ad67c68f

Unjustified Dismissal in Malta: What Employees and Employers Should Know

Thu, 04 Jun 2026 12:47:22 GMT

A practical guide to unfair dismissal, employee rights, employer obligations and recent developments before the Industrial Tribunal in Malta.

Unjustified Dismissal in Malta: What Employers and Employees Should Know

Dismissal is one of the most sensitive areas of Maltese employment law. For employers, a dismissal decision must be legally justified, properly documented and procedurally fair. For employees, the law provides protection against termination which is not based on redundancy, good and sufficient cause, or proper procedure.

In Malta, disputes concerning unjustified or unfair dismissal are generally heard before the Industrial Tribunal , which has exclusive jurisdiction over alleged unfair dismissal cases. Under Article 75 of the Employment and Industrial Relations Act, the complaint must be referred to the Tribunal by means of a written declaration stating the facts of the case, and this must generally be filed within four months from the effective date of the alleged breach.

What amounts to unjustified dismissal?

A dismissal may be challenged where the employer terminates employment without a valid legal basis. In broad terms, an employer must normally be able to show one of the following:

redundancy;
good and sufficient cause;
termination during probation, where applicable and lawfully handled;
expiry of a fixed-term contract;
another lawful contractual or statutory basis.

Article 36 of the Employment and Industrial Relations Act recognises that an employer may dismiss an employee without notice where there is good and sufficient cause . However, the Act also lists grounds which cannot be relied upon as good and sufficient cause, including trade union membership or representation, marriage, pregnancy or maternity leave, protected disclosures, complaints against the employer, and transfer of business ownership unless justified by economic, technical or organisational reasons.

The key point is that the employer must not only have a reason. The reason must be legally valid, sufficiently serious where disciplinary dismissal is involved, and supported by a fair process.

The importance of fair procedure

Recent Maltese cases continue to show that procedure matters.

A dismissal may be found unfair even where the employer believes there were performance or disciplinary concerns, if the employee was not given a fair opportunity to understand the allegations, answer them, and participate in a proper disciplinary process.

In Rueben Fenech vs L-Awtorità għas-Servizzi Finanzjarji ta’ Malta , the Court of Appeal confirmed an Industrial Tribunal decision concerning unfair dismissal. The case involved a senior MFSA employee whose dismissal was based on alleged poor performance. The Tribunal emphasised that disciplinary procedures contained in a collective agreement or staff handbook may form an important part of the employment relationship, and that principles of natural justice must be respected. These include the right to be heard, impartiality, proper investigation and avoidance of conflicts between investigator, witness and decision-maker.

The Tribunal also considered whether the reasons relied upon by the employer were legally sufficient. It was observed that vague warning letters, generic accusations or concerns not properly discussed with the employee may not be enough to support dismissal.

Remedies: compensation, reinstatement and re-engagement

If the Industrial Tribunal finds that a dismissal was unfair, it may order reinstatement, re-engagement or compensation.

Article 81 of the Employment and Industrial Relations Act provides that, where the Tribunal finds a complaint of unfair dismissal well-founded and considers reinstatement or re-engagement practicable and equitable, it may order such reinstatement or re-engagement. However, where the employee held a managerial or executive post requiring special trust, the Tribunal is restricted from ordering reinstatement or re-engagement in that role.

Where reinstatement or re-engagement is not ordered, the Tribunal must award compensation. In assessing compensation, the Tribunal must consider the real damages and losses suffered by the unjustly dismissed worker, together with other circumstances such as age, skills and employment potential.

The recent Fenech vs MFSA decision is particularly notable because the Court of Appeal confirmed a decision involving both reinstatement and compensation, in circumstances where the employee’s dismissal from a senior, sector-specific role had serious consequences for his career and earning potential.

Compensation is not automatic mathematics

Compensation in unfair dismissal cases is not calculated by a single fixed formula. The Tribunal will generally consider the employee’s actual losses, the period of unemployment, the employee’s efforts to mitigate loss, age, skills, prospects of alternative employment and the circumstances of the dismissal.

In a 2024 case discussed in local employment law commentary, the Court of Appeal considered the reasoning behind compensation awarded following an unfair dismissal finding. The Tribunal had separated compensation for the unfair dismissal itself from real damages linked to one month of unemployment. The case highlights the need for the Tribunal to explain the basis on which compensation is calculated, particularly where the employer challenges the amount awarded.

