IP holding company

It is a company that owns intellectual property and may license it to operating businesses. The assets can include trademarks, patents, designs and contractual rights in technology. Its role should be documented through ownership records, licenses and governance that reflect the actual business arrangements.

The decision can involve group location, management, commercial relationships and the legal environment. We compare these needs with the cost of establishing and maintaining a Swiss entity. Incorporation alone does not establish an effective IP strategy or a particular tax result.

No. Patent-box treatment concerns qualifying patents and comparable rights and depends on the applicable rules, research expenditure and other conditions. Holding trademarks alone does not create eligibility. Any proposal needs a tax analysis of the specific rights, income and activities before benefits are assumed.

The company’s people, decisions, capabilities, functions and risk control should be consistent with its role. The analysis includes who develops, improves, maintains, protects and exploits the assets. A registered address and legal title alone do not answer the operational or tax questions.

Related-party terms need an arm’s-length analysis reflecting the rights, functions, risks and commercial circumstances. We coordinate the legal terms with appropriate valuation and tax input. A standard percentage applied to every asset can overlook material differences between businesses and licenses.

We first confirm ownership, transferability, restrictions and any required consents. The project then addresses valuation, tax consequences, assignment documents and relevant register updates. Cross-border transfers and existing licenses can add requirements that should be understood before a transfer is signed.

Yes, where that suits the business. The portfolio still needs asset-specific administration, licenses and records. Different rights can have different renewal cycles, ownership histories, territorial coverage and tax treatment; placing them in the same company does not remove those differences.

The plan should allocate renewals, recordals, license reporting, collections, enforcement decisions and corporate governance. Accounting and tax compliance also continue. We can help define the responsibilities and legal documentation, with any ongoing support agreed as a separate engagement.

No, but a smaller business should compare the benefits with additional cost and complexity. Sometimes holding the rights in the operating company with clear ownership records is more proportionate. We assess the expected users, growth plans and transaction needs before recommending another entity.

No. Guarantees, security rights, transfer terms, insolvency rules and the facts of a restructuring can affect exposure. Asset separation should be assessed alongside the group’s obligations. It should not be presented as an absolute shield or a way to move assets beyond existing claims.

Possibly, but the relevant contracts and security arrangements must be reviewed first. Consent, assignment restrictions, tax effects and continued performance can determine the sequence. We record these dependencies in the transfer plan and closing documents rather than assume title can move freely.

We can structure the ownership project, prepare corporate and transfer documents, negotiate licenses and set up the legal administration framework. Specialist valuation, tax advice, accounting and portfolio-management services are coordinated or scoped separately according to the assets and jurisdictions involved.