A counterparty report answers one question before a transaction closes: who controls the company, and what does the official record actually show. Control is not always visible at the first layer. The report traces the ownership chain, names the registered directors, and identifies where the source stops disclosing — before payment is made.
The ceiling of what the sources allow is stated in the scope table below. No report promises what the sources do not contain.
What the report establishesRegistered shareholders, directors, and the ownership chain to the point where the official source stops disclosing. Verified against primary registries across 35 jurisdictions. TurnaroundSignal tier: 3 business days. Standard tier: 5 business days. Extended tier: 10 business days. Timelines run from confirmed instruction. PriceFixed at three tiers: Signal €890 · Standard €1900 · Extended €4200. Price is stated before payment. What the sources do not showBeneficial ownership in most EU jurisdictions is not publicly accessible following CJEU C-37/20. The report names the layer at which disclosure ends and the reason.The report draws on official company registries, insolvency registers, and filed financial statements. Coverage varies by jurisdiction. The scope at each tier is fixed; it does not expand on request within a tier.
At the Signal tier, the report establishes the registered legal name, jurisdiction of incorporation, current directors, and the shareholder structure as filed. This is the minimum verification layer for a counterparty in any cross-border transaction.
At the Standard tier, the report adds the ownership chain traced to the next corporate layer, a review of filed financial statements where the registry makes them available, and a check against the relevant insolvency register. Discrepancies between the registry record and the filed accounts are flagged as a separate finding.
At the Extended tier, the report covers all Standard elements plus a multi-jurisdictional trace where the counterparty holds subsidiaries or intermediate holding vehicles in additional jurisdictions. Each additional jurisdiction is covered to the same source standard. The report names every layer at which the chain becomes opaque and states the reason.
Control and ownership are not the same thing. A shareholder list shows who holds registered shares. It does not show who gives instructions, who holds economic rights through nominee arrangements, or who sits behind a trust structure. The report distinguishes between what the registry records and what it does not.
In common-law jurisdictions, the People with Significant Control register or its equivalent records individuals who hold more than a defined threshold of shares or voting rights. The threshold and the register's reliability vary. The report states the threshold applicable in the relevant jurisdiction and notes any gap between the PSC record and the shareholder list.
In civil-law jurisdictions, the shareholder list filed with the commercial registry is the primary source. Where a Gesellschafterliste or equivalent is filed, it names participants and their percentage interests. Where it is not filed or is out of date, the report states that the registry record is incomplete and gives the date of the most recent filing.
Where a jurisdiction does not maintain a public shareholder register — or where access requires a national identifier or a declaration of legitimate interest that a foreign applicant cannot provide — the report names the barrier and the layer at which the chain ends.
Discrepancies between sources are findings, not footnotes. The report flags three categories of disagreement:
Registry versus filed accounts. The shareholder list may name a corporate holder whose accounts show a different ultimate parent. Both records are cited; the discrepancy is stated.
Current filing versus historical record. A director removed from the registry may still appear as a signatory on filed contracts. The report notes the date of removal and the date of the most recent filing.
Insolvency register versus active registry status. A company may appear active in the commercial registry while a petition has been filed but not yet processed. An absence from the insolvency register does not confirm the absence of a filed petition; the report states this limit explicitly.
| Tier | Price | What is included | Not included |
|---|---|---|---|
| Signal | €890 | Registered legal name, jurisdiction, current directors, shareholder structure as filed, registry status | Ownership chain beyond first layer; financial statements; insolvency check; multi-jurisdictional trace |
| Standard | €1900 | All Signal elements; ownership chain to next corporate layer; filed financial statements where available; insolvency register check; flagged discrepancies between registry and accounts | Subsidiaries in additional jurisdictions; beneficial ownership where registry does not disclose; legal qualification of findings |
| Extended | €4200 | All Standard elements; multi-jurisdictional trace of subsidiaries and intermediate holding vehicles; each additional jurisdiction covered to the same source standard; named opacity layers with stated reasons | Beneficial ownership where no public register exists; legal advice; enforcement action; any finding not derivable from official sources |
The sources have a ceiling. The report states it before payment, not after delivery.
Beneficial ownership in the EU. Following the Court of Justice ruling in joined cases C-37/20 and C-601/20, public access to UBO registers across EU member states is no longer available as a default. Access requires a demonstrated legitimate interest assessed by the national authority. The report does not promise beneficial ownership data for EU-registered entities unless the specific jurisdiction's register remains accessible under a confirmed access regime. Where access is unavailable, the report names the layer at which the chain ends.
