As a former colony under British rule, the foundation of Bahamian law and the legal system of The Bahamas is the common law of England.
The Bahamas is a parliamentary democracy based on the Westminster system of government consisting of three branches: the executive, a bicameral parliament, and the judiciary. The relationship between each branch is governed by the principle of separation of powers and the operation of each branch is enunciated in a written constitution.
The judiciary of The Bahamas comprises the Magistrates′ Court, the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, and the Judicial Committee of His Majesty′s Privy Council.
The Magistrates′ Court is presided over by stipendiary and circuit magistrates who exercise summary jurisdiction in criminal matters and civil matters involving amounts not exceeding BSD20,000. Currently, there are 17 Magistrates′ Courts throughout The Bahamas, with most located in New Providence (the most populous island in The Bahamas).
The Supreme Court bench consists of a Chief Justice and not more than 20 additional justices. The Supreme Court has unlimited original jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters and such appellate jurisdiction as may be conferred upon it by law.
The Court of Appeal, the highest resident court within The Bahamas, is made up of not more than six justices of appeal, inclusive of its President, and has jurisdiction in criminal, constitutional, and civil matters.
The Judicial Committee of His Majesty′s Privy Council is the highest court for The Bahamas, which sits in England to hear appeals from the Court of Appeal.
The prior approval of the government of The Bahamas is required before a foreign investor invests in The Bahamas. All non-Bahamians are required to submit a formal investment proposal to the Bahamas Investment Authority (BIA), which serves as the secretariat of the National Economic Council and The Bahamas Investments Board.
Investment in Bahamian Business
The current investment policy reserves certain sectors of the Bahamian economy for investment by Bahamians, as follows:
(International investors may engage in the wholesale distribution of any product the investor produces locally.)
The following sectors are open to foreign investment; the list is non-exhaustive, and investors are encouraged to communicate their intended investment activity to the BIA:
In addition to BIA approval, Exchange Control Regulations and policies may bear upon a particular transaction and in certain instances may require that foreign investment inflows are granted approval, that entities wholly or partially owned by foreign investors are appropriately designated, and that “Approved Investment Status” is granted to foreign investors or lenders with respect to their investment or loans. Over recent years (including in early 2024), the Central Bank of The Bahamas has taken various steps to simplify or “relax” the Exchange Control regime and administrative arrangements, or to delegate authority for certain matters to local financial institutions, and a prudent investor or lender would want to obtain advice regarding what approvals may be required (or now dispensed with or delegated to local banks) in respect of their transaction.
Investments in Property
Subject to any exceptions in the International Person’s Landholding Act, non-Bahamians acquiring real property or having an interest in real property must first apply for a permit from the Investment Board. Eligibility for a permit includes a due diligence review of the intended purchaser.
Steps to Obtain Approval
A foreign investor interested in undertaking a significant development project or commercial enterprise would, as a first step be required to obtain BIA approval to invest in a business within The Bahamas. Such application must be supported, in addition to routine due diligence materials on the applicant, by a detailed investment proposal to the BIA. The proposal should include explicit details regarding the nature of the investment, the island on which the investment/business would take place, due diligence and financial details regarding the beneficial owners, employment projections for Bahamians and non-Bahamians, whether work permits or any concessions under the relevant legislation are required, and whether the investment will include the acquisition of land.
The proposal is reviewed by the BIA and, where required, based on internal administrative policies, referred to the National Economic Council for a decision. This process may take between one and six months, depending on the nature and complexity of the investment.
Following approval from the BIA, the investor will be directed to:
A business licence may be approved within 10 to 12 business days of receipt of an application with supporting information, though longer timelines are common for more complicated applications.
In addition to BIA approval, the investor must obtain the approval of the Central Bank of The Bahamas (the “Bank”), pursuant to the Exchange Control Regulations, to make the required investment for recognition of the beneficial owners of the enterprise and, in certain instances, be granted Approved Investment Status in relation to their foreign currency investment. The timeframe for this process is between two and eight weeks.
Consequences of Investing Without Approval
In as much as the prior approval of the BIA and the Bank are respectively required before a foreign investor makes a capital investment within The Bahamas, a major consequence of investing without the requisite approvals is that the investor cannot receive returns on capital.
