The Utility of the Share Premium Account in Cayman Islands Exempted Companies

Published: 20 Feb 2025

Cayman Islands exempted companies are valued for their flexibility and ease of operation. A key component of their appeal lies in the nuanced treatment of share capital and, particularly, the strategic uses of the share premium account.

Primary Contact

Simon Raftopoulos

Managing Partner
Cayman Islands

T +1 345 814 2748
E [email protected]

Darryl Jago

Senior Associate
Cayman Islands

T +1345 814 2074
E [email protected]

Simon Raftopoulos, Darryl Jago

“Share capital” refers to the nominal (or par) value of a company’s issued shares. If a company issues shares which do not have a nominal value, then “share capital” refers to the total consideration received by the company for those shares.

If a company issues shares for a premium, the “share premium” is the amount by which the consideration received by the company exceeds the nominal value of the shares. This premium is credited to the “share premium account”. Notably, if shares are issued without a nominal value, the entire consideration received constitutes paid-up share capital and is not treated as share premium.

Share premium is not simply an accounting entry – it is a practical tool deployed by companies. Subject to the company’s memorandum and articles of association, the share premium account may be used to:

pay distributions or dividends;
pay up unissued shares as fully paid bonus shares to existing shareholders;
repurchase or redeem shares;
write off preliminary expenses of the company; or
write off expenses, discounts, or commissions on any issue of shares or debentures.

The Companies Act (as revised) (the Act) grants exempted companies discretion regarding the creation of a share premium account in certain “arrangements” (such as mergers, consolidations, acquisitions, and reconstructions) where the allotting company gains control over a company whose shares it acquires or cancels. This discretion, if exercised, allows a company to disregard the share premium when valuing the issued shares on its balance sheet – providing greater flexibility in how they present their financial position following the transaction.

A defining advantage of an exempted company is the permissive framework for making distributions from the share premium account. Unlike some jurisdictions with stricter “profits-only” distribution rules, the Act expressly allows distributions (or dividends) to be made from the share premium account, provided the so-called “statutory solvency test” is adhered to. Under this test, no distribution or dividend may be paid out of the share premium account unless the company, immediately after payment, can pay its debts as they fall due in the ordinary course of business. This test acts as a critical safeguard, ensuring that distributions from the share premium account do not prejudice the company’s ability to meet its obligations to creditors. Knowingly or wilfully authorising or permitting a distribution or dividend in contravention of the statutory solvency test is an offence, carrying the risk of a fine or imprisonment for the company/directors in question.

The share premium account also provides a flexible funding source for repurchasing or redeeming shares. The principal amount and any premium payable on a repurchase or redemption may be funded from the share premium account with or without a combination of other funding sources, such as profits. When shares are redeemed or repurchased using the share premium account (or profits), those shares will be cancelled and their nominal value must be transferred to a “capital redemption reserve”, with a corresponding reduction in the share premium account (or profits). This process ensures the maintenance of the company’s stated capital and provides a degree of protection for creditors by preventing the erosion of the capital base.

Overall, the share premium account offers Cayman Islands exempted companies a strategic advantage. Its flexibility in distributions, redemption and restructuring provides powerful tools for optimising a company’s capital structure and maximising shareholder value within the robust legal framework created by the Act.

More publications

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.

Daniel Mitchell, Harriet Ter-Berg, Jae Shin

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.

Susan Fallan, Daniel Coelho, Hannah Oh

Appleby-Website-Insolvency-and-Restructuring-562x340

14 Jul 2026

Directors Cannot Delay Shareholder Votes: Cayman Court Limits Postponement Powers

Eliot Simpson, Ray Leung, Steven Yuen

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.

Caroline Barton

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.

Harriet Ter-Berg, Alan Bercow, Sofia Kranjec

8 Jul 2026

A Cautionary Tale in Interim Injunctive Relief: Lessons from Dixon v Seymour

In a recent judgment of Chief Justice Ramsay-Hale, the Cayman Grand Court provided guidance on the necessary components of an application for interim injunctive relief. The ruling illustrates how an ex parte application may fail to satisfy the American Cyanamid test when unsupported by proper evidence.

