Beautiful Bermuda, but investors told to tread with caution in the case of offshore listings
Bermuda is not the only exotic home claimed by ASX-listed companies — S&P Cap IQ data shows there are three groups from the Channel Island groups, one each from the Cayman Islands and British Virgin Islands, and even one from the Isle of Man.
But takeover drama at Miclyn Offshore Express, one of the 10 Bermudian companies already listed on the ASX, illustrates that investing in the sunny island nation poses more risks than just the possibility of a visit from Tax Office auditors.
Private equity firms CHAMP and Headland Capital Partners last month increased their joint holding in Miclyn, a shipping services company, to 75 per cent, without mounting a takeover bid.
This would have been impossible if Miclyn was an Australian company, because under most circumstances our laws require a takeover bid to be made when a shareholder reaches 20 per cent ownership. There is no such provision in Bermudan law.
Both the ASX and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission say that as long as Bermudian companies explain to shareholders that they have less protection than they would if the company was incorporated in Australia, it's up to investors to make sure they understand the risks.
ASX spokesman Matthew Gibbs said the bourse "focuses on ensuring adequate disclosure, so that potential investors can inform themselves about the implications of investing in a foreign incorporated company".
Investors should take care when considering a company that is based offshore, an ASIC spokesman said.
"When deciding to invest in these companies stop to consider where that company actually carries out its business, and what challenges and risks might arise.
"Companies incorporated overseas will have different rules that apply to them, for example when there is a takeover."
By contrast, the takeover rules in Singapore — a popular listing destination for Bermudian companies — state that they apply to "corporations with a primary listing of their equity securities ... in Singapore", regardless of where they are incorporated.
As for Miclyn, it looks likely to pass into the hands of CHAMP and Headland.
A fortnight ago, the private equity funds asked Miclyn to hold a special meeting of shareholders to appoint two nominees to the board, giving them effective control.
And they have left the door open to privatising Miclyn at a lower price than the $2.20 they paid for their latest tranche of shares.
Miclyn's general manager of investor relations Adam Clayton said he has never been to Bermuda.
The company has its offices in Singapore, a traditional hub for shipping companies servicing the offshore oil and gas industries.
Mr Clayton said Miclyn's decision to incorporate in Bermuda was "not about getting around those corporate governance issues".
"My understanding is that it's more around tax issues," he said.
He admitted that if CHAMP and Headland appoint their extra directors, Miclyn will be in breach of ASX guidelines requiring a majority of directors be independent.
"We are bound by Bermuda law," he said. "Those guidelines are just guidelines."
Corporate governance expert Ian Ramsay, a professor at the University of Melbourne and a former member of the Takeovers Panel, said he wasn't aware of Bermudian takeover rules.
The island was not one of the jurisdictions included in a paper he co-wrote last year comparing shareholder protection around the world.
"We're extending the research now into more Asian countries," he said. "In summary, Australian shareholder protection is very strong — of the countries that we looked at over a 40 year period, Australian shareholder protection by and large has been the strongest."
Frequently Asked Questions about this Article…
The article said Zeta Resources was due to list on the ASX next week and would be the exchange's 11th company incorporated in Bermuda. S&P Cap IQ data in the piece also notes other ASX‑listed groups use offshore homes such as the Channel Islands, the Cayman Islands, the British Virgin Islands and even the Isle of Man.
Bermuda‑incorporated firms can be subject to different laws and have less automatic shareholder protection than Australian companies. The article highlights that some takeover and corporate governance rules that apply in Australia don’t necessarily apply under Bermudian law, so investors need to understand those legal differences and the extra risks involved.
Private equity firms CHAMP and Headland Capital Partners increased their joint holding in Miclyn to 75% without mounting an Australian‑style takeover bid. They asked Miclyn to hold a special meeting to appoint two nominees to the board (giving effective control) and left open the possibility of privatising Miclyn at a lower price than they recently paid. The episode shows how offshore incorporation can affect shareholder outcomes.
According to the article, Bermudian law doesn’t have the common Australian provision that generally requires a takeover bid once a shareholder reaches a 20% holding. Because Miclyn is incorporated in Bermuda, those Australian mandatory bid thresholds didn’t apply the same way.
The ASX says it focuses on ensuring adequate disclosure so potential investors can understand the implications of investing in a foreign‑incorporated company. ASIC advises investors to consider where the company actually carries out its business and what specific challenges and risks might arise, including the fact that different takeover and governance rules may apply.
No. Miclyn’s offices are in Singapore — a hub for shipping companies that service the offshore oil and gas industry. Miclyn’s general manager of investor relations, Adam Clayton, said he had never been to Bermuda and that the company’s decision to incorporate there was more about tax issues than about corporate governance.
The article notes that Singapore’s takeover rules state they apply to corporations with a primary listing in Singapore regardless of where they are incorporated. By contrast, Bermuda apparently does not impose the same kind of mandatory bid provisions tied to the listing jurisdiction, which can lead to different outcomes for shareholders.
Miclyn’s investor‑relations manager acknowledged that if CHAMP and Headland appoint additional directors, the company would be in breach of ASX guidelines that recommend a majority of directors be independent. He also said the company is bound by Bermuda law and described the ASX rules as guidelines. The article quotes a corporate‑governance expert who emphasised that Australian shareholder protections are generally strong.