The Bank, via the Exchange Control Regulations Act and the Exchange Control Regulations, has wide powers to make orders to prevent capital transactions involving the movement of funds to and from The Bahamas. The Bank also regulates and may restrict the conversion of Bahamian dollars to a foreign currency to make capital returns to non-Bahamians, where the underlying transaction/investment did not receive required approvals.
A failure to obtain from the Investments Board a Landholding Permit or Certificate, where such approval is required pursuant to the International Persons Landholding Act, may also result in the relevant transfer instrument or deed being null and void for all purposes of law.
Sanctions
Sanctions under the Exchange Control Regulations Act for non-compliance with the Exchange Control Regulations include:
Where a foreign investor fails to obtain a business licence under the Business Licence Act, they may be liable upon summary conviction to a fine of BSD5,000 and a sum of BSD100 for each day the offence continues subsequent to the date to which the conviction relates.
Generally, the conditions attached to the approval of foreign investors are found within a Heads of Agreement (setting out key terms that form the basis on which two parties intend to form a contract) executed between the government of The Bahamas and the foreign investor. In this regard, certain factors such as the sector of the economy being considered for foreign investment, the environment or infrastructure of the area or island being considered, the nature and scope of the foreign investment, the number of jobs expected to be created and any applicable government concessions will help to determine the type of conditions for a particular foreign investment project.
For example, it is often the case that the government of The Bahamas will require within a Heads of Agreement that a certain number of jobs be filled by Bahamians, continuing education and training be made available to employees, suitable infrastructure and essential services be put in place, and safety measures implemented to protect a particular area or environment, just to name a few.
There is no specific legislative framework in place that gives investors the ability to challenge decisions if a particular investment is not authorised by the government of The Bahamas.
The most common forms of legal entity within The Bahamas are companies incorporated under the Companies Act and the International Business Companies Act.
Some of the main characteristics of each type of company are outlined below.
Companies Incorporated Under the Companies Act
Companies Incorporated Under the International Business Companies Act
Within 48 hours from receipt of the relevant documents, a company may be incorporated under the Companies Act and the International Business Companies Act. The main steps under both Acts are:
Companies Incorporated Under the Companies Act
Companies incorporated under the Companies Act are subject to annual reporting and disclosure requirements. The following lists must be submitted to the Registrar of Companies.
Companies Incorporated Under the International Business Companies Act
Companies incorporated under the International Business Companies Act are subject to the following reporting and disclosure requirements.
Recent Updates to Reporting and Disclosure Obligations
The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) adopted revisions to Recommendation 24 to reinforce global standards on the transparency of nominee shareholders and nominee directors. These revisions require jurisdictions to ensure that nominee arrangements are not misused to conceal beneficial ownership. The Bahamas, in adopting the provisions of Recommendation 24, amended the International Business Companies Act (“IBC Act”), the Companies Act (CA), and the Register of Beneficial Ownership Act (“ROBO Act”) by the International Business Companies (Amendment) Act 2025, the Companies (Amendment) Act 2025, and the Register of Beneficial Ownership (Amendment) Act 2025, respectively, to impose restrictions concerning nominee director and nominee shareholder arrangements.
The recent amendments to the IBC Act and the CA require (i) disclosure of both the nominee and the person(s) on whose behalf the nominee holds the shares in the company’s share register, and (ii) maintenance of declarations of trust in respect of the nominee relationship. The ROBO Act was amended such that both the nominee and the person(s) on whose behalf the nominee holds the shares are required to be disclosed in the Beneficial Ownership Secure System. Additionally, the CA and IBC Act were amended such that the use of nominee directors is prohibited. Note, however, that the authors have taken the view that this restriction does not apply to the provision of directorial services where such directors are acting independently of the instructions of others and in the best interest of the company.
The directors of companies incorporated under the Companies Act and the International Business Companies Act are charged with the responsibility of managing the company. Generally, this rule is subject to any limitation as provided for in any unanimous shareholder agreement and the constitutional documents of the company.
