ZS

  • Services
  • Professionals
  • Insights
  • About Us
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Regional Coverage

Services

Banking and Finance

What does the draft Law on Digital Assets bring?

Friday, 16 October 2020 by ZS Law

The Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Serbia has published the Bill (Legal draft) of the Law on Digital Property („Draft“) with an invitation to the professionals and interested citizens to participate in the consultations that will take place in the period from October 13, 2020 to October 28, 2020.

The Draft aims to regulate the issuance and secondary trade in digital assets (“crypto-assets”), but also the provisions of services related to digital assets. In this way, Serbia should become one of the few countries that regulate digital property by special regulations.

In addition, it is worth mentioning that the Draft regulates a pledge on digital property, but also introduces special actions and measures to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing, in connection with digital property.

Here is a brief overview of the most important solutions from Draft:

Defining Digital Assets and Virtual Currencies

Digital Assets is defined as a digital record of value that can be digitally bought, sold, exchanged or transferred and which can be used as a means of exchange or for investment purposes.

Virtual currency is defined as a type of digital asset that is not issued and whose value is not guaranteed by the Central bank or other public authority, which is not necessarily tied to a legal tender, has no legal status of money or currency, but is accepted by individuals or legal entities and it can be bought, sold, exchanged, transmitted and stored electronically.

The provisions of the Draft Law do not apply to “mining” and transactions within limited networks

The law does not apply to: 1) transactions with digital assets if they are performed exclusively within a limited network of persons who accept these digital assets; 2) Acquisition of digital assets by participating in the provision of computer transaction confirmation service (“minning”). Mining is allowed but the provisions of this Draft do not apply to property acquired in this way, however, persons who acquire property in this way may dispose it through Digital property service providers in which case the Law applies, (or through the OTC market).

Who can provide digital asset services and what are those services?

Only a company registered in the Republic of Serbia can be a Provider of services related to digital assets (“Provider”). Registered Providers may perform some or all of the following: receiving, transferring and executing orders relating to the purchase and sale of digital assets on behalf of third parties; services for the purchase and sale of digital assets for cash and/or funds in the account and/or electronic money; digital asset exchange services for other digital assets; storage and administration of digital assets for the account of users of digital assets and related services; services related to the issuance, offer and sale of digital property, with the obligation to purchase it, or without that obligation; keeping a register of pledges on digital property; digital asset acceptance/transfer services; digital asset portfolio management

The draft regulates in more detail the procedure for obtaining a permit from the competent authority to perform activities as Provider.  Also prescribes the amounts of roles, the manner of registration, the election of members, the personnel organization and general acts of Provider, as well as status changes and termination of the license.

Who can be a counselor?

The Draft does not prescribe the obligation for a person who wants to engage in advisory activities to obtain a permit from the competent authority, but he can do so. If a person does not obtain a permit, he is obliged to inform each of his users, as well as to indicate it on his website. This activity can be performed by companies, entrepreneurs or persons who, in business form, perform the activity of a free profession.

Issuance of digital assets and their marketing

Whoever wants to issue digital assets can do so as an Issuer through a few steps. First, it compiles a “white paper” and obtains permission from the supervisory authority to publish it. The white paper contains prescribed elements, and the issuer is responsible for untruthfulness, as well as the independent auditor in the part of the financial report which is an integral part of the white paper, as well as a third party if he has taken responsibility for the accuracy of any white paper elements. The issuer must publish a white paper on his website before the initial offer of digital property. Access is public and free, without registration or giving a statement of acceptance of the limitation of legal liability. The publisher may also advertise the sale on his website, but only in accordance with the provisions of the Law. The start of registration and payment of digital property begins no later than 30 days from the date of publication of the “white paper”. payments are made in cash, digital assets or in the services of the acquirer of property – e.g. by transferring digital assets, if acquired by mining (“minning”). After a successful initial sale, the issuer notifies the competent authority. If the “white paper” is not approved, it is possible to advertise the sale of such digital assets, but with the obligatory indication that the white paper is not approved.

Secondary trading in digital assets for which “white paper” has been issued and for which no “white paper” has been issued is allowed. It is performed by a Provider who is registered as the organizer of the platform. OTC trading is also allowed for the use of transactions under the OTC market (without platforms). The contracting parties are not obliged to use the services of  the providers.

Virtual assets as an investment in the share capital of a company

Virtual currencies cannot be used as a cash investment in a company. Non-monetary contributions to the company may be in digital tokens not related to the provision of services or performance of work. Extremely non-monetary contributions to the partnership and limited partnership may also be in digital tokens related to the provision of services or performance of work.

Digital asset protection

Provider is prohibited from:

Pledging or alienating the digital property without prior written authorization; executes user orders in a manner that is not in accordance with Law and the acts of the supervisory body, ie the acts of the platform organizer;  buys, sells or lends for its own account the same digital property that is the subject of the user’s order before acting on the user’s order; charges commissions and other fees from the digital assets that keeps and administers; encourages users to perform transactions frequently solely for the purpose of charging a commission. The provider is obliged to conclude a contract with the user of digital property which determines the rights and obligations of the contracting parties, as well as other conditions which the provider services.

Virtual currency service providers are obliged to submit to the Central bank:

Data on entrepreneurs and legal entities that are holders of virtual currencies, in addition to company identification data and the date of establishment and termination of business with the virtual currency holder and the address of the virtual currency used or used for the currency transaction.

Provider is obliged to act in accordance with the regulations governing the protection of personal data when collecting and processing personal data (GDPR).

Pledge on digital assets

The Draft specifically prescribes the possibility of establishing a pledge on digital property, prescribes mandatory elements of the pledge agreement – mandatory written or electronic form, but also the possibility of concluding as “Smart contract”.

Pledge is acquired by registration in the register kept by the Provider.  This indicates that the legislator did not decide to form a central register of pledges on digital property. The register maintained by the Provider is public and accessible to all.

The Settlement of pledge can also be done by public bidding. It is especially stated that the pledge creditor becomes a secured creditor after initiating bankruptcy over the pledge debtor.

Supervision

Supervision over the implementation of the Law, as well as the Law on Prevention of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing over digital service Providers, is carried out by the Central Bank of Serbia and the Securities Commission, through indirect (collection and analysis of reports and other documentation and data submitted by the supervised entity) and direct supervision (inspection of business books and other documentation and data of the subject of supervision). For all additional questions related to this topic, feel free to contact the lawyers Sava Pavlović, sava.pavlovic@zslaw.rs and  Tihomir Vlaović, tihomir.vlaovic@zslaw.rs or your regular contact at the Law Office Živković Samardžić.


Šta donosi nacrt Zakona o digitalnoj imovini?

Ministarstvo finansija Republike Srbije objavilo je Nacrt Zakona o digitalnoj imovini sa pozivom stručnoj javnosti i zainteresovanim građanima da učestvuju u konsultacijama koje će se odvijati u periodu od 13. oktobra 2020. godine do 28. oktobra 2020. godine.

Zakon, čiji je nacrt objavljen, ima za cilj da reguliše izdavanje i sekundarnu trgovinu digitalnom imovinom („crypto-assets“), ali i pružanje usluga povezanih s digitalnom imovinom. Na ovaj način, Srbija bi trebalo da postane jedna od malobrojnih država koje posebnim propisima regulišu digitalnu imovinu.

Osim toga, vredno pomena je i to da Nacrt predviđa mogućnost uspostavljanja zaloge na digitalnoj imovini, ali i to da Nacrt uvodi posebne radnje i mere za sprečavanje pranja novca i finansiranja terorizma, a u vezi s digitalnom imovinom.

U nastavku pružamo kratak pregled najvažnijih rešenja koje Nacrt predviđa.

Definisanje Digitalne imovine i Virtuelne valute

Nacrt, između ostalog, sadrži i definicije Digitalne imovine,tj.virtuelne imovine – to je digitalni zapis vrednosti koji se može digitalno kupovati, prodavati, razmenjivati ili prenositi i koji se može koristiti kao sredstvo razmene ili u svrhu ulaganja. Ne podrazumevaju se ovim digitalni zapisi valuta koje su zakonsko sredstvo plaćanja i drugu finansijsku imovinu koja je uređena drugim zakonima.

Dodatno, Virtuelna valuta je definisana kao vrsta digitalne imovine koju nije izdala i za čiju vrednost ne garantuje centralna banka, niti drugi organ javne vlasti, koja nije nužno vezana za zakonsko sredstvo plaćanja i nema pravni status novca ili valute, ali je fizička ili pravna lica prihvataju kao sredstvo razmene i može se kupovati, prodavati, razmenjivati, prenositi i čuvati elektronski.

Odredbe Nacrta zakona se ne primenjuju na „rudarenje“ i transakcije u okviru ograničenih mreža lica

Zakon se ne primenjuje na: 1) transakcije s digitalnom imovinom ako se vrše isključivo u okviru ograničene mreže lica koja prihvataju tu digitalnu imovinu; 2) Sticanje digitalne imovine učestvovanjem u pružanju usluge računarskog potvrđivanja transakcija (rudarenje „minning“, naime rudarenje jeste dozvoljeno ali se na imovinu stečenu tim putem ne primenjuju odredbe ovog nacrta zakona, međutim, lica koja na taj način steknu imovinu mogu njome raspolagati preko pružaoca usluga u vezi sa digitalnom imovinom u kom slučaju se primenjuje Zakon, a mogu i preko OTC tržišta).

