SA) - 37,000 Euros
Belgium (SA) - 61,500 Euros
Spain (SA) - 60,100 Euros
Italy (SpA) - 100,000 Euros

USA (Corp) - No minimum capital (depending on State of incorporation)

Mexico (SA de CV) - 50,000 Mexican pesos (aprox. US$ 4,000)
Argentina (SA) - 12,000 Argentinean pesos (aprox. US$ 3,500)
Chile (SA) - No minimum capital
Colombia (SA) - No minimum capital
Brazil (SA) - No minimum capital
Venezuela (SA) - No minimum capital
Peru (SA) - No minimum capital
 

PICHARDO

One Dominican at a time, please!
May 15, 2003
13,280
893
113
Santiago de Los 30 Caballeros
Its b/c they are not getting ready or doing what the DR is about to do when it puts into action the Financial FTZ!

I can't really go into specifics on the subject, but let me clear at least one point to you:

The incidence of the liquidity a SA must comply with is linked to the general changes of accountability each such institution will be required to answer to in regards to any legal challenge that it's embarked on. Be it from the private sector, gov or international origins.

The DR will be opening up the internal market with the removal of all tariffs and taxes today ruling our import/export table. As such, any given SA institution will be able to conduct high level trade and commerce with other institutions/biz worldwide; this will expose those institutions to an international legal framework that can become very expensive for a small budgeted institution to face, should any challenge be raised or claims over faulty products/services be made.

In a way, the DR is presetting the internal biz sector to face a much stronger valued international one, which given our monetary value would be hard to compete with.

As you may have guessed, SA will be able to conduct biz directly under the FULL protection of our laws while in the international realm.

Believe you me, the changes coming to the DR in those regards are far reaching and will need that our internal biz institutions become much stronger than they are today.

Call it a strengthening of the internal biz sectors...

Just as the DR was able to deal with a US economic meltdown with major relative success, given the scope of the reach being a global phenomenon; the changes to our internal biz structure will provide an extra layer of cladding once the walls are taken down.

I once again prompt you to get legal advice in order to make these changes fit your biz. You may not see the gains now, but later they'll pay off greatly as your position will be on par to any other in the world market, vying for a piece of the money pie offered by worldwide clients.
 

MikeFisher

The Fisherman/Weather Mod
Feb 28, 2006
13,766
2,195
113
Punta Cana/DR
www.mikefisher.fun
No No NO NO
Pichardo,
what advantages?
what costs covered by that or any law?
what GUBMIN protection??? and for what?who protects my company from this gubmin????
that law is in case they wanna apply it really for the EXISTING corporations/companies a huge fraud, a huge trap for all existing S.A.'s and CxA's.
when i constituted my own S.A. many years ago nobody told me that there is the risk that that corrupt bast... gubmin will come up one day with a law which requires that my lil company has a 30 millions of pesos fund on the bank!!!!
that part of the law is the most stupid thing i ever heard in any country in case of "Changing a Law" or "changing requirements for EXISTING corporations/companies".
i would accept that a gubmin changes a law which says "from now on all newly formed corporations/companies need to comply to these and those requirements", but to say such for long years existing companies with all prior rquirements changed/switched to the opposite is a Big BS.
they(who) cover costs of transition???
that's even bigger BS,
because at the moment i transit my existing every month tax paying company in any other/new form of company(or clowns club aso) i need my legal advisor(my lawyer) to do so for me/my corporation/company, and that lawyer is sure not doing such for free, and i bet the big gubmin bringing up a new clowns club within the anyways existing corrupt trappers will sure not pay my lawyers fees or my expenses which i will face to change the form of my actually and by the back in the day legal and required neccessarities constituted company.
that law in this present form is just the next example for the big time stealing of an government which i don't think will make it to the end of the 4 years period. put on the job a REAL and INDEPENDENT(for the People working) investigator who checks out where money on the Isle comes from and where it is going to and that actual gubmin will be completely in jail before x-mas eve 2009.
do they need an other 1000 millions of US$$$ for an other Metro BS???
to me that stuff is just a big Fraud advised by Law.
Mike
 