Alan Bercow, William Spence

7 Jul 2026

CIMA’s 2026 Reinsurance Thematic Review: Focus Points for Boards

The Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (CIMA) has published its 2026 Thematic Review of Reinsurance Companies (Thematic Review). This reflects fieldwork conducted by CIMA between mid-2025 and Q1 2026 at selected Class B(iii) and Class D licensed reinsurers. The focus being on compliance with the Insurance Act (as revised) and other applicable legislation, regulations, rules and statements of guidance as issued by CIMA centering around stress-testing, cash flow testing frameworks, capital and collateral adequacy management, and corporate governance. Corporate governance weaknesses account for 68% of all findings with the remaining 32% spread across stress-testing, cash flow testing capital and collateral adequacy. Notwithstanding these findings, CIMA has noted several good practices across all areas including, importantly, comprehensive risk management frameworks covering key risk areas and strong capital and collateral adequacy monitoring processes. With Cayman’s reinsurance sector having grown to an institutional scale, and over 110 licensed reinsurers writing in the order of US$30 billion in annual premiums against over US$100 billion in assets, this latest Thematic Review demonstrates development in CIMA’s supervisory expectations of Cayman’s licensed reinsurers. It represents a reflection of the jurisdiction’s increasingly sophisticated and maturing reinsurance market and reinforces that CIMA’s expectations align closely with the standards that onshore counterparty cedants, rating agencies and US state regulators already expect. We take this opportunity to review certain of the key findings alongside CIMA’s cross-sectoral 2026 Thematic Review on Outsourcing, note some of the good practices highlighted by CIMA and make some associated recommendations for Cayman reinsurers.

Jacob MacAdam, Martin Byers, Simon Raftopoulos, Dean Bennett, Miriam Smyth

25 Jun 2026

CIMA Enforcement Action in Focus: Reminders and Recommendations

The Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (CIMA) has recently published a number of Enforcement Notices that provide helpful context for regulated entities, including Licensees and Registered Persons under the Securities Investment Business Act (Revised) (SIBA), seeking to understand and meet their ongoing regulatory obligations in the Cayman Islands. In early June 2026, CIMA exercised its enforcement powers under SIBA Section 17 to cancel the registrations of several SIBA Registered Persons on the basis that it had reasonable grounds to believe that such Registered Persons had failed to meet certain key regulatory obligations. The Appleby Team takes this opportunity to review the relevant findings and CIMA enforcement action; and to highlight certain key obligations that attach to regulated entities in the Cayman Islands.

Simon Raftopoulos, Martin Byers, Maree Martin, Menelik Miller, Miriam Smyth

23 Jun 2026

Important Cayman Islands Industry Advisory: Common Reporting Standard 2.0 and Economic Substance Updates

Further to the introduction of the Tax Information Authority (International Tax Compliance) (Common Reporting Standard) (Amendment) Regulations, 2025 (the CRS Amendment Regulations or CRS 2.0), the Cayman Islands Department for International Tax Cooperation (DITC) has issued an Industry Advisory flagging certain key updates in respect of Common Reporting Standard (CRS) and Economic Substance (ES) reporting in the Cayman Islands. Cayman Financial Institutions will be required file 2025 CRS Returns and Declarations by 31 July 2026, ahead of the online DITC Portal’s closure to facilitate its transition to XML Schema v3.0. ES courtesy reminders (which have historically been sent by email to designated Responsible Persons in advance of annual ES reporting deadlines) will no longer be issued such that Relevant Entities will need to independently track such deadlines themselves. Updated Individual and Entity CRS Self-Certification forms, aligned with CRS 2.0, are now available online via the DITC website.

Martin Byers, Maree Martin, Miriam Smyth, Menelik Miller

18 Jun 2026

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

In Peakwave Investment Management Ltd v Energy Evolution GP Ltd [2026] CIGC (FSD) 22, the Grand Court clarified the scope of joint provisional liquidators' powers following their appointment. In particular, the Court confirmed that the appointment of provisional liquidators does not automatically displace existing directors.

David Lee, Joe Dale

The Utility of the Share Premium Account in Cayman Islands Exempted Companies

locations

services

Sector

types

Share