Professional Legal Services

In our professional practice, we take into account the legal nature of each category of legal subjects.

Natural Persons

In the law of most modern states, a natural person is recognised as the primary, pre-institutional subject of legal relations, whose existence is not created by legislative will but merely acknowledged by it. Historically, the concept of law itself has been formed around the natural person, while all other legal subjects derive from individual legal personality.

From a comparative law perspective, the notion of a natural person encompasses multiple legal statuses – citizen, foreign national, stateless person, and person under international protection – which do not alter the subject’s ontological essence but significantly affect the scope and modalities of exercising rights and obligations. Across jurisdictions, the legal capacity of natural persons is calibrated through criteria such as age, mental capacity, legal attachment to the state, and specific public-law restrictions, reflecting a balance between natural-law principles and legal positivism.

In tax law, a natural person is treated as the ultimate bearer of the tax burden and the final point of economic value redistribution, which subjects them to the principles of tax residence, source of income, and ability to pay. The principal legal risks for natural persons arise at the intersection of private autonomy and public authority, particularly in matters of liability, taxation, migration regimes, and the protection of fundamental rights.

Sole Proprietors (Natural Persons Engaged in Business Activity)

From a comparative law perspective, a sole proprietor is not an independent ontological legal subject but rather a specific legal regime governing a natural person’s participation in economic activity, in which private legal personality is complemented by a functional commercial role. In most legal systems, the entrepreneur is not separated from the individual who carries on the business; accordingly, the law deliberately refrains from employing a legal fiction and places the full economic risk directly on the individual.

This model reflects the classical liberal conception of entrepreneurial freedom as an expression of personal initiative, while simultaneously limiting the scale of economic activity through unlimited liability. For tax purposes, the entrepreneur is treated not as a separate taxpayer but as an extended form of the natural person, allowing states to apply simplified tax regimes without departing from the core principles of personal taxation. The legal risks associated with this status are concentrated around liability for obligations, fiscal transparency, and the permissible scope of economic activity conducted without a corporate structure.

Self-Employed Persons

In contemporary law, a self-employed person occupies an intermediate position between the classical entrepreneur and the employee, reflecting the shift from industrial economic models to a knowledge- and services-based economy. Their legal character is determined not by formal status but by the nature of the activity performed, the degree of organisational autonomy, and the absence of subordination to another party.

Across jurisdictions, self-employment attracts heightened regulatory and judicial scrutiny, as it marks the boundary between contractual freedom and the social function of labour law. For tax purposes, a self-employed person is treated as an independent economic agent responsible for the declaration and payment of taxes and social contributions, reflecting a move away from paternalistic models toward the principle of personal fiscal responsibility. The principal legal risks arise in the area of reclassification of legal relationships, which may fundamentally alter both tax and social-law consequences.

Legal Persons (General Ontology)

A legal person is a classical legal construct that emerges in response to the limitations of individual legal personality in complex economic and social relations. It has no existence outside the law and is entirely dependent on normative recognition, which makes it a secondary, institutional legal subject.

Across legal traditions, a legal person is conceptualised either as a legal fiction or as an autonomous social reality; however, in all jurisdictions it performs a common function—the aggregation of assets, risks, and managerial decision-making within a separate legal form. Its legal capacity is inherently purposive and limited by its constitutive documents and by law. For tax purposes, a legal person is treated as an autonomous taxpayer, enabling the state to separate corporate income from the income of its members and to apply fiscal instruments of economic regulation.

Commercial Legal Persons (Small, Medium, and Large Enterprises; Corporations)

Commercial legal persons represent an evolution of the basic legal-person construct toward increasing organisational complexity, scale of operations, and separation of ownership from management. In smaller forms, the legal person retains a personalised character, whereas in large corporations it acquires the features of an autonomous economic organism with its own internal decision-making logic.

In this sense, the corporation functions not merely as a participant in legal relations but as a systemic factor in economic and social development, which justifies heightened regulatory and tax oversight. For tax purposes, such entities constitute a central focus of international tax law, transfer pricing regimes, and competition regulation. The principal legal risks arise at the intersection of private interests, public regulation, and the liability of management bodies.

