A Guide to Transferring Shares in a Local Company

Published: 1 Sep 2025
Type: Insight

The Cayman Islands has a well-established legal framework for companies carrying on local business.  This article outlines the key practical steps for transferring shares in a so-called local company, focusing on legal requirements, licensing and ownership considerations, and share transfer tax applicable to land holding companies.


Transferring Shares (Generally)

Transferring shares in a local company is governed by the Companies Act (as revised) (the Act) and the company’s articles of association.

The process requires a signed instrument of transfer, executed by or on behalf of the transferor and the transferee.  Under Cayman Islands law, a register of members is prima facie evidence of the matters required to be recorded in it.  Accordingly, a transferor remains the legal owner of the shares until the transfer is recorded in the register.

Director approval is often required under a local company’s articles of association before the register can be updated, and directors usually have discretion to refuse a transfer.  This gives directors a gatekeeping role in ensuring share transfers comply with the company’s governance framework.

Once approved, the original share certificate (if any) is surrendered for cancellation and a new share certificate is issued to the transferee.  The Act does not prescribe the issuance of share certificates and, in practice, they are rare as the register of members serves as primary evidence of share ownership.

It is essential to review the company’s articles of association, shareholders agreement, financing agreements and any other binding arrangements for additional restrictions or approval requirements that may apply to a share transfer.

Trade and Business Licensing Considerations

Subject to certain exemptions, every company carrying on business in the Cayman Islands must hold a valid Trade and Business Licence (TBL).

While a share transfer does not automatically void a TBL, material changes in ownership or control of a TBL holder must be notified to the Department of Commerce and Investment.  Any share transfer that results in a person acquiring a significant interest in a TBL holder (defined as 10% or more of the voting rights, dividend rights, or rights to surplus assets) requires prior written approval from the Trade and Business Licensing Board (the Board).

Failure to obtain prior written approval may lead to penalties or the suspension or revocation of the TBL.

Local Companies (Control) Act Considerations

Under the Local Companies (Control) Act (as revised), a local company carrying on business in the Cayman Islands must:

  • be Caymanian controlled;
  • be at least 60% beneficially owned by Caymanians; and
  • have at least 60% Caymanian directors.

A company that does not satisfy the above requirements must apply to the Board for a Local Companies (Control) Licence (LCCL).  The grant of an LCCL is discretionary and assessed with reference to, among other things, (i) public interest, (ii) Caymanian participation, and (iii) sector sensitivities.

Any share transfer that affects Caymanian ownership or control must be carefully reviewed to avoid breaching the statutory thresholds and potentially triggering the need for an LCCL.  Directors are required to decline any share transfer that would breach these thresholds without prior Board consent.

All share transfers in a local company carrying on business in the Cayman Islands must be notified to the Board within 21 days.

If a local company already holds an LCCL, the licence terms must be checked carefully as these typically require prior written approval from the Board for any share transfer or change in beneficial ownership.

Land Holding Companies and Share Transfer Tax

If a company qualifies as a land holding corporation under the Land Holding Companies Share Transfer Tax Act (as revised), a transfer (broadly defined to include share transfers and other transactions affecting ownership) may trigger share transfer tax at a fixed rate of 7.5%.

The share transfer tax is calculated with reference to the greater of:

  • the consideration paid for the transferred shares; and
  • the taxable value, which is calculated as: market value of the company’s landed property × (nominal value of the transferred shares ÷ total nominal value of all issued shares).

The company must file a return, in the prescribed form, with the Ministry of Finance within 31 days of the transfer occurring and pay the share transfer tax at that time.

Summary

Share transfers in local companies must be carefully structured and reviewed to ensure compliance with Cayman Islands laws, licensing requirements, and ownership thresholds. A proactive, well-informed approach helps ensure compliance and safeguards a local company’s continued right to carry on business in the Cayman Islands.

locations

Cayman Islands

services

Corporate

types

Insight

Share
More publications
Appleby-Website-Insolvency-and-Restructuring
13 Aug 2026

Restructurings Frustrating Creditors And The Enforcement Of Arbitral Awards: The English Court's Decision In State Oil Company Of Azerbaijan V Mansimov Abstract

The English High Court has issued a significant judgment on the enforcement of arbitral awards, the reach of section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 and the limits of the Marex tort, with potential relevance to the Cayman Islands' Fraudulent Dispositions Act.

Appleby-Website-Regulatory-Practice
7 Aug 2026

New CIMA Rules on AML/CFT/CPF Compliance and Financial Sanctions Issued in the Cayman Islands

On 20 July 2026, further to an industry consultation, the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (CIMA) published the following two new Rules set to introduce binding risk management, governance, sanctions screening and other compliance requirements for regulated financial service providers in the Cayman Islands: (i) Rule on Effective Compliance Programmes for the Prevention and Detection of Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Proliferation Financing for Financial Services Providers (AML Rule); and (ii) Rule on Compliance with Financial Sanctions and Targeted Financial Sanctions (Sanctions Rule and, together with the AML Rule, the Rules). All CIMA-regulated financial services providers, including investment funds, insurers and reinsurers that are conducting ‘relevant financial business’ as defined under the Proceeds of Crime Act (Revised) (POCA) (FSP), are encouraged to review and update their documented framework of AML/CFT/CPF and sanctions compliance policies, procedures, controls, oversight and reporting mechanisms (Compliance Programmes) to ensure compliance with the Rules by the time they come into force on 18 September 2026.