MikeFisher

The Fisherman/Weather Mod
Feb 28, 2006
13,766
2,195
113
Punta Cana/DR
www.mikefisher.fun
Pichardo,
with all respect and i don't want to change the subject of this important theme, effecting myself as a S.A. owner/president.
but when did it happen that the DR been able to deal with a US economic meltdown with major relative success, given the scope of the reach being a global phenomenon???
looks like i missed a mayor phenomenon of world's history.
not that it matters much, i know that i don't know it all, but that one i never heard about.
basically there is of course absolutely no problem for the gubmin to prepare the internal biz constellation more competitive for the international market, such is very welcome, such is NEEDED, totally agree on that.
but why to bring up a law for that in the way it is published?
it looks like the same professional idea like a bit back in the day when the country joined the world of sunlight saving times, just with the prob that they changed the clock in the wrong direction to be helpful.
in my own opinion, and i am providing just that, my own opinion as a small business S.A. owner and want to hear opinions from others on that very and drastic important theme, i would accept that a new law reflects newly formed corporations/companies. make a new catalogue with new 'names' for newly formed companies, but how can a gubmin pressure it's existing legally registered and tax paying corporations/companies to change the way they are formed and operating?
specially in such a drastic way.
even that i need to gather much more detailed info about the theme from my legal advisor during the next days i would at this moment say that i am absolutely unsatisfied with such an gobernmetal 'decision'/law.
it looks to me AGAIN like one of those things the President and some friends talked over by a glass of good wine and the next morning somebody signed a paper to make it official.
the country's leader urgently needs some wine - drinking partners who have a clue what they are talking about or at least he should not sign all those presented papers the next day without asking somebody competent about their meanings.
just my 2 cents
Mike
 

PICHARDO

One Dominican at a time, please!
May 15, 2003
13,280
893
113
Santiago de Los 30 Caballeros
What if it told you that the changes administered now in this regard had been programmed 3 years ago? That all this time members from both sides (biz reps and policy makers) met and discussed at length all of the nooks and crannies, before it was even sent via the legal and executive channels for its approval?

The changes you see on the outside are not even a 1% of the real changes that are being implemented within our internal revenues agency. That our legal departments are still implementing the changes to ready it for the due path we're to take in the mid term future.

That even as they may feel as hardships today to small biz like yours, they're in fact the changes that must take place so that our public and private financial framework can be prepared to deal with what is to come...

You can't just exonerate a whole sector and expect order to be viable in such conditions!

There existed a plan that would had allowed biz like yours to gradually make the change, all the whilst using tax incentives roll outs for that phase; after the US economic meltdown and propagation to other international markets, such plan was discarded b/c it was fiscally impossible to roll out under the still existing conditions today. Like I said, one pane from the window is already shattered and the other is already cracked! We can't afford to have weak institutions at this level of play and still think that we can overcome the financially stagnant markets.

This is not about trying to squeeze an extra buck from our internal biz, but on the contrary, trying to build enough strength for it to face the weather.

Our Banks are strong and continue to provide a solid support to both, the public and private sectors; then we have that our biz framework was lacking seriously at the time of liquid solvency! Most lacked real active capital to secure a short term internal loan, much less an external line of credit successfully.

The framework offers the best from both sides: A strong liquidity base and an equally strong legal framework for the biz to operate in both the home and external markets.

I can tell no a single of the posters with numerous reservations on the changes, have actually sought competent legal advise on the issue. Please do so before you contemplate any other options, as less expensive as they may look, this framework is much better suited to the medium and long term biz outlook.
 

BushBaby

Silver
Jan 1, 2002
3,829
329
0
79
www.casabush.org
Its b/c they are not getting ready or doing what the DR is about to do when it puts into action the Financial FTZ!

I can't really go into specifics on the subject, but let me clear at least one point to you:

The incidence of the liquidity a SA must comply with is linked to the general changes of accountability each such institution will be required to answer to in regards to any legal challenge that it's embarked on. Be it from the private sector, gov or international origins.

The DR will be opening up the internal market with the removal of all tariffs and taxes today ruling our import/export table. As such, any given SA institution will be able to conduct high level trade and commerce with other institutions/biz worldwide; this will expose those institutions to an international legal framework that can become very expensive for a small budgeted institution to face, should any challenge be raised or claims over faulty products/services be made.


In a way, the DR is presetting the internal biz sector to face a much stronger valued international one, which given our monetary value would be hard to compete with.