Corporations

In contemporary law, the corporation represents the institutionally complete form of the legal person, embodying the separation of capital from its holders and of management from ownership. Its legal ontology is based on the recognition of an autonomous corporate will, exercised through governing bodies and not reducible to the will of individual members or shareholders.

Across jurisdictions, corporations are understood either as legal fictions or as independent socio-economic organisms; in all cases, however, they function as full subjects of both private and public law. Corporate legal personality is always functionally limited by the corporate purpose and regulatory frameworks, yet sufficiently broad to engage in complex economic, financial, and cross-border legal relations. For tax purposes, a corporation is treated as an independent bearer of tax obligations, allowing states to separate corporate income from that of owners and to use the tax system as an instrument of economic policy. The principal legal risks for corporations are concentrated in the areas of corporate governance, management liability, competition law, and tax regulation.

Transnational Companies

A transnational company is not a distinct organisational or legal form, but rather a legal and economic reality arising from the functional integration of multiple legal persons across different jurisdictions under a single centre of economic control. Its ontology is network-based: legally, it consists of a plurality of autonomous entities, while economically and managerially it operates as a single unit. This duality defines the specificity of its legal position and complicates the application of traditional private-law concepts.

For tax purposes, transnational companies are a central focus of international tax law, as their structures enable the allocation of profits across jurisdictions, which has driven the development of transfer pricing regimes and OECD-led initiatives. The principal legal risks faced by such entities arise at the intersection of national sovereignty, international regulation, and accountability for global economic impact.

Banks

In the law of most states, a bank is a specialised financial institution whose legal capacity is from the outset constrained by the public interest in the stability of the monetary and financial system. Its legal ontology combines the private-law form of a legal person with public-law functions of financial intermediation, which justifies enhanced regulatory oversight.

Unlike ordinary commercial entities, a bank does not merely enter into contractual relations but also operates on trust as a systemic category, giving its activities a quasi-public character. For tax purposes, banks are subject to general taxation rules, while at the same time serving as instruments of fiscal and monetary policy through special regulatory regimes. The principal legal risks for banks relate to regulatory compliance, financial monitoring, liability for systemic risk, and adherence to international standards.

Foundations

A foundation, as a legal construct, embodies the idea of separating assets from the person of the founder for the purpose of pursuing a defined objective, which gives it a distinctive ontological character. In civil law systems, a foundation is conceived as a legal person without membership, while in common law jurisdictions analogous functions are performed by trusts; in both cases, the defining element is the subordination of assets to a specified purpose.

Foundations may be non-profit or investment-oriented in nature, resulting in substantial diversity in their legal and tax regimes. For tax purposes, they are often subject to special rules aimed at ensuring transparency and preventing abuse. The principal legal risks faced by foundations include breaches of purpose-bound asset use, conflicts within governing bodies, and regulatory oversight.

Exchanges

An exchange is an institutionalised marketplace whose legal ontology lies less in participation in transactions than in the creation and maintenance of the rules governing those transactions. In modern legal systems, exchanges operate as specialised legal persons whose activities are subject to strict oversight by the state or supranational regulators. They combine a private-law form with a public-law function aimed at ensuring transparency, equal access, and the stability of financial markets.

For tax purposes, exchanges are taxpayers, yet their economic role extends beyond fiscal considerations, as they indirectly influence the allocation of capital within the economy. The principal legal risks for exchanges relate to market manipulation, breaches of listing rules, and liability for systemic failures.

Professional and Business Associations

Professional and business associations are collective entities formed to enable self-regulation and represent shared interests within a particular profession or industry. Their legal ontology is based on a combination of private initiative and delegated public functions, especially in cases of mandatory membership or regulatory influence over professional access.

Across jurisdictions, such associations may take the form of ordinary legal persons or special public-law corporations, significantly affecting the scope of their powers and liabilities. For tax purposes, they generally benefit from preferential regimes, yet remain under close scrutiny due to risks of cartel practices and abuse of regulatory authority. The principal legal risks involve balancing self-regulation, competition, and the protection of the public interest.