For employers, this means that a dismissal decision may expose the business not only to a finding of unfair dismissal, but also to an award reflecting actual financial consequences and wider employment-related factors. For employees, it means that evidence of loss, attempts to find new employment and the impact of the dismissal can be important.

Fair hearing and disciplinary safeguards

Another recent case involved OZO Services Limited , where the Court of Appeal upheld an Industrial Tribunal decision in favour of an employee. The employee had been dismissed following allegations connected to his role as a security guard. The earlier Tribunal decision concluded that the employee had not been granted a fair hearing and that the dismissal was unjust. The company’s appeal was rejected and the Tribunal’s decision was upheld.

This reinforces a practical lesson: where dismissal is based on allegations of misconduct, the employer should ensure that the disciplinary process is properly conducted. The employee should know the allegations, have an opportunity to respond, and be treated in accordance with any applicable handbook, collective agreement or internal disciplinary procedure.

Constructive dismissal and jurisdiction

Unjustified dismissal is not limited to cases where the employer expressly dismisses the employee. In some cases, an employee may resign because the employer’s conduct has made continued employment intolerable. This is commonly referred to as constructive dismissal .

Recent commentary on Arabella Tonna vs Malta Stock Exchange et , decided by the Court of Appeal in July 2025, highlights an important distinction. Generally, unfair dismissal remedies fall within the Industrial Tribunal’s jurisdiction. However, the Court considered the nature of the specific claims being brought and distinguished between dismissal-related remedies and other civil claims for alleged abusive conduct or damages.

For practical purposes, this means that the way a claim is framed matters. A claim seeking reinstatement, re-engagement or compensation for dismissal will normally point towards the Industrial Tribunal. Other claims based on separate civil wrongs may raise different jurisdictional questions.

Appeals from the Industrial Tribunal

Industrial Tribunal decisions are binding. However, in unfair dismissal cases there is a right of appeal on a point of law to the Court of Appeal. Such appeal must be filed within the applicable statutory time limit, which Article 82 states is not later than twelve days from the date of the Tribunal’s decision.

This is a narrow form of appeal. It is not simply a second hearing on the facts. Parties should therefore treat the Tribunal proceedings seriously from the outset and ensure that all relevant evidence, documents and arguments are properly presented.

Practical guidance for employers

Employers should avoid treating dismissal as a purely administrative decision. Before terminating employment, it is important to review the contract, the employee handbook, any collective agreement, internal disciplinary rules and the factual basis for the decision.

In disciplinary cases, employers should normally ensure that allegations are clear, evidence is properly gathered, the employee is allowed to respond, and the final decision is taken by an appropriate and impartial decision-maker. In redundancy cases, employers should ensure that the redundancy is genuine and properly documented.

A poorly handled dismissal can expose the employer to proceedings before the Industrial Tribunal, compensation, reputational risk and, in some cases, reinstatement or re-engagement orders.

Practical guidance for employees

Employees who believe they have been unjustly dismissed should act promptly. The four-month time limit for filing before the Industrial Tribunal is strict. Delay can prejudice the claim.

Employees should preserve the dismissal letter, contract of employment, payslips, warning letters, correspondence, internal policies, disciplinary records, WhatsApp messages, emails and any evidence relating to the circumstances of the dismissal. Where the issue involves constructive dismissal, it is particularly important to document the conduct relied upon before resigning.

Conclusion

Unjustified dismissal in Malta is highly fact-sensitive. The Industrial Tribunal will look at the reason for dismissal, the procedure followed, the evidence available to the employer, the employee’s role, and the consequences of termination.

Recent cases show three recurring themes. First, employers must respect fair procedure. Secondly, compensation must be reasoned and linked to the circumstances of the case. Thirdly, the remedies available in unfair dismissal disputes may be wider and more flexible than employers sometimes assume.

For both employers and employees, early legal advice is often decisive. A dismissal dispute is rarely won or lost only at the final hearing. It is usually shaped by the documents, procedure and strategy adopted from the beginning.

Malta Citizenship by Naturalisation on the Basis of Merit.

Thu, 04 Jun 2026 11:35:09 GMT

Malta has replaced its former investment-based citizenship framework with Citizenship by Naturalisation on the Basis of Merit. Learn how the new route works and who may qualify.

