But it should not be mistaken in his choice

Investment in companies allows to reduce, or even delete, his tax bill. The taxpayer may do so online, or even through a holding company of a FIPS (proximity investment fund), a FCPI or an RPF, or donate to an organization of public utility.

The direct subscription to the capital increase of a SME is probably the riskiest approach. It assumes that the taxpayer be able to find a company meets the conditions of eligibility of the device, to assess the viability of the project, the jurisdiction of the team, and to negotiate the financial conditions for its participation. Unable to improvise "business angel" when it is not yourself immersed in the business world.

Since last year, Internet sites multiply to facilitate the meeting between contractors and individual investors. This is the case of capitalpme.oseo.fr, faisonsaffaire, capangel.fr or investigo.fr. In all cases, it is for the investor to sort the list of companies that are presented.

Other sites, from associations, present to investors a choice of companies selected by their care. Alternativa, for example, is a non-publicly-listed securities trading platform. It is the only of its kind in France. It offers 12 SMEs to the subscription. In all these cases, this service is not free. However, associations, such as Love Money for employment or EWB Invest, offer the same service at a lower cost or even free of charge. Another association, ICT Paris-region System, which unites in Ile-de-France over 360 industry players, SMEs and scientists, organizes "blow EWB" operations to present a selection of innovative SMEs.

Holding company or Fund, he must choose

Taxpayers who prefer to rely on professionals for the selection and management of their investment have the choice between two formulas: the holding company or the Fund. The latter can then take the form of an investment Fund (FIP) proximity, a mutual fund in innovation (FCPI) or a mutual fund risk (RPF).

Tax plan, the benefit is equivalent to the holdings because they benefit from a reduction of tax rises to 75 of the amount invested in the limit of a ceiling of 50,000 euros, compared to 50 with a limit of 20,000 euros to the Fund.

In fact these figures are theoretical, to the extent that, for the holdings as funds, these rates apply only in proportion to the capital actually invested in the target companies. The funds invest, generally between 60 and 80 of their capital in target SMEs. Hence a reduction of effective tax which varies between 30 (i.e. 50 to 60) in the first case and 40 (50 to 80) in the second. Similarly, if a holding company invests only 70 of the funds collected in eligible SMEs, the actual tax reduction is not 75 but 75 of 70, or 52.5. This explains that the holdings which cover their expenses by extracting a percentage of payments displayed a tax cut less than 75.

Competition for funds and holdings, they appear to have collected the favours of the taxpayers and operators, be they professional or not. Difficult to know exactly how many holdings arose in 2009. At least 50, against a dozen in 2008. Only two had sought and obtained a visa from the MFA in 2008, while 20 obtained it at the time when these lines are written.

The allure of a greater tax benefit explains both the interest of taxpayers and the dynamism of the operators. But the comparison between investment funds and the holdings should take into account the fact that the first have two years to invest the collected capital. While the holdings have until 15 June of the year to do so. When collection begins during the month of may which is very often the case they have, therefore, less than two months to invest. Difficult but not impossible. The risk is that the holding company succeeds in only invest a portion of collected capital and that it seriously poor tax cut expected by subscribers. Another danger is a revision to the decline of the selection criteria.

The holdings may vary by the size, the entry ticket, the amount of the collection, the number of shareholders and the level of fees; They also differ in the competence of the management team and the means available to it by the stage of development of the target companies and their areas of activity. On this point, some holdings have not hesitated to ignore the warnings. To the point that some parliamentarians had to remind them of the spirit of the law.

Among the holdings coming to obtain the visa from the MFA, one of them has "plans to invest in companies belonging to the field of real estate, property, promotion and real estate dealers." Another Announces "no investment in film production sector alone"; a third will specialize in the financing of photovoltaic power plants.

However it should be noted that in addition to the risks inherent in any investment in venture capital, holding holders face a risk of tax requalification, against which an AMF visa, moreover, does not protect. It must be taken into account. Because this may be the perspective not only of losing it, but of duty, in addition, pay the tax to which it was believed to have escaped. Of course, all holdings and thereby even all subscribers are not housed in the same sign this threat. Because there are holding and holding. But it should not be mistaken in his choice. As the time to decide is not very long...