Ko može da pruža usluge  povezane sa digitalnom imovinom i koje su to usluge?

Pružalac usluga u vezi sa digitalnom imovinom može biti samo privredno društvo registrovano u Republici Srbiji. Registrovani pružaoci mogu obavljati neke ili sve od sledećih radnji: prijem, prenos iizvršenje naloga koji se odnose na kupovinu i prodaju digitalne imovine za račun trećih lica; usluge kupovine i prodaje digitalne imovine za gotov novac i/ili sredstva na računu i/ili elektronski novac; usluge zamene digitalne imovine za drugu digitalnu imovinu; čuvanje i administriranje digitalne imovine za račun korisnika digitalne imovine i sa tim povezane usluge; usluge u vezi sa izdavanjem, ponudom i prodajomdigitalne imovine, sa obavezom njenog otkupa (pokroviteljstvo) ili bez te obaveze (agentura); vođenje registra založnog prava na digitalnoj imovini; usluge prihvatanja/prenosa digitalne imovine; upravljanje portfoliom digitalne imovine; organizovanje platforme za trgovanje digitalnom imovinom.

Nacrt detaljnije uređuje proceduru pribavljanja dozvole nadležnog organa za obavljanje delatnosti povezane sa digitalnom imovinom, ali propisuje i visine uloga, način registracije, izbor članova, kadrovsku organizaciju, opšte akte pružaoca usluga povezanih sa digitalnom imovinom, njihove statusne promene, registar pružaoca usluga povezanih sa digitalnom imovinom i prestanak važenja dozvole.

Ko može biti pružalac savetodavnih usluga?

Nacrt zakona ne propisuje obavezu licu koje želi da se bavi savetodavnom delatnošću da pribavlja dozvolu nadležnog organa, ali to može učiniti ukoliko želi. Ako lice ne pribavi dozvolu, dužno je svakom svom korisniku to da saopšti, kao i da naznači na svom Internet sajtu. Ovom delatnošću se mogu baviti privredna društva, preduzetnici i fizička lica koja u vidu zanimanja obavljaju delatnost slobodne profesije.

Izdavanje digitalne imovine i njeno plasiranje na tržište

Lice koje želi da izda digitalnu imovinu može to učiniti kao Izdavalac kroz nekoliko koraka. Prvo, sačinjava „beli papir“ i pribavlja dozvolu nadzornog organa da ga objavi. Beli papir sadrži propsiane elemente, a za neistinitost odgovara izdavalac, ali i nezavisni revizor u delu finansijskog izveštaja koji je sastavni deo belog papira, kao i treće lice ako je preuzelo odgovornost za tačnost nekog od elemenata belog papira.  Izdavalac mora objaviti beli papir na svojoj internet stranici pre inicijane ponude digitalne imovine, pristup mora biti bez registracije, davanje izjave o prihvatanju ograničenja pravne odgovornosti, niti sme podleći nekoj naknadi. Izdavalac može i oglašavati prodaju na svom Internet sajtu, ali samo u skladu sa odredbama Zakona.

Početak upisa i uplate digitalne imovine počinje najkasnije 30 dana od dana objave „belog papira“ (sadrži podatke o izdavaocu digitalne imovine, digitalnoj imovini i rizicima povezanih s digitalnom imovinom), a uplate se vrše u novčanim sredstvima, digitalnoj imovini ili u uslugama sticaoca imovine – npr. prenosom digitalne imovine, ako je stečena rudarenjem („minning“). Nakon uspešne inicijalne prodaje, izdavalac obaveštava nadležni organ. Ukoliko „beli papir“ nije odobren, moguće je oglašavati prodaju i takve digitalne imovine, ali uz obavezno naznačenje da nije odobren beli papir.

Sekundarno trgovanje digitalnom imovinom za koju je izdat i za koju nije izdat „beli papir“ je dozvoljeno, vrši ga Pružalac usluga  povezanih sa digitalnom imovinom koji je za to registrovan kao organizator platforme. OTC trgovanje je takođe dozvoljeno i za korišćenje transakcija na OTC tržištu  (bez platformi), ugovorne strane nisu dužne da koriste usluge pružaoca usluga povezanih sa digitalnom imovinom.

 Virtuelna imovina kao ulog u osnovni kapital privrednog društva

Virtuelne valute se ne mogu unositi kao novčani ulog u privredno društvo. Nenovčani ulozi u privredno društvo mogu biti u digitalnim tokenima koji se ne odnose na pružanje usluga ili izvršenje rada, izuzetno nenovčani ulozi u ortačko i komanditno društvo mogu biti i u digitalnim tokenima koji se odnose na pružanje usluga ili izvršenje rada.

Zaštita digitalne imovine

Pružaocu usluga povezanih s digitalnom imovinom je zabranjeno da zalaže ili otuđuje digitalnu imovinu korisnika bez njegovog prethodnog pisanog ovlašćenja; izvršava naloge korisnika na način koji nije u skladu s ovim nacrtom Zakona i aktima nadzornog organa, odnosno aktima organizatora platforme; kupuje, prodaje ili pozajmljuje za sopstveni račun istu digitalnu imovinu koja je predmet naloga korisnika pre postupanja po nalogu korisnika; naplaćuje provizije i druge naknade iz digitalne imovine koju čuva i kojom administrira; podstiče korisnike na učestalo obavljanje transakcija isključivo radi naplate provizije. Pružaoc usluga povezanih sa digitalnom imovinom dužan je da sa korisnikom digitalne imovine zaključi ugovor kojim se utvrđuju prava i obaveze ugovornih strana, kao i ostali uslovi pod kojima pružalac usluga povezanih s digitalnom imovinom pruža usluge.

Pružaoci usluga povezani sa virtualnim valutama dužni su dostaviti NBS-u podatke o preduzetnicima i pravnim licima koji su imaoci virtualnih valuta i to pored identifikacionih podataka društva i datum uspostavljanja i prestanka poslovnog odnosa s imaocem virtuelnih valuta, kao i datum druge promene povezanih s tim poslovnim odnosom; vrstu usluge; adresu virtuelnih valuta  koju koristi odnosno koju je koristio za transakciju valuta, kao i ostale podatke na zahtev NBS.

Pružalac usluga povezanih sa digitalnom imovinom je dužan pri prikupljanju i obradi podataka o ličnosti postupa u skladu sa propisima koji uređuju zaštitu podataka o ličnosti.

Zaloga na digitalnoj imovini

Zakon posebno propisuje mogućnost zasnivanja založnog prava na digitalnoj imovini, propisuje obavezne elemente ugovora o zalozi, obaveznu pismenu ili elektronsku formu, ali i mogućnost zaključenja tzv. „pametnog ugovora“.

Založno pravo se stiče upisom u registar koji vodi pružalac usluga povezanih sa digitalnom imovinom, i to kod onog pružaoca koji zalogodavcu administrira digitalnu imovinu, što ukazuje da se zakonodavac nije opredelio za formiranje objedinjenog registra zaloga na digitalnoj imovini. Registar koji vodi pružalac usluge je javan i dostupan svima.

Priroda zaloge na virtuelnoj imovini i namirenje iz nje regulisani su postojećim propisima kojima se reguliše zaloga, a namirenje se može vršiti i javnim nadmetanjem. Posebno je naznačeno da založni poverilac postaje razlučni poverilac nakon pokretanja stečaja nad založnim dužnikom. 

Nadzor

Nadzor nad sporvođenjem Zakona, kao i  Zakona o sprečavanju pranja novca i finansiranja terorizma nad pružaocem usluge povezane sa digitalnom imovinom, sprovode NBS i Komisija HOV, kroz posredan (prikupljanjem i analizom izveštaja i druge dokumentacije i podataka koje subjekt nadzora dostavlja nadzornom organu) i neposredan nadzor (uvidom u poslovne knjige i drugu dokumentaciju i podatke subjekta nadzora).

Za sva dodatna pitanja u vezi sa ovom temom, kontaktirajte advokate Savu Pavlovića, sava.pavlovic@zslaw.rs, Tihomira Vlaovića, tihomir.vlaovic@zslaw.rs, ili vaš redovan kontakt u Advokatskoj Kancelariji Živković Samardžić.

Sava PavlovićTihomir Vlaović
Read more
  • Published in Client Updates
No Comments

Esports and the very long arm of the law

Friday, 09 October 2020 by ZS Law

The biggest issues facing professional players in the Republic of Serbia

Esports, for the uninitiated, are multiplayer video games played competitively for spectators, currently the most famous examples include Dota 2, Counter-Strike GO, LoL, Fornite, Overwatch and World of Tanks. In the recent years the Esport scene has slowly abandoned the premises of internet cafes and weekend Lan parties and has taken to the spotlight by being broadcast worldwide through prominent television channels such as ESPN and through platforms of newcomers in the digital age of entertainment such as Twitch, Youtube and Facebook Live. Back in 2016, Belgrade was host to the World championship in CS:GO with a humbling prize pool of 100.000 EUR. By comparison, just last year the prize pool for the Dota 2 International championship was in excess of 34.000.000,00 USD not to mention Epic games investing a total of 100.000.000,00 USD in Fortnite tournaments all across the world. One thing is for certain, the landscape of entertainment is changing drastically and the younger generations will be its torchbearers.