Malta’s Citizenship by Merit: From Investment-Based Naturalisation to a Merit-Based Route

Malta’s citizenship framework has recently undergone a significant change. For many years, international attention focused on Malta’s investor citizenship routes, first through the Individual Investor Programme and later through the framework for citizenship by naturalisation for exceptional services by direct investment.

That landscape has now changed. Malta has moved away from a model associated with fixed financial contributions and investment requirements, and towards a more discretionary, merit-based naturalisation framework.

The current route is known as Citizenship by Naturalisation on the Basis of Merit .

From IIP to Exceptional Services by Direct Investment

Malta’s earlier citizenship-by-investment model was the Individual Investor Programme, commonly known as the IIP. It was followed by the 2020 framework for Maltese Citizenship by Naturalisation for Exceptional Services by Direct Investment, often referred to as MEIN or ESDI.

These earlier routes were investment-led. They were structured around statutory financial contributions, property requirements, residence requirements and due diligence. They attracted substantial international interest, particularly from high-net-worth individuals seeking a connection with Malta and, through Malta, the European Union. However, the investment-based model also attracted legal and political scrutiny at European level.

The European Court of Justice and the End of the Old Model

In April 2025, the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered judgment in Commission v Malta , concerning Malta’s investor citizenship framework. The Court held that a system granting nationality in return for predetermined payments or investments was contrary to EU law.

Following that development, Malta amended its citizenship framework. Community Malta Agency described the amendments as addressing the CJEU decision, and Legal Notice 159 of 2025 amended the relevant subsidiary legislation.

The result is a new legal framework centred on merit rather than direct investment.

The Current Framework: Citizenship by Naturalisation on the Basis of Merit

The current regulations are titled the Granting of Citizenship by Naturalisation on the basis of Merit Regulations , S.L. 188.06. Their stated purpose is to regulate citizenship by naturalisation on the basis of merit under article 10(9) of the Maltese Citizenship Act.

This is not a rebranded investment programme. It is a discretionary naturalisation route for individuals whose profile, achievements or proposed contribution may justify Maltese citizenship on merit-based grounds.

Under the regulations, a person may qualify where he or she:

renders exceptional service to Malta or to humanity;
makes an exceptional contribution to Malta or to humanity; or
is of exceptional interest to Malta.

This marks the central difference from the previous model. The focus is no longer on a prescribed financial formula. The focus is now on exceptional value, reputation, contribution and Malta’s national interest.

The Old Direct Investment Provisions Have Been Deleted

The amended regulations expressly delete the former Part IV provisions dealing with naturalisation for exceptional services by direct investment. The previous provisions dealing with processing, requisites, oath, first five years, maximum admissions, and the former non-refundable fees and investment requirements were removed by Legal Notice 159 of 2025.

This is important for potential applicants. A person cannot approach the current framework as though it were the old investment route. There is no longer a simple “contribution plus property” pathway to citizenship.

How the New Process Works

The process now begins with a proposal letter . The applicant must submit a comprehensive proposal to the Evaluation Board through the Agency. This proposal must introduce the applicant, provide an overview of achievements, describe the exceptional service or contribution proposed, or explain why the applicant should be considered of exceptional interest to Malta. It must also include a plan showing how the applicant intends to continue contributing to Malta after naturalisation, should the application be successful.

Only applicants who receive a letter of approval in principle may proceed to submit a formal application for naturalisation on the basis of merit.

At application stage, the applicant must provide, among other things, proof of at least eight months’ residence in Malta before the application, proof of title to adequate residential property in Malta where applicable, confirmation of adequate knowledge of Maltese or English, and proof of ties created with Malta as proposed in the original proposal letter.

Due Diligence Remains Central

The new route is not simply an honours-based process. It remains subject to rigorous scrutiny.

The regulations provide for due diligence controls, including checks by third parties and internationally recognised specialised due diligence service providers. The controls are to be of a four-tier nature or more and may include security checks, anti-money laundering checks, terrorism financing checks, background verification and risk assessment.

The regulations also contain detailed disqualification grounds. These include matters relating to national security, public policy, public health, Interpol or Europol listing, serious criminality, terrorism, money laundering, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and conduct that may cause disrepute to Malta.

Ministerial Discretion

Citizenship by Merit remains highly discretionary. The Evaluation Board assesses the proposal and application, the Agency submits recommendations, and the Minister makes the final decision. The regulations state that the Minister is not obliged to provide reasons for the decision, and that the decision is final.

