<![CDATA[This article examines how Indonesian law permits special purpose vehicles (SPVs) while requiring disclosure of the natural persons who ultimately own or control them. The research uses a normative legal method, reading the Financial Sector Development and Strengthening Law, the tax-amnesty SPV regulations, Presidential Regulation No. 13 of 2018, and the implementing rules on beneficial ownership together with international guidance. It finds that the expression SPV has different meanings in different regulatory settings: a regulated vehicle for securitization or trust administration under the 2023 financial-sector law, and an intermediary with no active business in the 2016 tax-amnesty regulation. Neither definition makes an SPV inherently unlawful. The legal concern is the use of layered ownership, nominee-like arrangements, or inaccurate filings to conceal ultimate control and the source of assets. Presidential Regulation No. 13 of 2018 looks beyond formal shareholding to voting rights, profits, appointment powers, effective control, and actual funding. Minister of Law Regulation No. 2 of 2025 adds risk-based verification, data analysis, supervision, and graduated administrative sanctions. The article argues that effective oversight requires a purpose-specific assessment of each SPV, tracing control to natural persons, testing declarations against supporting documents, and coordinating corporate and financial-sector supervision.]]>
Copyrights © 2024
