Indirect holding, indirect control of the invested unit. For example, Company A owns
5 1% equity of company b is called direct holding.
Possession company a
Company B holds 30%, A 1 Company holds 25%, and A 1 Company is a subsidiary of Company A, so Company A is indirectly holding!
The difference between indirect holding company and direct holding company is that
1, different in nature: direct holding is the largest shareholder of the enterprise; Indirect holding refers to holding subsidiaries through holding the parent company.
2. The difference between shareholding: direct shareholding and ultimate shareholding are that natural persons directly own 50% or more of the company's shares, and indirect shareholding refers to owning 50% of the company's shares through subsidiaries or grandchildren.
Extended data:
Indirect holding form:
1. Parent-child structure: that is, the parent company directly owns 80% of the shares of subsidiary A and subsidiary A directly owns 70% of the shares of subsidiary B, then the parent company indirectly owns 56% of the shares of subsidiary B. ..
2. Associated structure: Although the parent company does not hold more than half of the shares of another company (B), it has accumulated more than half of the shares of Company B through its subsidiary (A), thus forming an enterprise group structure.
Direct holding refers to shareholders whose direct investment accounts for more than 50% of the total capital of a limited liability company or whose shares account for more than 50% of the total share capital of a joint stock limited company; Although the capital contribution or the proportion of shares held is less than 50%, but according to their capital contribution or shares held, shareholders have enough voting rights to the shareholders' meeting and the resolutions of the shareholders' meeting.
Indirect holding refers to the shareholders who do not directly hold the shares of the company, but hold or hold more than 50% of the shares of the company through their direct or indirect subsidiaries or sun companies, and obtain control over the company's financial and operating policies.
The ultimate controller is basically equivalent to the actual controller, not necessarily the shareholder of the company, but the person who can actually control the company's behavior through investment relations, agreements or other arrangements. The actual controller will eventually be traced back to natural persons, state-owned assets management departments or other ultimate controllers.
With reference to the relevant regulations of listed companies, in any of the following circumstances, it is deemed that compliance can actually control the company's behavior:
1. Control the shares of a company individually or jointly, and the voting rights exceed the voting rights exercised by the shareholders with the largest number of shares in the company's shareholder list;
2. Control the shares and voting rights of a company individually or collectively to reach or exceed 30%;
3. More than half of the members of the board of directors of the company can be elected by voting rights controlled individually or jointly;
4. Be able to decide the company's financial and business policies and get corresponding benefits from the company's business activities;
5. According to the principle that substance is more important than form, the relevant departments judge other situations in which an entity can actually control the company's behavior.
According to the case, if the shareholding ratio of B, C, D and e*** exceeds 50%, H indirectly controls Company A as the controlling shareholder of Company A, and the controlling shareholder of Company H can be traced back to the natural person, state-owned assets management department or other ultimate controllers as the actual controllers of Company A. ..