JPLs, Directors and Arbitration: Grand Court Clarifies the Scope of Provisional Liquidators' Powers
5 Aug 2026

Good faith in action, not just belief: the UK Supreme Court’s decision in Saxon Woods Investments Limited v Costa and its significance in the Cayman Islands

May a company director depart from a strategy his board has agreed, in the sincere belief that he knows a better route to the company’s success? In Saxon Woods Investments Limited v Costa [2026] UKSC 21, the Supreme Court held that, whatever the answer, a director cannot pursue his own strategy by concealing it from, and misleading, his fellow directors. The Court confirmed that the good faith duty is not confined to a director’s sincerely held view of the company’s best interests; it also governs the means by which the director acts. The decision is an authoritative statement of the content of the fiduciary duty of loyalty, and is likely to be influential in the Cayman Islands. The decision will interest directors, those who advise or appoint them, and stakeholders affected by directors’ conduct.

Website-Code-Cayman-2
30 Jul 2026

Contingent Creditors, Standing And The Winding Up Jurisdiction: Analysing Re Petrosaudi International

The Cayman Islands Court of Appeal has delivered a highly significant judgment in Re PetroSaudi International.[1] The Court clarified the circumstances in which an alleged contingent creditor will have standing to petition to wind up a company under section 94(1)(b) of the Companies Act, and confirmed that there is no jurisdiction to make a winding up order on an ex parte without notice basis.[2] Our article analyses the Court of Appeal’s decision, and considers its implications for insolvency practitioners.

Website-Code-Cayman-1
30 Jul 2026

Final Means Final: Wei v Wang and the Common Law Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in the Cayman Islands

English Court Reaffirms Pro-Enforcement Approach to Foreign Judgments In Wei v Wang [2026] EWHC 1892 (Comm), the Court confirmed that exceptional avenues of review do not undermine the finality of a judgment and reiterated the limited scope of the natural justice defence.

JPLs, Directors and Arbitration: Grand Court Clarifies the Scope of Provisional Liquidators' Powers
28 Jul 2026

Drelle Overturned in Latest UK Supreme Court Decision

The United Kingdom Supreme Court in its recent decision in Drelle v Servis-Terminal LLC [2026] UKSC 29 (Drelle SC) has overturned the controversial decision of the English Court of Appeal in Servis-Terminal LLC v Drelle [2025] EWCA Civ 62 (Drelle CA), and in doing so has provided welcome clarity on the effect of unrecognised foreign judgments in cross-border bankruptcy and insolvency contexts. This is likely to have a wide-reaching impact – not only in the UK but also offshore – and particularly in the British Virgin Islands following the recent decision in JJW Hotels & Resorts Holding Inc v Rhodes (BVIHCM2025/0296) (JJW Hotels) (which relied heavily on Drelle CA), and in the Cayman Islands where previous authorities had recognised the ability, in the corporate context, for petitioners to present winding up petitions on the basis of an unrecognised foreign judgment.

JPLs, Directors and Arbitration: Grand Court Clarifies the Scope of Provisional Liquidators' Powers
24 Jul 2026

Thalassa Investments LP: Section 22 and Specific Discovery - Strategic Considerations for Limited Partners Seeking Information and Documents

In Thalassa Investments LP [2026] CIGC (FSD) 32, the Grand Court refused an application by limited partner petitioners for specific discovery from the general partner in just and equitable proceedings to wind up a Cayman Islands ELP. The ruling was against the backdrop of serious lack of probity allegations made against the general partner by the petitioners. Notwithstanding those allegations, the Grand Court declined to make orders requiring discovery of various categories of documents to be used at trial.   The ruling brings into focus the multiple routes potentially open to limited partners seeking information and/or documents from an ELP where there are allegations of mismanagement by the general partner. The limited partner may issue substantive proceedings (or, as in this case, present a just and equitable winding up petition) against the general partner and partnership, and then obtain documents through the usual discovery process. Alternatively, the limited partner may pursue its substantive right to true and full information under section 22 of the Exempted Limited Partnership Act first in order to help inform the bringing of a substantive claim, as was the approach in the Neoma (Abraaj) and the Port Fund litigation. Thalassa illustrates that the nature of the information sought, who holds it, and the legal basis on which disclosure is sought are all highly relevant to the outcome. The decision also highlights that section 22 and discovery serve different purposes, are governed by different legal tests and can produce different outcomes. The strategic question is not whether section 22 or the discovery process may be preferable in the abstract, but which legal framework best aligns with the limited partner’s objectives and the nature of the information sought.

Appleby-Website-Banking-and-Asset-Finance
13 Jul 2026

Guide to Loans & Secured Financing in the Cayman Islands 2026

This guide provides local insights into the legal and regulatory framework governing bank lending and finance. It covers key topics including bank loans versus debt securities, common forms of bank loan facilities, bridge financing, the roles of agents, trustees and lenders, and governing laws. It also examines the regulatory landscape, including capital, liquidity and disclosure requirements, the use of loan proceeds, cross-border lending, and interest rate and currency restrictions. In addition, the guide explores security interests and guarantees, the impact of fraudulent conveyance and similar doctrines on bank loan financing structures, intercreditor arrangements, loan terms and structures, and recent market developments.

Appleby-Website-Insolvency-and-Restructuring
9 Jul 2026

A Warning to Litigants Seeking Funding: English High Court Clarifies the Limits of Litigation Privilege

Important for Cayman litigants, funders and attorneys given the growing use of third-party funding in disputes.