As you may have guessed, SA will be able to conduct biz directly under the FULL protection of our laws while in the international realm.

Believe you me, the changes coming to the DR in those regards are far reaching and will need that our internal biz institutions become much stronger than they are today.

Call it a strengthening of the internal biz sectors...

Just as the DR was able to deal with a US economic meltdown with major relative success, given the scope of the reach being a global phenomenon; the changes to our internal biz structure will provide an extra layer of cladding once the walls are taken down.

I once again prompt you to get legal advice in order to make these changes fit your biz. You may not see the gains now, but later they'll pay off greatly as your position will be on par to any other in the world market, vying for a piece of the money pie offered by worldwide clients.

PICHARDO,
Have there been any reports written on the ,meetings that took place between the Government & Business Organisations? If so, would you be so kind as to list them so that we may read the views of (& presumably acceptance by) those business organisations that were consulted?

If the objective is to strengthen the companies who wish to export/import to an International level of security against legal claims etc (see highlighted & italicised above) would it not be simpler just to INSIST that all these companies should have Liability Insurance to the level of RD $30 Million? OKAY, I know the problem of getting money out of Insurance Companies in the event of a claim might prejudice the suggestion, but IF the Government is only interested in making the SA companies more 'SECURE' maybe they would underwrite any 'Liability' policy written & then argue the claim on behalf of the business/company concerned if the Insurance company fails in IT'S obligations?

Or maybe I am missing something that has not come to light yet? Making laws on behalf of companies who as yet have not been told the WHOLE scenario, seems a bit Arse about Face to me. I hope more will be forthcoming FOR the companies who have to comply with this law BEFORE it is signed off by The President!! ~ Grahame.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MikeFisher

MikeFisher

The Fisherman/Weather Mod
Feb 28, 2006
13,766
2,195
113
Punta Cana/DR
www.mikefisher.fun
i do not completely disagree on that.
but one of my points still is:
why to change the status of the huge amount of companies(without a stat at my hand i would say that at least MUCH over 80% of all registered companies in case of S.A.'s are small biz's like mine with 15 employess and even much less) to make a maybe 5% (which are the big guys) more competitive to an international market instead of leaving them the way they are and offering a change to that 5 or much less % of big guys to change their legal status in a corporation/company form which allows them to compete on that international market?
would be in my eyes much less of work to switch the status of a few than to change the huge crowd. less work means less hassle and less costs, costs which WE, the people, the tax payers, have to pay.
and many of the decisions the gubmin brought up during the last decade sound to me still like the results of a small talk chat over a good glass of imported wine with the papers presented by a secretary the next morning signed quick without the need to really think about it.
Mike
 
Feb 7, 2007
8,005
625
113
OK, so a German AG company (stock company) with 50,000 Euros capital is what - a weak link in German economic system? Would seem so from your point of view, Pichardo, because according to you that would be considered a poor capitalization. Por favor!

If Germany or France or other western country can have functioning stock companies with 30 or 50 thousand Euros capital (which could still be acceptable) why do you think that a DR based SA would not be as strong partner in international marketplace with let's say 1 million pesos capital? 30 million pesos in the DR is just ridiculous.

No normal nation in its right mind applies the law retroactively. Only dictatorial countries do as they please. No single democratic country creates a law that has such a profound retroactive effect.

I think it even goes against international public law. I have to polish my IPL textbook and do some online research. Possibly, DR can be even sued by foreign investors (sued outside of DR) as infringnment on the investments.

I will now give you an example, Pichardo, to show you how retroactive application si just purely absurd: Imagine the US now passes a law, that because of financial crisis, the social security checks will be reduced to 200 dollars maximum per person, per month. Applied retroactively. The people will have 180 days to comply. The SSA and IRS would start collecting billions of dollars from retired Americans in back payments.

