Compare company formation jurisdictions

Every record is compiled from the corresponding full formation guide, which is built on registry and tax-authority primary sources: companies legislation, official registry fee schedules and published tax guidance. Each record is then checked against a pinned-fact validation matrix before publication, so the figures on a card trace back to a verified source rather than a third-party aggregator.

Records are re-verified on their own cycles rather than all at once, and the set currently spans May to August 2026. Registry fees, tax rates, and economic-substance rules change, sometimes mid-year, so treat the cards as a shortlisting tool and confirm the current position in the full jurisdiction guide or a consultation before incorporating.

Only that it fails one or more of your active filters; the reasons are listed on the dimmed card. It is not a verdict on the jurisdiction itself. Relaxing a single filter, often budget or privacy, can return strong candidates to the shortlist, which is why non-matching jurisdictions stay visible instead of disappearing.

Start from a Quick-start preset or set the filters directly, then combine as many as you need: use case, jurisdiction class (offshore, midshore, or onshore), budget, tax, formation speed, local substance, ownership privacy, and banking access. Results update live as you filter, and any jurisdiction that fails a filter stays visible, dimmed, with the exact reasons, so you can see what relaxing one constraint would unlock. Use Reset all filters to start again.

Each card links straight to the full jurisdiction guide, where every figure is set out with its source. Because registry fees, tax rates, and substance rules change, confirm the current position in that guide or in a consultation before incorporating. If you would rather talk it through, Emma can compare your shortlisted jurisdictions in seconds, in your language.