During this year’s COVID-19 pandemic, with the large absence of traditional sports coverage, Esports came out on top as being one of the most watched forms of entertainment available. To get a clear picture of the European Esports market, Deloitte ran two extensive surveys focused on the different segments of the European Esports industry, the direct market participants and company representatives from across the industry, both of which concluded in June 2020. In these findings it is worth to note that 77% of the organizations invested in Esports stated that they managed to increase their revenues compared to 2018 accompanied by a boost in user numbers, which was classified as sign of a dynamically developing industry. Furthermore, the market for mergers and acquisitions in this area had a cash flow of 1.7 billion EUR in global transaction volume in the last year.

But what does this all mean for the professional players, managers, team owners and even the viewers? The legal implications of Esports have been ignored in most part by state authorities but that is bound to change in the coming years with the unrelenting and exponential growth of the industry. The lawmakers will have their hands full with issues such as copyright – video games are protected under copyright law and as such broadcasting of the tournament or live streaming on the internet, without the prior approval of the copyright holder i.e. the publisher, might be considered an infringement on the author’s exploitation rights, not to mention the fact that the publisher can alter the rules of the game by altering its source code. Gambling laws – an increasing number of video games have in game purchases called “loot-boxes” where the rewards are randomized but are acquired with real money, while certain jurisdictions such as China or Belgium have already designated these purchases as gambling or have out right banned them, most of the European states have yet to address this issue.

Employment laws – different Esports have different formats for competing, some are individual (Street Fighter V) while some are team based (League of Legends, Overwatch) with Esport players often being under contract with a professional Esports team. Currently players are typically employed under a “provision of services contract”, with the players being hired as a physical person / executor of work and paid a fee or as an entrepreneur having to issue invoices to their teams. There are instances where video game publisher required a specific type of contract between player and team, for instance, Riot games, required all NA and EU League Championship Series players to be employed by a team from 2017 onwards as a pre-condition to be eligible for a tournament. In contrast to executors of work i.e. contractors, players who are hired as employees are paid a salary. Whether a player is classed as an employee or a contractor can have real impact on both the player and the team in terms of obligations and money. Generally speaking, employees have higher legal protection and employers have higher obligations and both employer and employee usually pay higher taxes.  Team draft changes are extremely common in Esports and with the issue of constant employment change, visas for competing in tournaments held in foreign countries (which can vary depending if the country in question recognizes Esports as a sport) there are numerous other issues which have already been regulated for traditional sports such as minimum wage, paid holidays, sick pay, etc.

The question of employment transfers over to the most pressing issue for upcoming professional players –  taxes. Professional players must be aware of the tax implications of their earnings, including how their tournament winnings, player salaries, streaming income/donations and sponsorship funds are typically taxed.

Before delving into these issues it must be analysed if existing sport regulation is applicable to professional gamers. Under the Law on Sports of Republic of Serbia a professional athlete is defined as a person who is engaged in sports activity as his only or basic occupation, or an athlete who has the status of a professional athlete in accordance with the sports rules of the competent international sports federation, whereas sports activities are all forms of physical and mental activity which, through unorganized or organized participation, aim to express or improve physical fitness and spiritual well-being, create social relationships or achieve results in competitions of all levels. By this broad definition, which leans on the internationally recognized standards for sports, it can be concluded that professional gamers can be treated as athletes if they fulfil the above mentioned criteria.

As stipulated by the Law on Sports a professional athlete establishes an employment relationship with a sports organization by concluding an employment contract, for a definite period of time, with a maximum of five years. This employment contract must determine the salary and other incomes of the professional athlete in accordance with relevant laws. Other incomes of a professional athlete or gamer are not characterized as salary, meaning that they are taxed differently. The salary tax is 10% on top of the contributions for social security insurance which can amount to an additional 36%. Any winnings the professional gamer achieves throughout tournaments and competitions is taxed at a rate of 20% where the gross income of the winnings is reduced beforehand by 50% on the account of standard costs, all under the prior condition that this type of income must be paid by sports organizations, associations or federations. Income not paid by sports organizations, sports associations or federations is taxed at a rate of 20% and standard costs which are deducted represent 20% of the gross income.

As a general rule, the location of a specific tournament dictates which tax laws are applicable to a particular tournament prize pool. As an example, the 2016 Dota 2 “The International” was located in the U.S. and boasted a $20.7 million prize pool. Therefore, the players that won a portion of this prize pool, even those who were not U.S. residents, were subject to United States federal income tax on these winnings. With Esports the question where the outcome-defining activities manifest themselves becomes extremely relevant in determining which jurisdiction has the right of taxation on income made from tournament winnings. This is especially relevant in online tournaments. Are the income generating activities performed in the country where the player takes part in the competition, the country in which the team is established, in in the country where the servers are located or in the country of residence of the tournament organizer?  A professional gamer who is a Serbian resident is subject to taxation in Serbia on their worldwide income which means that tournament winnings awarded in foreign countries can lead to potential double taxation. It is of note that Serbia has entered into a significant number of multilateral and bilateral treaties based on the OECD Model Tax Convention in order to avoid this very issue. In practice, this means that cross-border European Esports employers and professional players will need legal and tax advice to ensure they have the proper employer tax setup.

Professional gamers are also profiting from new forms of compensation, including sponsorships and income from streaming through partnerships with streaming websites and donations from their viewers all of which are subject to different types of taxation. In regards to donations, it is worth pointing out that the money received as a donation from the same person, up to the amount of 100,000 RSD in one calendar year, is excluded from taxes while any amount exceeding this is subject to a 2,5% gift tax. The issue which arises is how is a streamer to know when one person has donated funds which exceed the legal minimum when the donations are conducted through online aliases which make the donator practically anonymous to the streamer.

Sponsorship fall into a different category on their own. When a sponsor gives a certain amount of money to the professional gamer or their team, who will in return publicly and in an agreed manner make it known that they are sponsored by a specific brand, this will be regarded as a transaction of services provided by the professional gamer or his team to the sponsor, which will then be subject to VAT. However, for the sponsors themselves it is relevant that the costs of advertising and propaganda are recognized as an expense in full in the tax balance.

Similar to any other type of income, benefits which professional gamers receive from their teams or sponsor are also taxed based on the fair market value of the benefit. For example, if a gamer received free air miles or products from a sponsor, they will be taxed based on the fair market value of those miles or products.

Even though the situation currently might not demand it, it is apparent that when negotiating the terms of their next gaming contract, professional gamers as well as their teams should utilise the advice of their tax advisor or legal professionals to determine the best way to structure the various forms of compensation they receive. In this regard our law office, along with the assistance of ZSTAX, provides the full scope of services necessary to ensure optimal legal security in the coming years.


Esport i vrlo dugačka ruka zakona

Najveći problemi sa kojima se suočavaju profesionalni Esport igrači u Republici Srbiji

Esport, za neupućene, su multiplayer igre koje se igraju u takmičarskom okruženju za gledaoce. Trenutno najpopularnije igre u ovoj sferi su Dota 2, Counter-Strike: GO, LoL, Fortnite, Overwatch i World of Tanks. U prethodnim godinama Esport scena je polako napustila igraonice i lokalne Lan turnire i našla se u centru pažnje emitovanjem na prominentnim kanalima kao što su ESPN i na platformama pridošlica digitalnog doba zabave kao što su Twitch, Youtube i Facebook Live. Još u 2016. godini Beograd je bio domaćin Svetskog šampionata u CS:GO koji je imao skromni nagradni fond od 100.000 EUR. Poređenja radi, samo prošle godine, nagradni fond za Dota 2 Međunarodni šampionat “The International” iznosio je preko 34.000.000,00 USD. Pri tom ne treba ni spomenuti da je Epic games investirao ukupno 100.000.000,00 USD u Fortnite turnire organizovane širom sveta. Jedna stvar je sigurna, pejzaž interaktivne zabave se menja drastično i mlađe generacije su njegovi pioniri.

Za vreme ovogodišnje COVID-19 pandemije praćene primetnim odsustvom prenosa tradicionalnih sportova, Esport se probio kao jedan od najgledanijih oblika zabave. U cilju dobijanja jasne slike evropskog Esport tržišta, Deloitte je sproveo dve ekstenzivne studije koje su bile fokusirane na različite aspekte evropske Esport industrije, prvo na direktne učesnike na tržištu a zatim i na predstavnike kompanija širom industije, obe studije su završene u junu 2020. godine. U nalazima ovih studija značajno je ukazati da je 77% organizacija investiranih u Esport navela da uspevaju da povećaju svoje prihode u poređenju sa 2018. godinom uz dodatno povećanjee broja korisnika, što je klasifikovano kao znak industrije koja je praćena dinamičnim razvojem. Dodatno, tržište za M&A transakcije u ovoj oblasti u toku prethodne godine videlo je protok kapitala u iznosu od 1.7 milijardi EUR u transakcijama na globalnom nivou.

