A group that has gradually collected entities costs effort every year, and sometimes no one remembers why some exist. The decision question is which of them still do a job, which duplicate another and which can be closed or merged without breaking something that matters.
For each company in the group the review asks three questions: what does it hold or do today, who relies on it, and what would stop working if it disappeared. Entities with no good answer to any of the three are candidates for simplification; those with a clear answer are kept, even if that is inconvenient.
May outlive the project and stays on the books with nothing in it.
Set up on someone's suggestion without a written reason, which makes it hard to judge.
May be doing a real job, such as keeping a licence or property apart. The review checks that before suggesting removal.
Two companies doing similar things in the same place, possibly from a period of rapid change.
This is a sorting aid; the right answer depends on documents and local rules.
Every entity gets an owner, a purpose, a status and a list of dependencies.
Entities with nothing in them versus those with contracts, accounts or employees.
What to close first, what to merge, what to leave alone.
Closure and merger may need a local adviser; the review gives them a clear brief.
This is business and structuring analysis, not legal, tax or investment advice. Where a legal or tax opinion is needed, we say so and point you to a licensed adviser.
Fewer entities can mean fewer recurring obligations, but a poorly planned closure can cost more than it saves. The review compares them, in general terms.
Closures are carried out by local professionals. The review prepares the decision.
That is a workable starting point. We reconstruct the purpose from documents and mark what remains unclear.
No obligation. We read your request and reply with a straight answer.
Describe your plan and your constraints. We reply with what we would look at first.
Request an assessment