For applicants, this means that a strong legal submission is essential. The application must be credible, well-documented and aligned with Malta’s interests.

Continuing Obligations and Risk of Deprivation

The grant of citizenship may also carry continuing obligations. Before taking the oath of allegiance, the applicant must confirm in writing that he or she will continue to observe and fulfil the relevant commitments and obligations. The Agency may monitor these commitments and request proof of compliance.

The regulations also provide for deprivation of citizenship where a person fails to comply with material obligations or commitments, becomes a threat to national security, or acts in a manner seriously prejudicial to Malta’s interests.

What This Means for Prospective Applicants

The new Maltese Citizenship by Merit route is not suitable for every applicant. It is designed for individuals who can demonstrate exceptional achievement, exceptional contribution, or a compelling reason why their naturalisation would be of exceptional interest to Malta.

Potential candidates may include leading entrepreneurs, innovators, philanthropists, researchers, cultural figures, sports personalities, investors with a genuine strategic contribution, or individuals whose work carries measurable value for Malta or humanity.

The strongest applications will be those supported by independent evidence, a credible Malta-facing contribution plan, clear personal and professional reputation, clean due diligence, and a genuine connection with Malta.

How ARK Associates Can Assist

ARK Associates assists clients in assessing whether Citizenship by Naturalisation on the Basis of Merit may be an appropriate route in their circumstances.

Our work includes preliminary eligibility assessment, strategic case positioning, preparation of the proposal letter, supporting documentation, due diligence preparation, liaison with relevant authorities and guidance on Malta residence, property and continuing obligations.

This is a selective, discretionary and evidence-driven process. It requires careful preparation, legal clarity and a compelling narrative of merit.

For individuals whose achievements and proposed contribution align with Malta’s national interest, the new Citizenship by Merit route may represent an important opportunity to establish a lasting bond with Malta.

Malta’s Digital Nomad Scheme: A Practical Route for Remote Workers Seeking a European Base

Tue, 07 Apr 2026 12:32:54 GMT

Malta’s Digital Nomad Scheme: A Practical Route for Remote Workers Seeking a European Base

Malta’s Nomad Residence Permit has become one of the country’s most attractive relocation options for remote workers, entrepreneurs, consultants and internationally mobile professionals.

Commonly referred to as Malta’s “digital nomad visa”, the scheme allows eligible third-country nationals to reside in Malta while continuing to work remotely for employers, clients or businesses situated outside Malta.

It is particularly relevant for professionals who do not need to be physically present in their country of employment, but who wish to live in Malta and benefit from its European location, English-speaking environment, Mediterranean lifestyle and developed professional services infrastructure.

What is the Malta Nomad Residence Permit?

The Malta Nomad Residence Permit is a residence route administered by Residency Malta Agency. It is intended for non-EU, non-EEA and non-Swiss nationals who can perform their work remotely and independently of location, using telecommunications technology.

In practical terms, the permit is aimed at individuals who earn income from outside Malta while living in Malta.

This may include:

employees working for an employer registered outside Malta;
self-employed professionals providing services to clients outside Malta;
business owners or partners carrying out activity for a company registered outside Malta.

The key point is that the applicant’s professional activity must be foreign-facing. The permit is not designed as a route to take up local employment in Malta.

Who is the Scheme Designed For?

The scheme is especially suitable for:

remote employees;
technology professionals;
consultants;
freelancers;
online entrepreneurs;
founders managing foreign companies;
private clients seeking a flexible Malta residence solution;
families wishing to relocate to Malta while maintaining foreign income.

For many applicants, the attraction is that Malta offers a combination of practical advantages: English is an official language, the country is within the Schengen Area, the climate is favourable, and the legal and business environment is familiar to international clients.

Main Eligibility Requirements

Applicants must generally be at least 18 years old, able to work remotely, and able to show that their work can be performed independently of location through telecommunications technology. Residency Malta’s eligibility page also states that applicants must have a minimum gross yearly income of €42,000 .

Applicants are also typically expected to provide evidence of:

a valid travel document;
remote employment, self-employment or ownership of a foreign business;
sufficient income;
health insurance;
accommodation in Malta;
a clean background and due diligence profile.

Where family members are included, additional documentation will normally be required to prove the family relationship and dependency where applicable.

