Activity
The activities of STIFA focus on the supervision of common-benefit foundations and establishments as well as private-benefit foundations and establishments that have voluntarily submitted to supervision. Unless the entity is exempted from the obligation to appoint an auditor, STIFA receives an annual audit report on the proper management and use of the assets for its supervisory purposes. These reports are processed by STIFA and, if necessary, regulatory measures are requested from the Court of Justice. In the case of foundations and establishments that are exempt from the obligation to appoint an auditor, STIFA normally carries out audits itself every three years. Furthermore, STIFA’s remit also includes checking the accuracy of the filed notifications of formation and amendments in the event of private-benefit foundations not entered in the Commercial Register.
Supervised entities
| Status at the end of the year | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Common-benefit foundations | 1’396 | 1’398 | 1’391 |
| (exempted from the obligation to appoint an auditor) | (89) | (102) | (102) |
| Common-benefit establishments | 7 | 8 | 8 |
| (exempted from the obligation to appoint an auditor) | (0) | (0) | (0) |
| Private-benefit foundations | 33 | 31 | 32 |
| Private-benefit establishments | 0 | 20 | 20 |
| Total new entities under STIFA supervision 1) | 56 | 62 | 74 |
| of which newly set up | 34 | 43 | 39 |
1 These numbers generally include common-benefit and private-benefit foundations and establishments.
Besides the 56 foundations that came under supervision of STIFA in the year under review, 47 foundations and establishments were put into liquidation, 24 foundations and establishments were released from the supervision of STIFA and 53 foundations were removed from the Commercial Register. The number of common-benefit foundations thus remains almost the same, although in absolute terms there has been a decrease of two common-benefit foundation compared to the previous year (reduction of 0.1%). It should be noted that although the number of common-benefit foundations dissolved in the year under review increased slightly compared to the previous year, the resulting reduction in the number of common-benefit foundations was compensated by the number of common-benefit foundations that came newly under the supervision of STIFA, which exceeded the number of dissolutions. With regard to the reduction in the number of private-benefit establishments from 20 to zero in the year under review, it should be noted that this is due to a related structure of establishments and a pending legal procedure in this regard, whereby it was agreed as a result of the legal procedure to revoke the voluntary supervision by STIFA.
Proceedings concerning auditors
| 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | Proceedings to appoint auditors | 81 | 86 | 115 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proceedings for exemption from the obligation to appoint an auditor | 4 | 10 | 6 |
During the year under review, 81 foundations applied to the Court of Justice for statutory auditors to be appointed. This also includes those proceedings in which an application was made for the replacement or dismissal of auditors. STIFA was a party to each of these proceedings. During the year under review, four common-benefit foundations applied to STIFA to be exempted from the obligation to appoint an auditor (Art. 552 § 27 Para. 5 PGR).
Audits conducted by the auditors
| Financial year | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Objections | 20 | 17 | 15 |
| Referrals | 92 | 102 | 123 |
On 31 December, 92 (in the previous year: 83) audit reports relating to the financial year 2024 were still outstanding. This means the above stated number of objections and referrals relating to the audited 2024 financial year is expected to increase until the reports have been submitted in full.
Regarding the objections raised by auditors relating to the 2024 financial year, it should be noted that these were largely due to improper use of the assets, in particular due to the lack of distributions over a longer period of time. Furthermore, deficiencies in the management of the assets, particularly disproportionately high costs for the foundation administration, also led to objections.
With regard to the referrals made by auditors concerning the 2024 financial year, the picture is broadly similar, namely that a large proportion of the matters requiring notification related to deficiencies in distribution practice. Many referrals were also made for the purpose of informing STIFA about pending legal proceedings, an accounting over-indebtness pursuant to Art. 182e and Art. 182f PGR or the completion of liquidation proceedings.
STIFA has examined the objections and referrals identified by the auditors and has taken the necessary measures.
Audits conducted by STIFA
| 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Objections | 3 | 3 | 5 |
| Referrals | 9 | 8 | 5 |
In the case of foundations and establishments that are exempt from the obligation to appoint an auditor (by the end of the year under review: 89), STIFA normally carries out the audit itself every three years. STIFA subjected a total of 30 (in the previous year: 26) common-benefit foundations to an independent audit during the year under review. Furthermore, in the year under review, STIFA carried out a final independent audit of eleven foundations that were exempt from the obligation to appoint an auditor because of a decision to dissolve the foundation, so that these foundations could subsequently be terminated.