Companies Act
The typical management structure of a company is based on a single-tier system and consists of a board of directors responsible for appointing officers. However, subject to any limitation in the company’s articles of association or a unanimous shareholder agreement, the directors may delegate their powers to a single director, a committee of directors, or officers, and specify their duties to manage the business and affairs of the company to them.
The officers are, however, restricted from issuing shares, declaring dividends, purchasing or redeeming shares, approving financial statements, or amending the company’s articles of association.
The International Business Companies Act
The usual management structure of an international business company is also based on a single-tier system and consists of a board of directors responsible for the appointment of officers. Subject to any limitations in the memorandum or articles of association or in a unanimous shareholder agreement, each officer or agent has similar powers and authority to the directors, except the power to fix emoluments of directors with respect to services provided to the company.
Directors of an international business company are also permitted to designate one or more committees, each consisting of one or more directors. The only limitations of such committees are the powers to fill a vacancy in the board of directors and appoint and remove officers or agents of the company.
The directors owe a fiduciary duty to their companies and should avoid situations where their duty conflicts with their personal interests. In accordance with the Companies Act and the International Business Companies Act, directors, officers and agents must act honestly and in good faith with a view to the best interest of the company and exercise the care, diligence, and skill that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in comparable circumstances in performing their functions.
Where a current or former director or officer has acted in good faith with a view to the best interest of the company and, in certain cases, had reasonable grounds to believe that their conduct was lawful, the company may indemnify such person.
Section 58 of the International Business Companies Act provides that subject to any limitations in its memorandum or articles of association or any unanimous shareholder agreement, a company may indemnify against all expenses, including legal fees, and against all judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement and reasonably incurred in connection with legal or administrative proceedings, any person who:
Also, under the common law of The Bahamas, there is the concept of piercing the corporate veil based on English common law principles.
Employment relationships are governed principally by the implied and expressed terms of the employment relationship. In The Bahamas, these terms (where applicable) may be gleaned from the following sources:
In particular, where an employment relationship has been created by oral agreement, the terms of the employment relationship are espoused principally from English common law (as applicable), local common law, and local statute (in particular, the Employment Act and the Employment (Amendment) Act).
The privileges associated with the freedom to contract exist in The Bahamas. This freedom, however, is subject to the relatively inalienable rights of the parties created under the Employment Act. These basic rights represent and dictate the minimum standard of behaviour and expectations between an employer and employee.
The termination of employment relations is governed by Sections 26 to 28E of Part VI (redundancy, lay-offs, and short-time) of the Employment Act as amended, Sections 29 and 30 of Part VII (termination of employment with notice), Sections 31 to 32 of Part VIII (summary dismissal) and Sections 34 to 48 of Part X (unfair dismissal) of the Employment Act.
Although there are no minimum requirements for the duration of an employment relationship, the employer’s duty upon the termination of a contract without cause varies depending upon the employee’s tenure of service with the employer.
Generally, when terminating the employee without cause, the employer is required to give the employee reasonable notice of the termination. The Employment Act establishes the minimum notice requirements and provides the employer with the power to elect whether to give notice or to give a payment in lieu of such notice. For example, an employee who has been employed at least six months but less than 12 months is entitled to one week’s notice or pay in lieu thereof, and an employee who was employed for 12 months or more is entitled to two weeks’ notice or pay in lieu thereof if such employee does not hold a managerial or supervisorial position, or one month’s notice or pay in lieu thereof if such employee does hold such a position.
In addition to this notice period (or payment in lieu thereof), the Employment Act places an obligation on the part of the employer to pay to the employee a sum representing the product of the dismissed employee’s bi-weekly or monthly salary (depending on their role) and the number of years of such employee’s service. This additional sum is usually referred to as “severance pay”. Severance pay acknowledges the dismissed employee’s years of service and is capped at six years for a non-managerial/non-supervisorial employee and 12 years for a managerial/supervisorial employee.
It is significant to note that the Employment Act does not confer an obligation on the part of the employer to give notice to an employee of less than six months′ tenure.
Notice of termination can be given verbally. However, the employer must ensure that the notice of termination was properly and unequivocally communicated to the employee and that they exercised their complete obligations upon termination. Thus, the parties’ conduct immediately after termination has been made orally may be evidence of the nature of the notice given.
