Access to understandable and accurate company information is key in facilitating different
forms of cross-border business.

In light of the benefits of improved access to business registers (some of which are outlined in
this paper),  encourages the Commission to continue its work on the
interconnection of business registers thereby helping business growth and encouraging
greater volumes of B2B transactions.

The parties to complex corporate transactions (such as in a mergers & acquisitions scenario)
require understandable and up to date company information.

          Easy access           to    business       registers      would       enhance       creditworthiness
          assessments

Facilitating cross-border company searches to better assess the creditworthiness of a
potential lessee (based abroad) would allow a lessor to make a better assessment of that
potential lessee's ability to honor a lease agreement.


An added benefit of promoting better access to business registers and the company
information held therein (such as annual reports/accounts/information on company directors)
is that such information can also be used in fraud prevention. This is particularly true when
assessing those risks presented by smaller businesses and start-ups.

In particular, the presence of directors names on official registers (e.g. on lists of registered
voters) can be used to help confirm the identity of a potential lessee and thus guard against
fraud.

Generally there are three parties to a typical leasing transaction (lessor, lessee and
manufacturer/dealer).

Better access to business registers would help lessors to investigate the manufacturers
and/or the dealers of a leased asset, particularly in a cross-border context. Such
investigations are particularly useful to ensure that a lessor:

     1. has good title to the leased asset; and
     2. can carry out all its contractual obligations under the lease agreement.

In the current economic climate with rising levels of insolvency it is crucial for a lessor to have
good title to the leased asset.

For example, if a dealer has delivered equipment to a lessee before paying the original
manufacturer and then becomes insolvent, the manufacturer may in certain circumstances1
be able to repossess the asset even though the lessor has already paid the dealer of the
leased asset.

If a lessor concludes a leasing transaction that specifies the maintenance/servicing of the
leased asset, the continued solvency of the manufacturer may be key for a lessor to respect
the maintenance aspect of the lease agreement.

This is generally true where that manufacturer is (inter alia) the sole provider of unique spare
parts/specialist knowledge or has implemented a bespoke outsourced service facility for the
asset specified in the lease agreement.
Hence, in order to investigate the solvency of a dealer (and/or a manufacturer), there should
be easy access to appropriate company searches and accounts information.


As mentioned above, improved access to business registers has many benefits. These are
made possible through the better interconnection of these registers. Accordingly, 
supports the objectives of the BRITE project2.


 believes that the key advantage of IMI is that the 27 Member States already
participate in the system.


Subject to a full cost benefit analysis, option 3 (a combination of options 1 and 2) is
optimal.

It would allow lessors to take full advantage of the work already carried out by the European
Commission and the members of the BRITE consortium. In parallel, the European
Commission's goal of enabling access to reliable information on companies in all Member
States, preferably in all official languages of the EU could be realized.

This option should also make it possible to search for information on a company or a group of
companies active in different Member States without having to access the relevant national or
regional registers one-by-one.

An added benefit of this option is that a consistent quality of service across the EU 27 would
exist.

That being said, the European Commission must ensure that national laws on data protection
are observed and that the costs for such a system are kept down.

Any Commission initiative in the field must be carried out in accordance with the Better
Regulation Principles whose importance was recently reaffirmed by the conclusions of the
Competitiveness Council meeting of 3-4 December 2009.