Ali šta ovo znači za profesionalne igrače, menadžere, vlasnike timova čak i gledaoce? Pravne implikacije Esporta su dugo vremena bile ignorisane od strane državnih vlasti ali i to je neizbežno da se promeni u predstojećim godinama usled neprestanog i eksponencijalnog rasta ove industrije. Zakonodavci će imati pune ruke sa pitanjima kao što su autorska prava – video igre su zaštićene putem autorskih prava i kao takve emitovanje turnira ili streamovanje uživo putem internet, bez prethodno pribavljene saglasnosti nosioca autorskog prava tj. izdavača, može predstavljati povredu autorovih prava na komercijalno iskorišćavanje dela, ovo i bez da spomenemo da izdavač može menjati pravila igre izmenama source koda. Zakoni o igrama na sreću – sve veći broj video igara sadrži mogućnost za dodatne transakcije unutar samih igara koje su kolokvijalno zovu “loot-boxes” a koje sadrže nagrade koje su nasumično dodeljene i koje nagrade mogu da variraju u svojoj vrednosti po kojoj se preprodaju putem eksternih web siteova. Pojedine zemlje kao što su Belgija i Kina već su svojim zakonima okarakterisale ove vrste transakcija kao podvrstu igara na sreću, ili su ih čak izričito zabranile, dok većina evropskih država tek treba da adresira ovo pitanje.

Radno pravo – različiti Esportovi imaju različite formate za takmičenje, neki su individualni (Street Fighter V) dok su neki timski (League of Legends, Overwatch) gde su profesionalni igrači uglavnom pod ugovorom zaključenim sa profesionalnim Esport timom. Trenutno igrači su tipično angažovani putem ugovora o pružanju usluga, gde su igrači najčešće angažovani u vidu izvršioca posla za šta im se isplaćuje naknada ili u vidu preduzetnika u kom slučaju izdaju račun timu za svoje usluge. Postoje slučajevi gde izdavači Esport video igara zahtevaju posebnu vrstu ugovora između igrača i tima. Primera radi, Riot games od 2017. godine zahteva od svih igrača koji učestvuju u Severnoameričkoj i Evropskoj Seriji Lige Šampiona da bude zaposleni od strane svog tima kako bi bili kvalifikovani da učestvuje na turnirima. U odnosu na igrače angažovane kao izvršioce posla, igrači koji su zaposleni u timu igraju za platu. Da li je igrač klasifikovan tj angažovan kao zaposleni ili na neki drugi način može imati veliki uticaj kako na samog igrača tako i na tim u pogledu obaveza i novca. Uopšteno govoreći, zaposleni imaju veću pravnu zaštitu a poslodavci veće obaveze a zaposleni i poslodavac zajedno plaćaju veće poreze i doprinose u odnosu na druge vidove angažovanja. Promene postave timova su ekstremno česte u Esportu i zajedno za problemom stalne promene zaposlenja, vizama za učestvovanje na turnirima koji se održavaju u stranim zemljama (koje mogu da variraju u zavisnosti od toga da li država domaćin priznaje Esport kao spor) postoji bezbroj drugih problema koji su već regulisani u tradicionalnom sportovima kao što su minimalna zarada, plaćeni odmori, prekovremeni rad, bolovanje itd.

Pitanje zaposlenja se prenosi na možda najbitnije pitanje za buduće profesionalne igrače – porezi. Profesionalni igrači moraju biti svesni poreskih implikacija njihove zarade, što uključuje znanje o tome kako se obračunava i plaća porez na njihove nagrade sa turnira, zarade, prihodi/donacije dobijene putem streamovanja i sponzorstva.

Pre nego što se upustimo u analizu ovih problema moramo postaviti pitanje da li je postojeća regulativa sporta primenjiva na profesionalne Esport igrače. Prema Zakonu o sportu Republike Srbije profesionalni sportista je sportista koji se bavi sportskom aktivnošću kao jedinim ili osnovnim zanimanjem i drugi sportista koji ima status profesionalnog sportiste u skladu sa sportskim pravilima nadležnog međunarodnog sportskog saveza, gde se sportske aktivnosti definišu kao svi oblici fizičke i umne aktivnosti koji, kroz neorganizovano ili organizovano učešće, imaju za cilj izražavanje ili poboljšanje fizičke spremnosti i duhovnog blagostanja, stvaranje društvenih odnosa ili postizanje rezultata na takmičenjima svih nivoa. Prema ovoj dosta široko postavljenoj definiciji koja se u određenoj meri oslanja na međunarodne standarde, profesionalni Esport igrači mogu se tretirati kao sportisti ukoliko ispunjavaju gore navedene kriterijume.

Kao što je navedeno Zakonom o sportu profesionalni sportista zasniva radni odnos sa sportskom organizacijom zaključenjem ugovora o radu, na određeno vreme, najduže do pet godina. Ovim ugovorom o radu mora biti utvrđena zarada i drugi prihodi profesionalnog sportiste u skladu sa zakonom. Drugi prihodi profesionalnog sportiste i Esport igrača nisu okarakterisani kao zarada, što znači da se oporezuju po drugom osnovu. Porez na zaradu je 10% povrh doprinosa za obavezno socijalno osiguranje koji mogu iznositi dodatnih 36%. Sve nagrade koje Esport igrač osvoji kroz učešće na turnirima i kroz druga takmičenja oporezuju se kao prihodi sportista po stopi od 20% gde se priznaju normirani troškovi od 50% putem umanjenja bruto prihoda sve pod uslovom da ova primanja isplaćuju sportske organizacije, udruženja ili savezi. Prihodi koji nisu isplaćeni od strane sportskih organizacija, udruženja ili saveza oporezuje se takođe po stopi od 20% kao dodatni prihod ali priznati normirani troškovi iznose 20% na bruto prihod.

Kao opšte pravilo lokacija pojedinačnog turnira dikitira koji se poreski zakoni primenjuju na određene nagrade iz nagradnog fonda. Kao primer, svetsko takmičenje iz Dota 2 “The international” koje je 2016. godine održano u Sjedinjenim Američkim Državama imalo je nagradni fond koji je bio nešto preko 20 miliona USD. Igrači koji su osnovjili deo ove nagrade, čak i oni koji nisu državljani SAD, bili su u obavezi da plate federalni porez na dohodak koji naplaćuje SAD. Kada je u pitanju Esport pitanje gde se ispoljavaju radnje po osnovu kojih se postiže određeni rezultat u takmičenju postaje izuzetno relevantno prilikom utvrđivanja koja jurisdikcija ima pravo da oporezuje nagrade dobijene za pobedničke plasmane na takmičenjima. Ovo je naročito relevantno kada se turniri održavaju online. Da li se aktivnosti koje predstavljaju izvor prihoda preduzimaju u mestu gde se profesionalni igrač nalazi prilikom učešća na turniru, u državi u kojoj je tim osnovan, u državi u kojoj se nalaze serveri preko kojih se takmičenje održava ili u državi porekla organizatora turnira? Profesionalni igrač koji je državljanin Republike Srbije u obavezi je da izmiri porez prema Republici Srbiji na sve nagrade osvojene širom sveta što u praksi znači da nagrade osvojene u stranim zemljama mogu voditi do potencijalnog dvostrukog oporezivanja. Bitno je naglasiti je da je Republika Srbija potpisnica značajnog broja multilateralnih i bilaterlanih sporazuma o izbegavanju dvostrukog oporezivanja koji su bazirani na O.E.C.D. modelu kao i da je potpisnica Multilateralne konvencije koja je suštinski, kada je reč o Srbiji počela da se primenjuje od oktobra 2018. godine, sve u cilju regulisanja ovoga problema. U praksi, ovo znači da Esport igrači i njihovi poslodavci moraju zatražiti pravni i poreski savet kako bi osigurali optimalan poreski tretman koji je u svačijem zajedničkom interesu.

Profesionalni igrači takođe profitiraju putem drugih oblika kompenzacije uključujući sponzorstva i prihode od streamovanja kroz partnerstva sa websajtovima koji pružaju usluge streamovanja a koji su svi podložni različitim poreskim tretmanima. U pogledu domacija prilikom streamovanja, bitno je ukazati na to da novac koji je primljen na ime donacije od strane istog fizičkog lica i koji ne prelazi iznos od 100.000 RSD u jednoj kalendarskoj godini ne predstavlja oporeziv prihod dok iznos koji prelazi ovu granicu podleže porezu na poklon od 2,5% i čiji je obveznik poklonoprimac. Problem koji se ovde javlja je kako da osoba koja streamuje svoj sadržaj stekne saznanje o tome kada je jedan donator premašio navedeni zakonski maksimum kada se donacije sprovode putem lako promenjivih online nadimaka koji čine donatora praktično anonimnim.

Sponzorstva spadaju u potpuno drugačiju kategoriju. Kada sponzor daje primaocu sponzorstva određeni novčani iznos, a primalac sponzorstva zauzvrat javno i na ugovoreni način ističe da je sponzorisan od strane sponzora i na drugi način reklamira sponzora, radi se o prometu usluga koji primalac sponzorstva vrši sponzoru, a koji je predmet oporezivanja PDV. Za sponozora je od značaja da troškovi reklame i propagande priznaju se kao rashod u poreskom bilansu u celosti.

Slično kao i drugi osnovi prihoda, benefiti koje profesionalni igrač primi od svog tima ili sponzora takođe se oporezuju po njihovoj tržišnoj vrednosti. Primera radi, ukoliko profesionalni ograč budu obezbeđeni letovi od strane tima ili proizvodi od sponzora, oni će biti oporezivani na način da će se kao poreska osnovica uzeti tržišna vrednost troškova leta ili proizvoda a obveznik poreza biće sam profesionalni igrač.