Where notice is not properly given or is insufficient, an employee is entitled to claim damages for wrongful dismissal.
Where the employment contract confers a greater benefit on the employee regarding the duration of the notice period or the value of the pay in lieu of notice, then such provisions and/or benefits will apply. Where no notice period is provided for under the contract of employment, the calculation set out in the Employment Act will apply.
The Employment Act also mandates that employees have a right not to be unfairly dismissed. Whilst the question of whether the dismissal of an employee was fair or unfair is to be determined in accordance with the substantial merits of each case the Employment Act provides instances in which a dismissal will be deemed to be unfair which include dismissal:
These categories are not closed and it is important to note that the rules of natural justice should be applied when seeking to terminate an employee.
Under the Employment Act, the maximum number of daily work hours is eight, and weekly work hours is 40, except for employees who hold managerial or supervisorial positions or work in any industrial, construction, manufacturing or transhipment enterprise, or essential service. Employees are also entitled to 48 hours of rest, with at least 24 of such hours being consecutive.
Where the relevant employee is required or is permitted to work in excess of their daily work hours, they are entitled to overtime pay, which is calculated at 1.5 times their regular rate of wages and two times the regular rate of wages if the overtime is performed on a holiday.
Contracts of employment may be terminated by either party upon giving the other party reasonable notice of the termination, by the employer without notice as detailed previously or by the employer “for cause” when an employee commits a fundamental breach of the contract such that the nature of the breach is repugnant to the interests of the employer.
An employment contract may also be terminated on the grounds of redundancy. An employee’s position is lawfully made redundant in the following circumstances:
Except where an employee is terminated for cause, the employer is required to either give notice or pay in lieu of notice (see 4.2 Characteristics of Employment Contracts).
Before the employer can lawfully terminate an employee or employees on the grounds of redundancy, the employer must:
Generally speaking, the role of an employee representative is not required by law.
Where the workforce is unionised, industrial agreements provide for the appointment of a representative, which would include, at a minimum, the purpose and functions as prescribed in the Industrial Relations Act. However, the extent of the rules and practices regarding employee representation depends on the terms negotiated between the relevant parties and thus may vary.
For those employment relationships to which an industrial agreement applies, a workplace representative is appointed who shall generally safeguard the interests of the employees and hear the collective views of the staff with a view of forwarding the same to the employer for their/its attention.
Trade unions are required by law to co-operate in ensuring effective communication and consultation with the employer regarding the employees’ views and the problems they face in meeting the employer’s objectives. The trade union is also obligated to keep all employees adequately informed of the main terms and conditions of the employment, job requirements, reporting requirements, disciplinary and grievance procedures, safety and health rules, and the conclusions reached through negotiations and consultation with the employer.
Contributions to the National Insurance Board (the Bahamian equivalent to social security) are the only taxes that must be paid on behalf of employees. Employees currently contribute the equivalent of 4.65%, and employers contribute the equivalent of 6.65% of an employee’s salary up to the employable wage ceiling. New contribution rates anticipated from 1 July 2026 but not yet announced. The employable wage ceiling is BSD810 per week, from a previous ceiling of BSD740 per week.
Business Licence Tax
All persons (inclusive of companies) conducting business within The Bahamas must be granted a business licence. Although certain activities are exempt from the licence requirements under the Business Licence Act, generally, there is a modest business licence tax (calculated based on a percentage of the turnover for the preceding year) for companies conducting business within The Bahamas.
Value Added Tax (VAT)
All goods and most services supplied by a VAT-registered business in The Bahamas that are neither subject to the zero rate nor exempt from VAT are subject to VAT at the standard rate (presently 10%) or such other rate as prescribed by law for certain goods and services (eg, real estate transactions). Effective 1 April 2026, unprepared food items were exempted from VAT and the VAT charged on essential non-food items was reduced to 5%. The VAT charged on prescription and non-prescription drugs is also 5%. VAT is also charged on goods and some services that are imported from outside The Bahamas.