Delaware and similar opacity jurisdictions. The Delaware Division of Corporations does not disclose LLC members. The registered agent is the only publicly available contact. The report establishes the registered agent, the date of formation, and the good-standing status. It does not establish the member or the economic owner. This is stated in the scope before instruction is confirmed.
Nominee structures. Where a registered shareholder is a professional nominee, the registry record reflects the nominee, not the economic owner. The report identifies nominee indicators where they are present in the filing. It does not pierce the nominee arrangement; that requires a separate legal process in the relevant jurisdiction.
Insolvency register gaps. A negative result in an insolvency register does not confirm the absence of a filed petition. Processing delays mean a petition may be filed and not yet recorded. The report states the date of the search and this limitation explicitly.
Language and access barriers. Several registries require a national identifier, a local electronic signature, or a declaration of legitimate interest to access documents. Where these barriers apply to a foreign applicant, the report describes the barrier and the layer of information that remains inaccessible.
The report is delivered as a structured PDF with source citations and extraction dates for each finding. Every factual statement carries a source reference. Every limit carries a stated reason.
Turnaround runs from confirmed instruction:
Where a registry imposes its own processing delay — for example, a certified extract that requires a notarised request — the report notes the delay and delivers the available elements within the standard turnaround, with the delayed element added on receipt.
The report covers 35 jurisdictions across the EU, EEA, UK, US, and selected offshore centres. Coverage at each tier is determined by what the primary registry in that jurisdiction discloses. The scope table above applies uniformly; no jurisdiction is treated as fully transparent unless its registry record supports that characterisation.
Where a counterparty operates across multiple jurisdictions, the Extended tier covers the full structure. Each jurisdiction is listed in the report with its source, the date of extraction, and the access conditions that applied.
What does the report establish that a free registry search does not? A direct registry search returns a raw document in the local language, often requiring a national identifier or a local electronic signature to access. The report removes that path: registration, national identifier, language, electronic signature, and declaration of legitimate interest are handled as part of the instruction. The result is a structured, sourced, English-language document with limits stated. What the free source contains is what the report contains; what the report adds is the removed path and the stated limit.
Does the report cover beneficial ownership? Where a jurisdiction maintains a publicly accessible beneficial ownership register and access is available to a foreign applicant, the report includes that layer. Where access requires a demonstrated legitimate interest assessed by the national authority — as is the case across most EU member states following CJEU C-37/20 — the report names the layer at which the chain ends and the reason. The Extended tier traces the ownership chain as far as the sources allow and names every opacity layer.
What happens if the counterparty is registered in a jurisdiction not on the standard list? Contact the firm before submitting the instruction. Coverage outside the standard 35 jurisdictions is assessed on a case-by-case basis. If the primary registry in that jurisdiction is accessible and the source standard can be met, the instruction proceeds. If it cannot, the firm states that before accepting the instruction.
Is the report a legal opinion? No. The report is a factual compilation from official registers and public sources. It does not constitute legal advice and contains no legal qualification of the findings. For advice regarding a specific position, contact info@vlolawfirm.com.
How is the price fixed if the counterparty has a complex structure? The price is fixed by tier, not by complexity. The Extended tier covers multi-jurisdictional structures at €4200. If the structure requires coverage beyond the standard 35 jurisdictions, that is assessed before instruction is confirmed and priced separately. No additional charge is applied within the scope of the tier as described.
What is the difference between the Standard and Extended tiers for a single-jurisdiction counterparty? For a counterparty incorporated and operating in a single jurisdiction with no subsidiaries elsewhere, the Standard tier covers the full scope. The Extended tier adds value where the structure spans multiple jurisdictions or where intermediate holding vehicles require a separate trace. The scope table states this explicitly; the firm will confirm the appropriate tier before instruction.
Official company registries, insolvency registers, and filed financial statements across 35 jurisdictions — extracted within 30 days of report delivery. Each finding in the delivered report carries its source registry name, the document reference where applicable, and the extraction date. Source names and URLs are provided in the report itself; the specific registries accessed depend on the jurisdiction of the counterparty under review.
General reference sources consulted in preparing this page:
Disclaimer: This report is a factual compilation from official registers and public sources. It is provided for informational purposes only, does not constitute legal advice, and contains no legal qualification of the facts established. VLO Law Firm assumes no liability for actions taken or not taken based on this material. For advice regarding your particular situation, please contact info@vlolawfirm.com.
Author: James Whitfield — Partner, UK & Common Law, VLO Law Firm