Or another example: Imagine the law is passed, that all marriages new and also those contracted before the law was passed (law applied retroactively) must comply with a fact that a child must be born out of marriage. One year to comply. If no... you can "transform" the marriage to "concubinate" or face penalties or other action by the government. ... Absurd... ain't it? But it would be to assure competitiveness in population growth with such world giants as China and India and would allow... allow...allow... (fill in the blanks as you please) in the international environment

Most countries in the world have prohibited retroactive laws, many by constitution.
Ex post facto law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Last edited:

PICHARDO

One Dominican at a time, please!
May 15, 2003
13,280
893
113
Santiago de Los 30 Caballeros
PICHARDO,
Have there been any reports written on the ,meetings that took place between the Government & Business Organisations? If so, would you be so kind as to list them so that we may read the views of (& presumably acceptance by) those business organisations that were consulted?

If the objective is to strengthen the companies who wish to export/import to an International level of security against legal claims etc (see highlighted & italicised above) would it not be simpler just to INSIST that all these companies should have Liability Insurance to the level of RD $30 Million? OKAY, I know the problem of getting money out of Insurance Companies in the event of a claim might prejudice the suggestion, but IF the Government is only interested in making the SA companies more 'SECURE' maybe they would underwrite any 'Liability' policy written & then argue the claim on behalf of the business/company concerned if the Insurance company fails in IT'S obligations?

Or maybe I am missing something that has not come to light yet? Making laws on behalf of companies who as yet have not been told the WHOLE scenario, seems a bit Arse about Face to me. I hope more will be forthcoming FOR the companies who have to comply with this law BEFORE it is signed off by The President!! ~ Grahame.

Bushbaby, the meetings took place several times and with much push from the private conglomerate of biz owners in the DR. They contended that removal of the tariffs and levied taxes upon industrialized goods, both to import and exports, would actually provide them with a greater facility to conduct their biz in both commercial situations.

That's to say the gov would take down those tariffs and levied taxes at the tune of billions in revenue it generates. The gov counter offered to agree to a framework that would do just that, but given the discordant rate of uncollected taxes and evasion within our internal framework; something was to be done to that respect, and something did get done about it.

As it stands, the new framework generated both under policy makers and general biz oversight, provides two things: One, it generates a recoverable revenue inflow to Rentas Internas whilst providing the internal financial institutions with much needed capital in order to provide a strong backing to the general market. Two, it allowed for the DR to remove certain dispositions which made it impossible to legally support or enforce an open market as it was in the DR. It meant that over 75% of the general biz in the DR would be falling into a category which rendered our commerce laws both ineffective and null in the international legal framework.

Once you open the doors, you can't just place hulk looking bouncers when you don't agree with some stuff coming in. The flow is uninterruptible once it begins. As such the DR needed to lay down the law within our internal biz model and further expand the articles within the legal bounds of international law to fit within ours.

AS one poster's opinion on the matter of the amount of money required for capitalization being ridiculously high compared to others in developed nations today; let's say that all of you still are pegged to the artificial value our currency is controlled at. The amount reflects the REAL value in correlation to other currencies and the effect it needs to be at, in order to be able to compete and conduct the general biz orders normal to in that field.

These values are not just taken from thin air; they're adjusted using the right economic tools and variants that affect it.

Like I said, there's a plus side to all of this to the general biz affected by the changes in the DR. Being able to solicit and bid in an international order is not something that a 10,000 pesos biz institution will get away with, come the reality that are the legal commerce minefields of the world...

Since you provided some examples, let me give you some shiners too:

Take a multi level corporation like Pollo Tropical (a US franchise based biz), where a potential investor/owner is required to handled a minimum amount of cash liquidity in order to be allowed to participate in the biz. That's if he can afford to open not one or three, but not less than five locations withinn his area, making the liquidity requirements even bigger as each multiplies as the total number of locations if agreed to.

Is that bad biz from the franchise owners? Not really!
It's pre-proofing the actual investor/owner to be at a set of minimum levels that can guarantee operations for short to mid term length of time in the worst of situations for all the locations in tandem!

Now take the changes applied by the new law regarding biz in the framework of financial woes that affect small to mid scale biz like these, and you do the math...

You're providing biz a cladding from short to mid term financial downturns, which could affect their ability to successfully open lines of credit, or short to mid term backing of major contracts. Simply put, biz will be able to avail themselves terms of credit and backing by financial institutions with relative success 99% of the time.

I know this makes no sense to you, when you view it as a mom and pops operation; but once the general market is open ended, the changes will be evident and impossible to ignore!

