By NEIL HARTNELL
TRIBUNE Business Editor
nhartnell@tribunemedia.net
THE BAHAMAS should have had its “ducks in a row” long before today’s House of Assembly debate on last-minute revisions to anti-financial crime defences now being inspected by international standard-setters, an Opposition MP is arguing.
Adrian White, the St Anne’s MP, yesterday confirming to Tribune Business that the Government had informed him MPs will debate changes to the Companies Act, voiced surprise that this had not been picked up and amendments made earlier with Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF) examiners already present in Nassau for their two-week inspection.
The Companies Act (Amendment) Bill 2026 is designed to bring The Bahamas into line with the standards and recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the CFATF’s parent and the global standard-setter on combating money laundering and other financial crimes, by prohibiting domestic companies from being able to issue bearer shares or bearer warrants.
The Bill, when passed, will also bring the Companies Act into alignment with the International Business Companies (IBCs) Act, which was overhauled more than 25 years ago in 2000 to ban bearer shares in the financial services industry’s international sector after The Bahamas was ‘blacklisted’ for the first time by the FATF.
“This Bill seeks to amend the Companies Act (Chapter 308) to correct a technical gap in the law concerning bearer shares and bearer share warrants arising in relation to the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force recommendation 24, which prohibits use of bearer shares and bearer share warrants,” the Bill’s ‘objects and reasons’ section states.
Besides prohibiting their issuance, the Bill also provides for a six-month transition to allow Bahamian domestic-incorporated companies to undertake the “surrender, cancellation and replacement of any existing bearer share instruments with registered share instruments”.
The legal revisions appear to be the latest move by The Bahamas to ensure it receives a favourable review from the CFATF, which began its examination of this nation’s anti-financial crime defences on Monday, October 19, with its team of inspectors here until October 30.
The House of Assembly last week debated and passed changes to the Anti-Terrorism Act designed to “close a gap between what The Bahamas has committed to internationally and what our [existing] law is able to deliver” when it comes to immediately freezing the assets of, and cutting-off access to the financial system for, persons on United Nations (UN) sanctions lists.
This, too, appeared design to close a legal loophole that could concern CFATF assessors as The Bahamas bids to retain its perfect ‘40 out of 40’ score, or 100 percent compliance, with the FATF’s anti-financial crime standards and recommendations.
Mr White, though, yesterday questioned why - given the urgency created by the CFATF visit - the Companies Act changes were not debated and passed at the same time. “Our ducks should be in a row before they get here,” he argued. “They shouldn’t find anything that is unforeseen, and which they have to search for, when they arrive.
“In my opinion, by the time they come to town and check, they look at what’s in stone not burning in the bush. These issues are minor amendments to the legislation in terms of time consumed in the House on matters of urgency.”
The Opposition MP agreed that the Companies Act reforms “tag on to the Anti-Terrorism amendments we did last week, which they made retroactive to 2019”. He added that the two could have been debated together as part of a “compendium” of legislation, and said: “It’s one step at a time and, when you proceed in that way, the sun goes down before you arrive at your destination.
“Your footing is not as strong as it should be. We need a stronger footing in the financial services industry.” As for the timing of the 11th hour Companies Act reforms, Mr White said: “It’s not a steady ship. We are an island nation, but don’t need to make the waters rough around is for any reason. Let’s stay with smooth sailing.”
He added that the elimination of bearer shares in the domestic Bahamian corporate market is unlikely to impact commerce and business volumes, and said: “If we are having to stay in line or will be in line in terms of positioning ourselves as the jurisdiction to go to, I don’t think playing by the rules is the only thing needed.
“We have to be a more attractive destination, and provide not only the services but the facilities and institutions that attract the type of wealth we seek for the financial services industry.”
Paul Moss, president of Dominion Management Services, similarly agreed that the elimination of bearer shares and warrants under these Companies Act reforms will not impact business for the Bahamian financial services industry either way.
“These are things that have been done away with and frowned upon years ago,” he told Tribune Business. “I guess, in keeping with that, they want to bring it into compliance. I’m sure that [the CFATF review] plays a role in it as well.”
Mr Moss said bearer shares and warrants had typically been a product used by The Bahamas’ international financial services industry and, once outlawed by the 2000 legal reforms, “it’s not something people really use a domestic company for”.
“It helps with their compliance with the FATF and some of the other alphabetic groups,” he added of the changes. “It’s not widely used in the community. Some of these things are overlooked because we don’t use them. But when it’s pointed out we have to address it. I would not be surprised if this was pointed out to them and they took care of it.”