Public-Law Corporations and Quasi-Public Entities

In many jurisdictions, public-law corporations possess a distinct legal ontology. They are entities created by statute to perform public functions but organised as legal persons acting in their own name. They are neither the state itself nor private individuals in the classical sense.

Their legal personality is functional, delegated, and often accompanied by governmental powers. This category includes regulators, government agencies, self-governing professional chambers, public universities, and central banks.

Institutions with Independent Financial-Legal Personality

These include international development banks, currency funds, and supranational financial mechanisms. Their legal personality does not derive from national law but arises from international treaties. They are not subject to the domestic tax regimes of member states in the traditional sense and enjoy functional immunities.

They occupy a distinct “apex” within the legal system, existing neither as states nor as corporations.

Territorial and Municipal Entities

Territorial and municipal entities – such as cities, regions, and autonomous areas – are, in many countries, independent public-law subjects with their own assets, budgets, and liabilities. They are not the state itself, nor are they merely administrative organs of the state.

Their role is increasingly significant in cross-border investment and financial legal relations.

Temporary, Procedural, and Functional Entities

These are entities whose legal personality is limited in time or by function. They include liquidation estates, bankruptcy creditors, trust estates, investment pools, consortia, and joint ventures formed without creating a separate legal person.

While not full legal subjects in the classical sense, they are recognised by law as holders of rights and obligations for the purpose of achieving specific objectives.

Digital and Algorithmic Entities (Borderline Legal Subjects)

At the frontier of modern law, decentralised autonomous organisations (DAOs), platforms, and protocols are emerging that do not fit within traditional legal subject typologies. While most jurisdictions do not yet recognise them as full legal persons, they already operate as economic agents with their own governance rules and resource allocation mechanisms.

Ignoring this category may be acceptable in classical legal analysis, but it is increasingly relevant for a conceptual understanding of the legal landscape of the future.

Non-Profit Organizations

Non-profit organizations are a special category of legal persons whose legal ontology is based on the denial of economic gain as their purpose of existence. They institutionalise social, cultural, or humanitarian interests, placing them beyond the logic of the market.

The law recognises their limited, functional legal personality, strictly tied to their statutory purpose, while tax incentives serve not as privileges but as tools to encourage socially beneficial activities. The principal risks for such entities arise from blurring the line between non-profit and commercial activities, which may result in the loss of their special status.

The State as a Legal Subject

The state is a unique legal subject that combines participation in legal relations with a monopoly over their normative regulation. Its legal personality is dual in nature: in the public sphere, it exercises sovereign authority, while in private-law relations, it acts on the basis of legal equality.

Under international law, the state is recognised as a primary subject capable of creating norms, not merely complying with them. For tax purposes, the state is not a taxpayer in the classical sense, but serves as the centre of fiscal sovereignty, through which the public interest is realised. The principal legal risks for the state relate to the limits of authority, liability under international obligations, and adherence to human-rights standards.

International Organizations

International organizations, including intergovernmental and private supranational structures, result from the institutionalisation of cooperation between subjects of different legal systems. Their legal ontology is based on recognition of a limited, functional legal personality, distinct from that of member states or individual members.

Under international law, such organizations can acquire rights and obligations, conclude agreements, and enjoy immunities, setting them apart from ordinary legal persons under domestic law. Their tax regime is generally special, reflecting a compromise between state fiscal sovereignty and the need to ensure effective functioning. The principal legal risks relate to the limits of their competence and liability in cross-border relations.

Entities without Personalised Will

Special mention should be made of asset pools and purpose-bound complexes, which in certain legal systems acquire features of legal personality – such as estates, trusts, and foundations without legal personhood. They do not possess a will in the classical sense, but the law “assumes” one through their managing or controlling persons.

Regardless of your legal nature or the type of legal subject you represent, we are ready to consider your inquiry and advise whether – and how – we can assist you.