The type of biz affected by this retroactive move is best suited to protect the general intersts of the people in a world market that seldom takes prisoners when things go bad at any end... Call it an extra layer of protection to our citizens at the individual stage of general commerce laws.

Once we open the door all bets are off and biz will have to understand that there's only so much, legally, that the country can protect them from in the world market.

Biz too small to, make the change for now, do have options. It's not like you either shell out or shut down. That's why I tell you to seek legal advice on the matter before you make unfounded conclusions on behalf of your biz here.

As far the end game being published or not in the local media: You really think that telling these folks ahead of time would have anything positive of an outcome? Nobody likes to pay more taxes, and in the DR that goes beyond since a tremendous amount don't pay more than nil, zip, zero, nada!

Like I said, the opportunities that will open to these biz on the new law will be wide and ranging from the private sector to the public funded projects in the billions. Their inclusion later to participate on the local Bolsa de Valores, will allow profitable and strong small to medium operations, the opportunity to raise huge capital with a strong commitments to fiscal responsibility.

Unlike the SEC's way of handling their trade market, in the DR our stock runners will be backed by factual and corroborated fiscal data in real time.

If a company tries to hike the value of their stocks using fraud, it would be a matter of days to detection and their actives embargoed during a preliminary investigation.

I told you here on DR1 that huge changes are imminent in our country, for the better!​
 
Last edited:

WINSTRIC

New member
Jan 7, 2003
42
4
0
This is a BAD choice for business,and for the people of the Dominican
Republic. The DR needs to enforce existing laws,which it does not!!!
The World Financal Crisses , and Big Problems in the United States,
did not happen because of unstable small corporations. The problems
are because BIG, Well Funded (on paper), Choose to do BAD! People
in places of knowledge,power looked the other way. You have not seen
anything yet! It is just the start! Small,under-funded business, as well
as the really good,hard working people are left towing the load. Corrupt
Gov't , CEO's , BANKERS need to be PUT& KEPT in JAIL. Not PARDONED!!!!
This will insure stability as well as insure short/long term growth.
Bad decisions/problems are not fixed with more bad decisions! This is
a classic NYC shell/ponzi scheme. The Good People from the Dominican
Republic DEMAND BETTER!!!
 

MikeFisher

The Fisherman/Weather Mod
Feb 28, 2006
13,766
2,195
113
Punta Cana/DR
www.mikefisher.fun
This is a BAD choice for business,and for the people of the Dominican
Republic. The DR needs to enforce existing laws,which it does not!!!
The World Financal Crisses , and Big Problems in the United States,
did not happen because of unstable small corporations. The problems
are because BIG, Well Funded (on paper), Choose to do BAD! People
in places of knowledge,power looked the other way. You have not seen
anything yet! It is just the start! Small,under-funded business, as well
as the really good,hard working people are left towing the load. Corrupt
Gov't , CEO's , BANKERS need to be PUT& KEPT in JAIL. Not PARDONED!!!!
This will insure stability as well as insure short/long term growth.
Bad decisions/problems are not fixed with more bad decisions! This is
a classic NYC shell/ponzi scheme. The Good People from the Dominican
Republic DEMAND BETTER!!!

exactly right
Mike
 
Feb 7, 2007
8,005
625
113
In any country, any stock company that wants to go public, has to satisfy the rule of law and comply with all the requirements and obligations. No objection against that. So no objection against big businesses which in new law are called "subscribcion publica" and the conditions stipulated.

But it is unprecedented to try to apply the same rule towards the companies that are family (privately) owned.

In Germany, UK, anywhere, a privately held stock company does not need to conform to all the rules a public stock company has to. When such a company wants to raise capital and go public, it's at that moment when it has to comply with more stricter requirements, including capitalization.

I am not interested in franchises or government contracts. I am not in that line of business. I do not take bank loans because I do not produce goods. My company works in a different field where it actually really doesn't matter if I am capitalized with 100 thousand pesos or 30 million. I need my company to have a business legal entity and separation of taxes. For me, this is a very bad law, and I stay behind what I say. I will not see many benefits (better to say, probably none of them) of what you describe.

I am also investigating and so far it looks like a viable option to have a stock company registered in Panama or Costa Rica and have a registered subsidiary (commercial representation) in the DR, with its RNC and inscription in Registro Mercantil. With no BS involved.