Legal and Tax Background

The residence permit operates within Malta’s immigration framework. Separate income tax rules apply to holders of Nomad Residence Permits, particularly through the Nomad Residence Permits (Income Tax) Rules , S.L. 123.210. These rules address the tax treatment of income derived from “authorised work” by individuals who hold a valid nomad residence permit in Malta.

The Malta Tax and Customs Administration has also issued guidelines on the tax treatment of nomad residence permit holders. These guidelines explain that a valid permit is issued in terms of the Immigration Act and grants a third-country national a licence to perform work in Malta limited to authorised work.

Applicants should not assume that immigration approval automatically resolves all tax questions. The tax position should be reviewed separately, particularly where the applicant has multiple sources of income, a foreign company, foreign tax residence, or extended physical presence in Malta.

Duration and Renewals

The Nomad Residence Permit is generally issued for a defined period and may be renewed, subject to continued eligibility and the discretion of the competent authorities. Renewal normally requires the applicant to continue satisfying the programme requirements and to remain compliant with Maltese law and programme conditions.

Applicants planning a longer stay should therefore treat the permit as a structured residence route requiring ongoing compliance, rather than a simple travel document.

Why Malta is Attractive for Digital Nomads

Malta offers a strong proposition for remote workers who want a European base without disconnecting from their existing international work.

The country offers:

English as an official language;
EU and Schengen location;
warm climate and Mediterranean lifestyle;
international schools and services;
professional banking, legal and corporate infrastructure;
strong connectivity with Europe and beyond;
a growing community of remote workers and entrepreneurs.

For the right applicant, Malta can serve as both a lifestyle destination and a practical operational base.

Common Mistakes Applicants Should Avoid

A successful application requires more than simply proving income. Applicants should avoid approaching the process casually. Common issues include:

unclear evidence of remote work;
income that does not meet the required threshold;
contracts showing Maltese clients or Maltese employment;
incomplete bank statements or financial evidence;
insufficient health insurance;
failure to consider tax residence implications;
inadequate documentation for dependants;
assuming approval is automatic.

The application should present a clear and coherent picture: who the applicant is, how income is generated, why the work is foreign-facing, and how the applicant will reside in Malta lawfully and sustainably.

How ARK Associates Can Assist

ARK Associates assists clients with Malta relocation and residence planning, including applications under the Nomad Residence Permit.

Our work includes preliminary eligibility assessment, review of employment or self-employment arrangements, documentation preparation, guidance on dependants, liaison with relevant authorities, and coordination with tax advisers where required.

For remote professionals, entrepreneurs and internationally mobile families, Malta’s digital nomad scheme can provide a flexible and attractive route to residence. The key is to structure the application properly from the outset and ensure that immigration, tax and practical relocation considerations are aligned.

Understanding Malta's 6/7 tax refund mechanism.

Tue, 04 Feb 2025 12:26:19 GMT

Learn how Malta’s 6/7 tax refund works, how it can reduce the effective tax rate on qualifying company profits, and why proper structuring and compliance are essential.

Malta’s 6/7 Tax Refund: Understanding Malta’s Corporate Tax Refund System

Malta’s corporate tax system is often misunderstood. On paper, Maltese companies are subject to tax at the standard corporate income tax rate of 35% . At first glance, this appears high when compared with other jurisdictions.

However, Malta operates a full imputation system , under which shareholders may, following a dividend distribution, become entitled to a refund of part — or in some cases all — of the tax paid by the company. The Malta Tax and Customs Administration explains that, where companies are taxed at the standard rate of 35%, shareholders may be entitled to a refund following the distribution of dividends, with the purpose of eliminating double taxation on distributed profits.

The most commonly discussed refund is the 6/7 refund , which can reduce the effective Malta tax leakage on qualifying distributed trading profits to approximately 5% .

How the 6/7 Refund Works

The 6/7 refund applies broadly where a Malta company distributes dividends out of qualifying taxed profits, typically active trading income, and the relevant statutory conditions are satisfied.

In simple terms:

A Malta company earns taxable profits.
The company pays corporate tax at 35%.
The company distributes post-tax profits as a dividend.
The shareholder may apply for a refund of 6/7 of the Malta tax paid by the company on those distributed profits.

For example:

Taxable profit: €100,000
Malta corporate tax at 35%: €35,000
Dividend available after tax: €65,000
6/7 refund of tax paid: €30,000
Net Malta tax retained: €5,000

This produces an effective Malta tax rate of approximately 5% on the distributed profits. KPMG’s Malta tax overview describes the 6/7 refund as the most common refund, stating that shareholders may be entitled to a refund of 6/7 of the tax paid by the Maltese company, resulting in an effective tax rate of 5%.