Iako trenutna situacija možda to ne zahteva, evidentno je da prilikom pregovaranja uslova njihovog sledećeg ugovora, profesionalni igrači ali i njihovi timovi trebaju da uposle podršku njihovih računovođa ili pravnih timova kako bi utvrdili koji je najbolji način da se struktuiraju različite forme prihoda koji se mogu javiti u budućnosti. U ovome pogledu, naša advokatska kancelarija, zajedno sa asistencijom ZSTAX pruža potpun set usluga neophodnih da se omogući optimala prava sigurnost u predstojećim godinama.

FortniteEsportsesportgamesDota 2CS:GOCounter-Strike
Read more
  • Published in Insights
No Comments

Market Conduct Regulation in Serbian Insurance Sector

Thursday, 01 October 2020 by ZS Law

What is market conduct regulation?

Market conduct is second pillar of ongoing regulatory reform in the EU insurance law. While the “macro-economic” quantitative and qualitative prudential requirements are addressed through the rules established by the Solvency II directive, the “micro-economic” conduct risks are addressed through rules established by the Insurance Distribution Directive.

Market conduct regulation provides supervisors with tools to assess behavior of the insurance distributors (insurance companies and intermediaries) in order to tackle consumer detriment at an early stage, rather than only react following the emergence of problems.

For insurance distributors, market conduct regulation imposes completely new and extensive “customer facing” obligations (fair treatment of the customer, acting in accordance with the client’s best interest, assessing demands and needs of the customer, pre-contractual information duties, maintaining and operating effective Product Oversight and Governance policies and procedures etc.)

Market conduct requirements in Serbian Insurance Regulation

Current Serbian Insurance Law imposes three key conduct requirements:

  • Provide policyholder with pre contractual information mandated by the Articles 82-84 of the Insurance Law;
  • Maintaining effective mechanisms ensure the protection of rights and interests of the insured, policyholders, insurance beneficiaries and injured parties, (as determined by the Decision on the NBS on Manner of Protecting the Rights and Interests of Insurance Service Consumers);
  • Pursuing activities in accordance with law, general acts, business policies, rules of the insurance and actuarial profession, good business practices and business ethics, (which includes adopted codes of professional ethics, codes of conduct and recommendation and guidelines adopted by the Supervisor);

The Guidelines of the National Bank on minimal standards of conduct and good practice of insurance market participants – Implementation of the IDD in Serbia

The Guidelines on minimal standards of conduct and good practice of insurance market participants introduce basic concepts from the IDD. In accordance with its international obligations, Serbia will be required to implement insurance acquis including the IDD, however publication of the Guidelines by the National Banks of Serbia seems to have caught many insurance undertakings somewhat by surprise. Through adoption and publication of the Guidelines National Bank of Serbia clearly pointed out that market conduct will be one of the focuses of the supervisor in the future, and stated its expectations (what constitutes good business practice) from the market participants.

Key market conduct changes introduced by the Guideline

  • Knowledge and expertise – essentially this is introduction of the continuous professional training requirements from the IDD. Once IDD is fully implemented all distributors (including employees of the insurance companies) will have to attend minimum of 15 hours per year of the professional training;
  • General principles of market conduct – distributors should conduct fairly, professionally and in the best interest of customers, these open norms can be used to assess wide both conduct as well as internal processes and policies of the insurance distributors;
  • Enhanced information duties – product information document design, clear distinction between general and specific terms and conditions and pre-contractual information documents;
  • Marketing of insurance products – prohibition of use of incorrect or misleading promises, misrepresentation and concealment of information, usage of professional terms etc.
  • Product oversight and governance – perhaps the most complex and far-reaching of all requirements introduced. Insurance manufacturers are required to operate and maintain effective product oversight and government policies and arrangements which include identification of the target market, testing of insurance products and review of the products;
  • Focus on distribution strategies and choice of distribution channels – insurance companies will have to apply certain level of diligence when choosing distribution channel and assess whether the distributors act in accordance with the product oversight and governance policy of the manufacturer, in particular whether the product is distributed to the identified target market;
  • Conflict of interest rules – assessment of policies and inducements schemes both internally for employees, and externally when distributing through indirect channels;

Which departments within the insurance companies are affected?

Without doubt the new rules will have the most serious impact on compliance departments. Broad nature of the conduct rules requires from compliance departments not just to be on the outside of the business development process, but essential element in the decision making process, in particular given regulatory focus on the design and development of the new products, before they are offered on the market (identification of the target market, choice of distribution strategy etc.)

However, compliance departments are not the only one affected, and other departments should be aware, that the broad nature of the conduct rules affects them as well. HR departments should be involved regarding training and competences of the employees, risk management given the fact that conduct rules represent legal risks that need to be properly managed, product development, marketing and sale for obvious reasons, but also ultimately the managing board due to potential financial fines and significant reputational risks associated with misconduct and mis-selling.

Proper management of the new legal risks – how to adjust to the changes in market conduct rules?

Insurance companies (because they will be most significantly affected by the changes), but also other distributors who are in scope of the new rules, should begin the evaluation process of their internal policies and procedures (gap analysis) in order to assess which conduct rules will most significantly affect their daily operations, and to provide their in house lawyers and compliance departments with support and adequate information in order to better comprehend the new conduct regime.

This is particularly important given soft law nature of the Guidelines. It allows insurance companies to identify legal requirements which could be hardly attainable, overly burdensome or with little effect on overall level of consumer protection and clearly communicate issues to the state and the supervisor, before rules become “hard law”.

Scope of application – who is affected by the market conduct rules?

Insurance companies, insurance agents and brokers, banks and financial leasing companies. In a brief, if you are part of the insurance distribution chain, it is very likely you will be affected by the market conduct rules.

For any additional questions regarding this topic, please follow our announcements and/or contact Nikola Filipović, nikola.filipovic@zslaw.rs, Ivan Ljubisavljevic, ivan.ljubisavljevic@zslaw.rs, or your regular contact at the Zivkovic Samardzic law office.


Pravila tržišnog ponašanja u srpskom pravu osiguranja

Šta su pravila tržišnog ponašanja?

Pravila tržišnog ponašanja su jedan od dva pravca reforme evropskog prava osiguranja. Dok Direktiva Solventnost II reguliše makro-ekonomska pitanja, kvalitativne i kvantitativne zahteve u vezi sa bonitetom osiguravajućeg društva, Direktiva o distribuciji osiguranja je usmerena na „mikro-ekonomska“ pitanja i rizike koji se javljaju kao posledica odnosa osiguravajućeg društva prema ugovaračima osiguranja (tržišno ponašanjе).

Pravila tržišnog ponašanja daju nadzornom organu mogućnost da ispita ponašanje osiguravajućeg društva (i drugih distributera osiguranja), odnosno njihov odnos prema klijentima, sa ciljem da preventivno deluje i spreči nastanak neželjenih situacija u kojima korisnici osiguranja mogu biti oštećeni, umesto da samo reaguje na neželjene sitaucije nakon što se dogode.

Za distributere osiguranja, pravila tržišnog ponašanja nameću poptuno nove, opsežne i sveobuhvatne obaveze u njihovom kontaktu i odnosu sa ugovaračima osiguranja i osiguranicima (fer pošten i transparentan odnos prema klijentima, postupanje u skladu sa najboljim interesima klijenta, procena zahteva i potreba klijenta, informisanje klijenata pre zaključenja ugovora) ali isto tako i nove organizacione zahteve (usvajanje i sprovođenje efikasne politike nadzora i upravljanja prozvodima).

Pravila tržišnog ponašanja u Zakonu o Osiguranju

Zakon o osiguranju propisuje tri ključne obaveze koje potpadaju pod pravila tržišnog ponašanja:

  • Članovi 82-84 Zakona o osiguranju propisuju obavezu predugovornog informisanja ugovarača osiguranja;
  • Član 15 Zakona o osiguranju propisuje obavezu obezbeđenja zaštite prava i interesa osiguranika, ugovarača osiguranja, korisnika osiguranja i trećih oštećenih lica, (ove obaveze detaljnije su propisane Odlukom NBS o načinu zaštite prava i interesa korisnika usluge osiguranja);
  • Član 19 Zakona o osiguranju propisuje obavezu obavljanja delatnosti u skladu sa zakonom, opštim aktima, aktima poslovne politike, pravilima struke osiguranja i aktuarske struke, dobrim poslovnim običajima i poslovnom etikom, (što obuhvata usvojene kodekse profesionalne etike, kodekse i pravilnike ponašanja kao i preporuke i smernice usvojene od strane nadzornog organa);

Smernica Narodne Banke Srbije o minimalnim standardima ponašanja i dobroj poslovnoj praksi učesnika na tržištu osiguranja – prvi korak ka implementaciji Direktive o distribuciji osiguranja u Srbiji

Smernica Narodne Banke Srbije o minimalnim standardima ponašanja i dobroj poslovnoj praksi učesnika na tržištu osiguranja uvodi po prvi put u pravni život osnovne koncepte i pojmove iz Direktive o distribuciji osiguranja. U skladu sa međunarodno preuzetim obavezama, Srbija ima obavezu da uskladi svoje propise sa direktivama EU iz oblasti prava osiguranja, uključujući i Direktivu o distribuciji osiguranja, međutim čini se da je objavljivanje smernica od strane NBS zateklo mnoga osiguravajuća društva nespremnim. Kroz usvajanje i objavljivanje Smernica Narodna Banka Srbije je jasno stavila do znanja da će pravila tržišnog ponašanja biti jedan od fokusa nadzora u narednom periodu, i definisala svoje viđenje dobrih poslovnih praksi na tržištu osiguranja.