On 31 December, 17 regular audits of STIFA were still pending. This means the above stated number of objections and referrals will increase until the audits of STIFA have been completed in full.
Regarding the objections and referrals ascertained by STIFA, it should be noted that the picture is broadly analogous to the objections and referrals made by the auditors. The findings were mainly made due to the improper use of the assets of the foundation, in particular due to the lack of distributions over a longer period of time. In addition, STIFA pointed out disproportionately high costs for the foundation administration in relation to the approved distributions. Furthermore, STIFA revoked the exemption from the duty to appoint an auditor for one foundation, as the conditions for the exemption were no longer met.
STIFA took the necessary measures based on the objections and referrals identified.
Supervisory proceedings and other proceedings
| 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Supervisory proceedings pursuant to Art. 552 § 29 Para. 3 PGR Application submitted by STIFA |
|||
| Proceedings opened | 11 | 17 | 8 |
| Proceedings concluded | 6 | 17 | 11 |
| Proceedings pending | 8 | 4 | 3 |
| of which pending before appeal | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Supervisory proceedings pursuant to Art. 552 § 29 Para. 4 PGR Application submitted by foundation participants |
|||
| Proceedings opened | 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Proceedings concluded | 4 | 7 | 10 | Proceedings pending | 6 | 7 | 7 |
| of which pending before appeal | 2 | 5 | 2 |
| Proceedings pursuant to Art. 552 §§ 33 and 34 PGR Change of purpose / change of other content |
|||
| Proceedings opened | 6 | 4 | 6 |
| Proceedings concluded | 8 | 7 | 4 |
| Proceedings pending | 0 | 2 | 5 |
| Referral of matters to the Office of the Public Prosecutor |
0 | 2 | 2 |
| Referral of matters to the Professional Ethics Committee of the Liechtenstein Institute of Professional Trustees and Fiduciaries |
0 | 4 | 1 |
In eleven cases STIFA applied to the Court of Justice for supervisory measures during the year under review (Art. 552 § 29 Para. 3 PGR). In addition, in three instances foundation participants applied to the Court of Justice for supervisory measures to be taken against foundations and establishments subject to STIFA supervision (Art. 552 § 29 Para. 4 PGR). STIFA was a party to each of these cases. Even though the number of legal proceedings initiated by foundation participants has decreased compared to the previous year, it can generally be said, as has been the case in the years before, that the scope and complexity of these proceedings has increased. As a result of the higher number of parties involved and the in some cases very high amount of and extensive assets affected by the proceedings, the legal proceedings are more comprehensive and take longer, which ultimately also places greater demands on STIFA’s resources.
Furthermore, in the year under review STIFA was asked to make statements in six cases on account of its party status in respect of changes to the purpose and other contents of the foundation documents, in particular the organisation, that had been requested at the Court of Justice (Art. 552 §§ 33 and 34 PGR).
In the year under review, STIFA has filed no reports to the Office of the Public Prosecutor on suspicion of criminal offences or the violation of the transitional provisions on foundation law (LGBl. 2008 Nr. 220) or to the Professional Ethics Committee of the Liechtenstein Institute of Professional Trustees and Fiduciaries on suspicion of possible violations of the Code of Professional Conduct.
Audits of formation and amendment notifications
| 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Audited non-registered foundations | 309 | 194 | 173 | (number of representatives/addresses for service) | (35) | (29) | (31) |
In the case of a total of 28 representatives and two addresses for service, the accuracy of the notifications of formation and amendments of private-benefit foundations not entered in the Commercial Register (Art. 552 § 21 PGR) was verified on a random basis during the year under review. In addition, the outstanding audit of one representative from the year before was completed during the year under review, with a total of 42 foundations audited due to mandates transfers at five representatives.
Regarding the total of 309 foundations audited by 31 December, STIFA was informed of various objections and referrals by the appointed auditors. In most cases it was found that changes to the information entered in the Commercial Register had not been notified in due time or that there were discrepancies between the foundation documents and the information deposited with the Commercial Register. In the first case, there was consistently no need for STIFA to initiate supervisory measures, especially since the foundations concerned had already notified the changes in the meantime. In the second case, STIFA has requested the foundations concerned for their statements or the necessary amendments had already been completed due to changes made in the Commercial Register in the meantime.
Furthermore, in the case of some foundations, not all notifications or foundation documents could be examined as they were not at the disposal of the representative concerned, for example due to the transfer of a mandate. However, the audit did not reveal any facts that would have led to the conclusion that violations had occurred. The current status in the Commercial Register is therefore correct.