Why Malta Uses a Refund System

Malta’s system is built around the principle that the same profits should not be economically taxed twice — once in the hands of the company and again in the hands of the shareholder.

This is why Malta’s corporate tax system is not simply a low corporate tax rate regime. The company first pays tax at 35%. The refund mechanism operates at shareholder level, after a dividend is distributed and after the necessary refund claim is made.

This distinction is important. The refund is not automatic at company level. It is connected to the shareholder’s entitlement after distribution of profits.

When the 6/7 Refund Is Usually Relevant

The 6/7 refund is most relevant for companies carrying out active trading or commercial activities, particularly where the company is used as part of an international trading, services, consultancy, intellectual property, group holding or commercial structure.

It may be attractive for:

international trading companies;
service companies;
group structures with Maltese subsidiaries;
entrepreneurs expanding into or through Malta;
family-owned international businesses;
private client and holding structures, where properly planned.

The refund is generally associated with profits allocated to the Malta Taxed Account or Foreign Income Account, provided the relevant income does not fall within categories requiring a different refund treatment. PwC’s Malta corporate tax summary notes that shareholders receiving distributions from the Malta Taxed Account and/or Foreign Income Account may be entitled to refunds such as 6/7, 5/7 or 2/3 of the tax suffered by the distributing Maltese company.

Not Every Case Qualifies for 6/7

The 6/7 refund is not a universal rule for all income. Different refund rates may apply depending on the type of income and the tax treatment adopted by the company.

For example:

A 5/7 refund may apply where profits consist of passive interest or royalties, or certain dividend income from a non-qualifying participating holding.
A 2/3 refund may apply where the company has claimed certain forms of double taxation relief.
A full refund may apply in certain participating holding cases where the participation exemption has not been applied.

This is why each structure must be reviewed carefully. The nature of the income, source of profits, tax account allocation, shareholder profile, double tax relief position and distribution mechanics all matter.

Substance, Compliance and International Scrutiny

Modern Malta tax planning must be compliance-led. International tax structuring is no longer assessed only by reference to domestic tax law. Substance, management and control, beneficial ownership, transfer pricing, anti-abuse rules, exchange of information, DAC6, ATAD principles and OECD standards all need to be considered.

A Malta company should therefore not be treated as a paper entity. A robust structure should be supported by genuine commercial rationale, proper governance, accounting records, tax filings, corporate substance, board decision-making and appropriate local administration.

The 6/7 refund can be effective, but it must be used correctly and within a properly designed structure.

Timing and Practical Process

In practice, the refund process depends on several steps:

The company prepares financial statements.
The company files its tax return.
The company pays the tax due.
The company distributes dividends.
The shareholder files the tax refund claim.
The authorities process the refund.

The timing will depend on the correctness of the filings, whether the company is fully compliant, whether tax has been paid, whether all supporting documentation is available, and whether the shareholder refund claim has been properly prepared.

Why Professional Structuring Matters

The mathematics of the 6/7 refund are straightforward. The legal and tax analysis behind it is not always straightforward.

Before implementing a Malta company structure, it is important to assess:

where the company will be tax resident;
where management and control will be exercised;
whether the income is trading income, passive income, royalties, dividends or capital gains;
whether foreign tax credits or double tax relief are relevant;
whether the shareholders are resident, non-resident, individuals, trusts, companies or foundations;
whether withholding tax arises in another jurisdiction;
whether the structure is defensible under anti-abuse principles;
whether there is sufficient substance in Malta.

A structure that works well for one client may not be appropriate for another.

How ARK Associates Can Assist

ARK Associates assists clients with Malta corporate structuring, tax-efficient company planning and private client structures involving Maltese companies.

Our role includes legal structuring, coordination with tax advisers and auditors, company incorporation, governance planning, shareholder arrangements, substance considerations, dividend distribution planning and support with ongoing corporate compliance.

Malta’s 6/7 refund system remains one of the most distinctive features of the Maltese corporate tax landscape. Used correctly, it can provide an efficient and transparent tax outcome. Used incorrectly, it can create unnecessary compliance, audit and cross-border tax risks.

For international entrepreneurs, investors and family offices considering Malta, the starting point should always be a proper legal and tax assessment before implementation.