Ključne promene koje Smernica donosi:

  • Znanje i stručnost – suštinski ovo je prvi korak u uvođenju obaveze kontinuiranog profesionalnog usavršavanja za zaposlene u osiguravajućim društvima. Direktiva predviđa obavezu, najmanje 15 sati godišnje kontinurane obuke za sve distributere (uključujući i zaposlene u osiguravajućim društvima);
  • Opšti principi tržišnog ponašanja – od distributere sa zahteva fer i pošteno poslovanje u najboljem interesu korisnika. Ove opšte norme mogu služiti kao osnova za procenu kako neposrednog odnosa prema korisnicma, tako i za ocenu internih procesa i politika distributera osiguranja;
  • Predugovorno informisanje – predlog dokumenta predugovornog informisanja, povlačenje jasne razlike između opštih i posebnih uslova osiguranja i obaveze predugovornog informisanja;
  • Oglašavanje – zabrana upotrebe netačnih obećanja ili informacija koje dovode u zabludu, pogrešnog predstavljanja informacija ili prikrivanja informacija, upotrebe profesionalnih izraza itd.;
  • Nadzor i upravljanje proizvodima osiguranja – verovatno najkompleksniji i najdalekosežniji od svih zahteva. Proizvođači osiguranja (a to su osiguravajuća društva i pod određenim uslovima posrednici osiguranja) imaju obavezu da uvedu i sprovode efikasnu politiku nadzora i upravljanja proizvodima osiguranja, što uključuje pitanja identifikacije ciljnog tržišta, testiranje proizvoda osiguranja kao i postupake korigovanja;
  • Regulatorni fokus na distributivne strategije i izbor kanala prodaje – osiguravajuća društva moraju pažljivo odabrati prikladni distributivni kanal i analizirati da li distributeri koje su odabrali postupaju u skladu sa politikom nadzora i upravljanja proizvodima, naročito da li se proizvod plasira identifikovanom ciljnom tržištu;
  • Pravila o sukobu interesa – obuhvataju kako direktnu tako i indirektnu prodaju. Od osiguravajućih društava se očekuje da procene kako interni (za zaposlene) tako i eksterni (za distributere) programi stimulacije i naknade mogu uticati na interese klijenata;

Na koja odeljenja u okviru osiguravajućeg društva će nova pravila najviše uticati?

Bez sumnje, nova pravila tržišnog ponašanja najviše će opteretiti (već veoma opterećena) odeljenja za usklađenost poslovanja. Priroda pravila tržišnog ponašanja takođe znači da odeljenja za usklađenost poslovanja više ne mogu biti na marginama poslovnog procesa, već da se moraju transformisati u jedan od ključnih faktora prilikom donošenja poslovnih odluka, naročito imajući u vidu novi regulatorni fokus na dizajn osiguranja pre nego što se proizvod uopšte ponudi osiguranicima na tržištu.

Međutim neće se samo odeljenja za usklađenost poslovanja pred izazovom. U proces usklađivanja trebala bi biti uključena i HR odeljenja, usled zahteva usmerenih na razvoj kompetencija i obuku zaposlenih, sektor za upravljanje rizikom usled činjenica da pravila tržišnog ponašanja predstavljaju nove pravne rizike koji zahtevaju kvalitativnu ocenu, sektori prodaje, marketinga i razvoj proizvoda iz očiglednih razloga, ali isto tako i izvršni odbor u krajnjoj instanci zbog potencijalnih finansijskih sankcija i reputacionih posledica koje mogu nastati usled nepoštovanja pravila tržišnog ponašanja.

Upravljanje novim pravnim rizicima – kako se prilagoditi izmenama u pravnom okviru?

Osiguravajuća društva (zato što nova pravila najviše utiču na njih), ali isto tako i drugi distributeri, trebali bi da se upuste u procenu svojih internih politika i procedura (gep analiza) kako bi ocenili koja će pravila tržišnog ponašanja najviše uticati na njihovu svakodnevnu delatnost i poslovanje (zavisno od portfolia, distributivnih kanala, prodajne mreže, već usvojenih politika i internih akata), kao i da  svojim pravnicima i odeljenjima za usklađenost pruže podršku kroz adekvatne informacije i obuke o novim pravilima, u skladu sa strateškim (forward-looking) pristupom i evolucijom uloge sektora usklađenosti u poslovnim procesima.

Ovo je naročito važno imajući u vidu pravnu prirodu Smernica. Osiguravajuća društva imaju priliku da identifikuju obaveze koje se teško mogu sprovesti u praksi ili jednostavno premalo doprinose nivou zaštite ugovarača osiguranja i osiguranika, da zauzmu stav po pitanju onih obaveza koje mogu biti suviše veliko opterećenje za indsutriju osiguranja pre nego što takve obaveze postanu deo zakona.

Domašaj primene novih pravila – na koga se odnose nova pravila tržišnog ponašanja?

Nova pravila tržišnog ponašanja odnose se na osiguravajuća društva, zastupnike i posrednike osiguranja, banke, davaoce finansijskog lizinga. Ukratko rečeno, ukoliko je subjekat deo lanca distribucije osiguranja, deo ili većina novih pravila tržišnog ponašanja će se primenjivati i uticati na poslovanje.

Za sva dodatna pitanja u vezi sa ovom temom, pratite naše objave, i/ili kontaktirajte Nikolu Filipovića, nikola.filipovic@zslaw.rs, Ivana Ljubisavljevića, ivan.ljubisavljevic@zslaw.rs ili vaš redovan kontakt u Advokatskoj Kancelariji Živković Samardžić.

Ivan LjubisavljevićNikola Filipović
Read more
  • Published in Insights
No Comments

IFLR1000 recognizes Branislav Živković and Miloš Milošević as Highly Regarded Lawyers and Igor Živkovski as Rising Star

Thursday, 01 October 2020 by ZS Law

IFLR 1000, a guide to the world’s leading financial and corporate law firms and lawyers, has once again ranked Živković Samardžić, one of Serbia’s leading law firms, for its financial and corporate practice as well as recognized Branislav Živković as Highly Regarded lawyer in M&A, Real Estate Finance and Real Estate Acquisitions, Miloš Milošević as Highly Regarded lawyer in Restructuring and Insolvency and Igor Živkovski as Rising Star in Corporate and M&A practice areas in Serbia.

Directory, released by International Financial Law Review, the market-leading financial publication for lawyers specialising in international finance in financial institutions, corporates and private practice, feature tiered rankings of the financial and corporate law firms and lawyers, recognized by their peers and clients to be the leading figures in their specialist areas, in more than 170 jurisdictions across the globe. The editorial for Serbia is available here.

Branislav Živković has been practicing law since 1988 and is a founding partner of Živković Samardžić. His wide-ranging experience covers mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, privatizations, acquisition and corporate finance, transactional tax aspects, complex commercial contracts and real estate and project finance.

Miloš Milošević joined Živković Samardžić in 2010. He graduated at the University of Belgrade Faculty of Law in 1995 and spent 15 years in the judiciary, as a judicial clerk at the Commercial Court in Belgrade and the Supreme Court of Serbia, Judge at the Fourth Municipal Court in Belgrade and a Civil Law Appellate Chamber Judge at the District Court in Belgrade.

Igor Živkovski graduated at the University of Belgrade Faculty of Law in 2010 and has been with Živković Samardžić since 2013, after six-month internship at the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague and two years with another reputable law firm in Belgrade.

Miloš MiloševićIgor ŽivkovskiBranislav Živković
Read more
  • Published in Uncategorized
No Comments

Between the waves

Tuesday, 15 September 2020 by ZS Law

An overview of the real estate sector in Serbia

As the summer period of 2020 quickly draws to a close, the uncertainty of autumn and the prospect of a second wave of COVID-19 outbreak gives rise to the necessity of ascertaining the current situation of the real estate sector and the projections for its possible future development.

One of the most important changes brought about by the necessity of social distancing is the greater emphasis on digitalization and flow of information. The frontrunner in this movement has certainly been the Republic Geodetic Authority (RGA) by implementing the Integrated Geospatial Information Framework which will assist in bridging the geospatial digital divide with other countries and secure socio-economic prosperity providing foreign investors with more opportunity, security and clarity in forming real estate investment trusts or groups aimed at the Serbian real estate market. As on the macro level, the day to day micro level has also been the recipient of the benefits of digitalization. Certified attorneys now have the ability to digitally acquire excerpts from the real estate cadastre i.e. legal proof of ownership, submit all requests which are related to changes of rights and titles on real estate, schedule meetings with officials concerning ongoing cases, access the digital noticeboard where all of the decisions passed by the RGA are posted, access the database of planning documents etc.

