The draft law “On Investments” suggests to secure the possibility for an investor who has concluded an investment agreement with the Republic of Belarus to be provided with guarantees against unfavorable changes in the tax legislation of Belarus, commented Sergei Mashonsky, senior partner of Arzinger Law Offices, for PrimePress. At the same time, the procedure and conditions for such guarantees are to be established in other legislative acts.
“In our opinion, it would be more effective to introduce into the current law on investments a stabilization clause in the tax sphere as it is already envisaged in the Decree No. 166 dated 12 May 2017 which regulates the activities of the Great Stone Industrial Park (possibly with minor changes in connection with the implementation of investment projects). In addition, it would be a good signal for investors to extend the stabilization clause not only to tax relations (a version of the clause was previously suggested in Article 48 of the Investment Code and can also be found in the Decree No. 166 for the residents of the Great Stone Industrial Park”, the expert noted.
He recalled that the essence of the clause is that for a certain period of time the investor is not subject to new legislative norms that worsen their position in comparison to the norms in force on the effective date when the investment agreement is concluded. The presence of such a clause fixes clear and predictable conditions for the investor’s work, makes legal regulation stable and therefore attractive.
The lawyer drew attention to the fact that in a number of countries, in accordance with the latest changes in investment legislation, stabilization clauses are included in laws, but their application is limited (for example, for certain investment projects in certain areas, as established by Article 9 of the Federal Law of 01.04. 2020 No. 69-FZ “On the Protection and Encouragement of Investment in the Russian Federation”). Alternatively, the “economic equilibrium clauses” are introduced instead of traditional “freezing clauses”. The “economic equilibrium clauses” provide the obligations of the parties to change the terms of the investment agreement in the event of a change in the terms of investment.
Mashonsky also emphasized one more sensitive issue for the investors.
With a specific article in the draft law, it is proposed to introduce provisions on compensation for the value of nationalized or requisitioned property that constitutes an investment or that is formed as a result of investment. In particular, the amount of compensation for property should be determined as the market value in prices on the day of the decision on nationalization or requisition; for land plots – as their cadastral value on the same day or as the cost of acquisition based on the results of the auction (taking into account the inflation, but not lower than its cadastral value as of the date of the decision on nationalization or requisition).
“I would like the draft law to include the interest on the amount of compensation from the moment of nationalization or requisition to the moment of payment (in global practice, it is usually calculated based on the LIBOR rate)”, noted the lawyer.
The rights of republican state bodies, other state organizations subordinate to the government, local executive and regulatory bodies to interact with the investors on the implementation of investment projects provided by the draft law, looks promising to Mashonsky. Such interaction includes informing, consulting, and other ways of providing of information to the investors.
“We expect that the state bodies will be even more open to interaction with the investors. But the investor should also carry out good “homework” - such assistance will be carried out not in relation to ephemeral investment ideas, but in relation to specific investment projects with certain conditions, methods of investment, sources of their financing, and the implementation timeframe,” Mashonsky underlined.
It is also proposed to envisage the limitation of the claims that the state may impose on the investor. “However, the wording of the provision on limitation of the claims against an investor requires revision in terms of defining these very claims and the procedure for presenting them in an attractive form for the investor”, the lawyer emphasized.
According to him, other changes proposed by the new draft law are not that significant. For example, the concepts of investment and investor are being clarified. The concept of an investment project is introduced, but this term does not find any development in the draft law. “I would like to believe that this is done for the future in order to link possible benefits, preferences and guarantees to investment projects not only on the basis of a special investment agreement with the state, but also without such an agreement,” the expert emphasized.
Meanwhile, another definition of “investment project” is already included into the Resolution of the Council of Ministers of Belarus dated 26 May 2014 No. 506 “On business Plans for Investment Projects”, but it is very narrow, and in practice the concept of “investment project” is used much more often in the meaning proposed in the draft law. “Therefore, if the draft law is adopted in the current edition, we will have to change the bylaws accordingly”, the lawyer said.
What investors expect from Belarusian investment legislation
“We believe that investors would also like to see the following points in the investment law, which will be the positive signals for them and have a positive effect on the investment climate”, Mashonsky said.
The waiver of its immunity by the states in investment disputes is among the innovations expected by the investors.
“The possibility of such a waiver also serves as an additional guarantee for the investors, since the states, by default, have a number of immunities and remains the “strongest side” in the negotiations”, the expert noted.
He drew attention to the fact that earlier such norms were present in the Investment Code, which was in force before the adoption of the current Law on investments. In particular, Article 46 provided for the possibility of the waiver of jurisdictional immunity, immunity from interim measures and immunity from enforcement of a court decision and (or) arbitral award.
“Today such norms are already included in several international treaties of the Republic of Belarus, under which investment disputes with the participation of the Republic of Belarus can be resolved in international arbitration. When including such a provision into the text of the law, it is also important to specify that the waiver of immunity cannot be challenged due to the fact that, for example, the investment agreement has not been signed by the head of state or by another person without the consent of the head of state”, Mashonsky said.
According to Mashonsky, the possibility of subrogation of risks is also important for the investor, because it gives the right to investor to transfer its rights to receive compensation to another person (for example, to a foreign insurance company in the case when the investor insured his property against nationalization and requisition and the insurance company made such an insurance payment to the investor). Such a subrogation is already included into international treaties, in particular, into art. 9 of the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Belarus and the Government of the Republic of Turkey on mutual promotion and protection of investments (signed in Minsk on 14 February 2018).
“Meanwhile, it is still unclear whether the proposed amendments to the law on investments will be adopted and in which wording, since the document is still a draft and has not passed the first reading in the House of Representatives”, Mashonsky noted.