All of the abovementioned will undoubtedly have the desired effect of considerably speeding up real estate transactions and lowering their costs to the benefits of our clients. The effect of these macro and micro stimuluses can already be discerned from the report published by the RGA on the real estate market in the first half of 2020. One of the most important conclusions from the report is that even though that the overall transactions have been down 13% compared to the same period last year, which can be attributed to the 2-month standstill period where almost no transactions have been concluded due to the state of emergency, the overall monetary funds exchanged in these transactions have only been 8% less compared to the amounts exchanged in the same period of last year, meaning that the average price of real estate has been increased in 2020. Additionally, it can be noted that the biggest drop-off has been in the office space market (especially office space exceeding 50 m2) due to the “work from home” regiment most of the employers have adopted, while weekend homes and construction land have seen the biggest increase in the overall market share, especially in the northern parts of Serbia i.e. Vojvodina. The takeaway from the report is that real estate market in the first half of 2020 has been especially strong considering the circumstances, with the biggest indicators of market strength being the fact that 67% of the transactions have been concluded without any form of credit and that residential real estate currently has the highest value per meter square.

Similarly, the Ministry of construction, transport and infrastructure has highlighted the prospects of future investments in the real estate sector. According to official data, there have been issued 10,846 building permits for the first seven months, which is about equal to the number issued in the previous year for the same time period. Of note is that most of the building permits are issued for residential construction where 88.88% of the building permits are issued for buildings with three or more apartments, with the average apartment size of 63,62m2, with certain locations and building types reaching a significantly higher than average value per meter square. Additionally, per official data available the total number of construction sites as of 18th of August is 62,405 (16.000 more than in the same period last year) with most of the construction being completed in capital city of Belgrade, followed by cities of Novi Sad, Subotica and Kragujevac.

It is an insurmountable task to predict what the future will hold, by judging existing patterns and extensively working with clients it the real estate sector we can yet safely affirm our predictions that the COVID-19 pandemic will have minimal impact on the future prospects of the real estate market in Serbia. A contributing factor to this is that the population is being more and more financially empowered to conduct individual purchases and real estate is seen as a perfect investment and savings opportunity which is in turn followed by naturally rising real estate prices in hopes of reaching the European standard.

For any additional questions regarding this topic, please follow our announcements and/or contact attorney at law Nikola Šiljegović, nikola.siljegovic@zslaw.rs or your regular contact at the Zivkovic Samardzic law office.

Nikola ŠiljegovićCOVID-19
Read more
  • Published in Insights
No Comments

Živković Samardžić Advises APIS Assay Technologies Ltd on Serbian Aspects of Acquisition of BeoGenomics

Wednesday, 09 September 2020 by ZS Law

Živković Samardžić has advised Manchester-based biotech firm APIS Assay Technologies Ltd, a company combining outstanding In Vitro Diagnostics (IVD) experience with integrated AI to develop biomarker-based diagnostic assays, on Serbian aspects of its acquisition of BeoGenomics, a specialised software developer with major expertise in Bioinformatics and Artificial Intelligence (BIOX).

BeoGenomics has been developing both on-prem and secure cloud-based data analysis solutions – helping customers design, build and run custom tailored genomics & proteomics pipelines. The start-up with amazing capability will be integrated into Manchester-based APIS, supporting the launch of a new BIOX Service Line as part of the company’s ongoing Biomarker Research and Development activities.

APIS develops new tests for the prediction, prevention, and diagnosis of disease from discovery to regulatory approval. The company’s business model is based on three pillars: biomarker diagnostics development, molecular diagnostic contract development, and applied bioinformatics.

Živković Samardžić’s scope of work consisted of performing due diligence of BeoGenomics, drafting and negotiating of transactional documentation, structuring the transaction, as well as all-encompassing legal advisory regarding post-closing activities for APIS Assay Technologies Ltd.

The Živković Samardžić team that has advised APIS Assay Technologies Ltd on this deal was led by Partner Igor Živkovski and included Partner Ana Popović, who advised on employment matters.

Igor Živkovski
Read more
  • Published in Deals and Cases
No Comments

The Decree on replacement travels – protection for passengers or travel agencies

Tuesday, 05 May 2020 by ZS Law

On April 30th, the Ministry of Trade, Tourism and Telecommunications announced on its website that on that day’s session the Government of the Republic of Serbia adopted the Decree on the offer of a replacement travel for tourist travel which was canceled or not realized due to the COVID-19 virus.

As stated on the website of the Ministry, the aforementioned Decree enables all citizens who have paid the tourist arrangement by March 15th of this year to have the opportunity to arrange a replacement travel with the agencies, which they can use by December 31st 2021. at the latest.

If the replacement travel isn’t realized by that date, citizens will be entitled to a refund until January 15th 2022.

Depending on the arrangement of the agency and the passenger, the new travel can be realized for the same or another destination, in the amount not less than that which the passenger paid to the agency for the travel which he did not use.

The conclusion of a new travel agreement between the agency and the passenger will be provided by insurance policies.

It could be heard earlier that the State renderd this Decree in order to protect about 500 thousand people who paid their arrangements by March 15th in every way.

Whether this really is the case, or the agencies are actually protected at the expense of the passengers in this way, remains to be seen.

First of all, the content of this Decree does not imply that passengers will be able to arrange a replacement travel with the agencies, but this possibility has been given to the agencies which are able to offer a replacement travel for unrealized tourist travel, paid in full, or in part, by March 15th 2020, irrespective of the period of realization, which is canceled or unrealized during the state of emergency or later, due to circumstances caused by COVID-19 disease induced by SARS-CoV-2 virus. Therefore, if the agencies do not offer replacement travels, passengers are left without this option. It is interesting that the deadline for the agencies to submit this offer is not prescribed by this Decree.

The passengers are given the possibility to accept or decline the replacement offer.

If they accept, a new agreement on the travel organization is concluded, which also includes the number of the issued guarantee of travel in case of insolvency, and for compensation of damages (which is also included in the existing agreement, which is reversed, according to the Decree). The replacement travel can be realized until December 31st 2021.

On the other hand, if the passenger declines the offer, the agency is obliged to make a refund within 14 days of the expiry of the deadline from the previous paragraph, ie by January 14th 2022. (not January 15th, as stated on the  website of the Ministry).

In other words, if the agencies offer a replacement travel, passengers will be able to accept it or decline it, in which case they will have to wait at least 18 months for a refund of the paid amount, when they should be repaid in RSD with no interest. As all arrangements are also paid in RSD equivalent, passengers will be refunded an amount equal to the paid, not revalued amount, which, due to inflation or weakening of the national currency, could be negative for the passengers.

In order to give an answer to the question from the beginning of this text, it is necessary to perceive the situation in which passengers would have found themselves if this Decree had not been rendered. In that case, the general mode of Article 877. of the Law on Obligations would be applied, which stipulates that a passenger can withdraw from an agreement at any time, in whole or in part (paragraph 1), that if the passenger withdraws from the agreement within a reasonable time, determined by the nature of the arrangement (cancellation on a timely basis) the tour operator is only entitled to compensation for administrative costs (paragraph 2), or that in the event of untimely cancellation of the agreement, the tour operator may require the passenger to pay a certain percentage of the agreed upon price determined in proportion to the time remaining until the start of the travel, and which must be economically justified (paragraph 3).

Instead of conclusion: if this Decree passes the assessment of constitutionality and legality (besides the disputed issues related to the restriction of passengers’ property rights, there is also the issue of prohibition of the retroactive enforcement of laws and other general acts), it seems that it was adopted in order to protect travel agencies while the passengers remain in the same (if they accept the offer for a replacement travel which could have been obtained without a Decree, by simple agreement of the contracting parties) or worse situation (if they do not accept the offer they must wait at least 18 months for the refund of the RSD amount of the paid arrangement without interest with all the risks of billing which exist at this time).

For any additional questions regarding this topic, please follow our announcements and/or contact attorney at law Ivan Ljubisavljevic ivan.ljubisavljevic@zslaw.rs or your regular contact at the Zivkovic Samardzic law office.


Uredba o zamenskim putovanjima – zaštita za putnike ili turističke agencije

30. aprila na sajtu Ministarstva trgovine, turizma i telekomunikacije objavljeno je da je na sednici Vlade Republike Srbije tog dana usvojena Uredba o ponudi zamenskog putovanja za turističko putovanje koje je otkazano ili nije realizovano usled bolesti Covid 19.

Kako se navodi na sajtu Ministarstva, pomenutom uredbom omogućeno je da svi građani koji su uplatili turistički aranžman do 15. marta ove godine, imaju mogućnost da sa agencijama dogovore zamensko putovanje koje mogu da iskoriste najkasnije do 31. decembra 2021. godine.

Ukoliko zamensko putovanje ne bude realizovano do pomenutog datuma, građani imaju pravo na povraćaj uplaćenih sredstava do 15. januara 2022. godine.

Novo putovanje se u dogovoru agencije i putnika može realizovati na istoj ili drugoj destinaciji i to u iznosu ne manjem od onog koji je putnik uplatio agenciji za putovanje koje nije iskoristio.

Zaključivanje novog ugovora o putovanju između agencije i putnika će biti obezbeđeno polisama osiguranja.

Ranije se moglo čuti da ovom uredbom država na svaki način želi da zaštiti oko 500 hiljada ljudi koji su do 15. marta uplatili svoje aranžmane.

Da li je to zaista tako ili se na ovaj način zapravo štite agencije nauštrb putnika ostaje da se vidi.

Pre svega, iz sadržine uredbe ne proizlazi da će putnici imati mogućnost da sa agencijama dogovore zamensko putovanje već je ova mogućnost data agencijama koje mogu ponuditi zamensko putovanje za nerealizovano turističko putovanje koje je u celosti ili delimično uplaćeno zaključno sa 15. martom 2020. godine, bez obzira na period realizacije, a koje je otkazano ili nerealizovano u periodu vanrednog stanja ili kasnije usled okolnosti koje su prouzrokovane bolešću COVID-19 izazvane virusom SARS-CoV-2. Dakle, ukoliko agecnije ne ponude zamensko putovanja, putnici ostaju bez ove mogućnosti. Interesantno je da uredbnom nije ostavljen rok u kojem bi agencije trebale da dostave ovu ponudu.

Ono što je putnicima dato jeste mogućnost da prihvate ili ne prihvate zamensku ponudu.

Ukoliko prihvate, zaključuje se  novi ugovor o organizovanju putovanja koji sadrži i broj izdate garancije putovanja za slučaj insolventnosti i radi naknade štete (što inače sadrži i postojeći ugovor koji se kako uredba kaže stornira). Zamensko putovanje moguće je realizovati do 31.12.2021. godine.

Sa druge strane, ukoliko putnik ne prihvati ponudu, agencija je dužna da izvrši povraćaj uplaćenih sredstava u roku od 14 dana od isteka roka iz prethodnog stava, dakle do 14. januara 2022. godine (a ne 15. januara kako se na sajtu Ministarstva navodi).

Drugim rečima, ukoliko agencije ponude zamensko putovanje putnici će moći da isto prihvate ili ne u kom slučaju će za povraćaj uplaćenog iznosa morati da sačekaju najmanje 18 meseci kada bi trebalo da im bude vraćen dinarski iznos uplaćenog aranžmana bez kamate. Budući da su svi aranžmani plaćeni i dinarskoj protivvrednosti, putnicima će biti vraćen iznos koji odgovara uplaćenom, a ne revalorizovanom iznosu, što usled inflacije ili slabljenje nacionalne valute može biti negativno po putnike.

Da bi se mogao dati odgovor na pitanje sa početka ovog teksta, potrebno je sagledati situaciju u kojoj bi se putnici našli da ova uredba nije doneta. U tom slučaju, na odnos putnika i agencije primenjivao bi se opšti režim iz  čl. 877 Zakona o obligacionom odnosu kojim je propisano da putnik može u svakom trenutku odustati od ugovora, potpuno ili delimično (st. 1), da ako putnik pre početka putovanja odustane od ugovora u razumnom roku koji se određuje s obzirom na vrstu aranžmana (blagovremeni odustanak), organizator putovanja ima pravo samo na naknadu administrativnih troškova (st. 2) odnosno da u slučaju neblagovremenog odustanka od ugovora, organizator putovanja može od putnika zahtevati naknadu u određenom procentu ugovorene cene koji se utvrđuje srazmerno vremenu preostalom do početka putovanja i koji mora biti ekonomski opravdan (st. 3).

Umesto zaključka: ukoliko predmetna uredba prođe ocenu ustavnosti i zakonitosti (pored spornih pitanja koji se odnose na ograničavanja imovinskih prava putnika, tu je i pitanje zabrane povratnog dejstva zakona i drugih opštih akata), stiče se utisak da je ista doneta sa ciljem zaštite turističkih agencija dok su putnici u istoj (ukoliko prihvate ponudu za zamensko putovanje do kojeg je moglo doći i bez uredbe, prostim dogovorom ugovornih strana) ili lošijoj situaciju (ukoliko ne prihvate ponudu moraju da čekaju najmanje 18 mesec za povraćaj dinarskog iznosa uplaćenog aranžmana bez kamate sa svim rizicima naplate koji postoje i u ovom trenutku). Ako imate pitanja u vezi sa ovom temom, pratite naše objave i/ili kontaktirajte adv Ivana Ljubisavljevića ivan.ljubisavljevic@zslaw.rs ili Vašu osobu za redovan kontakt u advokatskoj kancelariji Živković Samardžić.

COVID-19Ivan Ljubisavljevic
Read more
  • Published in Insights
No Comments

Živković Samardžić lawyers and practice groups recognized by Legal500 EMEA 2020 legal directory

Friday, 17 April 2020 by ZS Law

Živkovic Samardžić is humbled and proud of our rankings in the Legal 500 Europe, Middle East & Africa 2020 directory. The firm has been ranked across diverse set of practice areas and our partners recognized as professional and well organised lawyers with extensive knowledge and analytical skills. 

Miloš Milošević, Partner has been recognized as a Leading Individual, and Ivan Ljubisavljević as a Rising Star, for their Dispute resolution work. Both are praised by clients as “co-operative and excellent lawyers.” Their team is commended for handling complex and high- value commercial cases and investment treaty arbitrations. 

Ana Popović, Partner has been recognized as a Next Generation Partner for her Employment work and her team praised for its broad experience in handling redundancy, reorganisation management, union negotiations, employment dispute resolution, executive terminations, and for being capable to help clients achieve compliance commercially. Legal 500 directory quotes some of the client testimonials, according to which Ana “demonstrates impressive knowledge as well as the ability to negotiate the client’s best interest during delicate relations with employees.”

Other ranked practice areas include Commercial, Corporate and M&A and Competition. 

Commercial, Corporate and M&A team is described as the one that advises frequently on complex business transactions, and experienced in M&A, joint ventures and privatisations. According to some of the quoted client testimonials, the team, led by Partners Branislav Živković, Nebojša Samardžić and Igor Živkovski “is highly professional, responsive and understands business”, with “creativity and experience, combined with prompt response times” as key qualities. Igor Živkovski, Partner is lauded for being “an exceptionally talented lawyer and someone that clients can always rely on”, “extremely professional, always available” and as “always very pragmatic and goal oriented.” 

Živković Samardžić Competition team is described as a team “known for abuse of dominance and cartel proceedings and investigations,” with “particular strengths in regulated industries, such as electronic communications, broadcasting, energy and financial services”. Directory quotes client testimonials praising the team for being “highly professional” with reputation “based on an acknowledged technical excellence and ability to provide commercial and practical advice and an in-depth understanding of markets and regulatory regimes.” Practice head, Slobodan Kremenjak, Partner is lauded for being “creative and insightful.”

Humbled and immensely grateful to our clients for the feedback provided to Legal 500 researchers, Živković Samardžić will continue to strive for excellence as client’s trusted Partners in Law.

Ivan LjubisavljevićSlobodan KremenjakMiloš MiloševićIgor ŽivkovskiBranislav ŽivkovićAna PopovićNebojša Samardžić
Read more
  • Published in Uncategorized
No Comments

Živković Samardžić Advises Sizmek on Serbian Aspects of Business Acquisition by Amazon

Monday, 02 March 2020 by ZS Law

Živković Samardžić has advised Israeli company Sizmek Technologies Ltd. on local implementation of the Transition Services Agreement and Asset Purchase Agreement concluded with Amazon.com, Inc.

As Amazon has already announced, it acquired Sizmek’s ad serving and dynamic content optimization businesses. Sizmek has been searching for a buyer for Sizmek Ad Server and Sizmek DCO and sale to Amazon was a logical solution since these two companies have many mutual customers. The deal will bring an ad server, which is a tool to actually place advertisements around the web, to Amazon.

Živković Samardžić’s work comprised advising Sizmek on employment, corporate and taxation matters of this deal in Serbia, as well as providing all-encompassing legal advisory to Sizmek Serbia on post-closing activities.

The Živković Samardžić team that has advised Sizmek on this deal consisted of Partners Ana Popović and Igor Živkovski.

Igor ŽivkovskiAna Popović
Read more
  • Published in Deals and Cases
No Comments

Živković Samardžić Advises B92 on the Transformation of a Joint Stock Company into a Limited Liability Company

Wednesday, 26 February 2020 by ZS Law

Živković Samardžić has advised Serbia’s national commercial broadcaster B92, subsidiary of Kopernikus Corporation, on the transformation of a joint stock company into a limited liability company. This transformation was a challenge, considering the complex legal framework governing joint stock companies and lack of local practice.

B92 was established in 1989 as radio broadcasting to Belgrade audiences and has since grown into a company which includes a national radio and television network and websites. B92 and its journalists have won numerous prestigious international awards for journalistic courage and advocacy of human rights.

The transformation marks the completion of the takeover process, with the company Astonko as the only remaining shareholder and introduces a simpler governance system without the Management Board. The simplified governance will allow more efficient management and decision-making within B92, thus enabling it to respond promptly to the challenges and changes in the harsh business environment.

The Živković Samardžić team that has advised B92 on this transformation was led by Igor Živkovski, Corporate and M&A Partner.

Corporate and M&AIgor Živkovski
Read more
  • Published in Deals and Cases
No Comments
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9

Makedonska 30 | Belgrade 11 000 | Serbia
t +381 11 2636 636 
f +381 11 2635 555
e-mail office@zslaw.rs

  • General Terms of Business
  • Disclaimer
  • Cookies
  • Privacy policy
TOP