Stamp Duty
Stamp duty is payable in respect of certain transactions (namely transfers of personal property). A Stamp Duty may also arise on the conversion of funds from Bahamian dollars to United States dollars where such funds are to be used for remittance or transferred out of The Bahamas.
Qualified Domestic Minimum Tax Top-Up
The Domestic Minimum Top-Up Tax Act, 2024 came into force on 1 January 2024, applying to fiscal years of a Multinational Enterprise (“MNE Group”) that began after 31 December 2023. However, the Act does not apply to a fiscal year of an MNE Group beginning before 1 January 2025, unless that Group is affected by an Income Inclusion Rule or an Undertaxed Profits Rule of a jurisdiction outside The Bahamas.
This Act incorporates into domestic law the Global Anti-Base Erosion Model Rules established by the OECD/G20 BEPS Project. In effect, in-scope MNE Groups with Constituent Entities in The Bahamas will be liable to pay a corporate tax of 15%, referred to as a domestic minimum top-up tax, as calculated under the GloBE Model Rules. The first filings are expected to occur within 18 months after 31 December 2025.
An agreement between the OECD and the United States of America (USA), which became effective in January 2026, resulted in the USA being recognised as a Qualified Side-by-Side (SbS) Regime. The agreement provides that MNE Groups headquartered in the USA are not subject to the application of the Income Inclusion Rule (IIR) or Untaxed Profit Rule (UTPR). As a result, where the UPE (ultimate parent entity) of a Group is located in the USA (or other Qualified SbS Regimes), there are two safe harbours, SbS Safe Harbour and UPE Safe Harbour, applicable for fiscal years commencing on or after 1 January 2026. The former eliminates top-up-tax by deeming any excess profits taxable under the IIR or UTPR, which is ordinarily available outside of the application of the SbS Regime, to be zero. The latter eliminates top-up-tax by deeming any excess profits taxable under application of the UTPR to be zero. The agreement has no effect on DMTT liability in The Bahamas. QDMTT continues to apply in The Bahamas with the need for a top-up-tax eliminated. QMDTT liability paid in The Bahamas is credited against the MNE Group’s tax liability in the Qualified SbS Regime.
The Department of Inland Revenue (DIR) published notification requiring each Bahamas Constituent Entity in an MNE Group, which is in-scope for fiscal years 2024 and 2025, to complete and submit Form DMTT-24/25 with a deadline of 31 March 2026, and 30 April 2026, respectively.
The Common Reporting Standard
The Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information Act, 2016 was recently amended by the Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information (Amendment) Act, 2026 (the “Amendment Act”).
Pursuant to the Amendment Act, all Financial Institutions are now required to register as either a Reporting or Non-Reporting Financial Institution, no later than 90 days after the date on which it became a Financial Institution. An existing Financial Institution, which has not previously registered, is required to register as a Financial Institution no later than 15 June 2026.
Moreover, a Non-Reporting Financial Institution is required to notify the Competent Authority when it becomes a Reporting Financial Institution and vice versa, within 30 days of such change. A Financial Institution must also de-register within 90 days from the date on which it ceased to be a Financial Institution.
If a Reporting Financial Institution did not maintain any reportable accounts for a reporting period, it must also file a Nil return with the Competent Authority. This change applies to information returns that are to be submitted in respect of the 2025 calendar year.
It is of note that pursuant to the Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information (Order) 2025, certain compliance and enforcement powers and functions were delegated to the Securities Commission of The Bahamas, the Central Bank of the Bahamas, and the Insurance Commission of The Bahamas (the “regulators”). The Amendment Act also introduced more stringent penalties for non-compliance (including an administrative fine of up to BSD300,000), and empowered the regulators to impose such penalties on their licensees and registrants for non-compliance.
The new reporting deadline is 30 June of the year immediately following the calendar year to which the information return relates. This accelerates the prior reporting deadline, which was previously 31 July. The reporting period is 1 May to 30 June of each year. The portal is accessible between 1 October and 31 August in any year.
The following is a non-exhaustive list of various pieces of legislation that provide tax concessions to persons who engage in business in The Bahamas.
The Hotels Encouragement Act
The Hotels Encouragement Act allows duty-free entry within The Bahamas of approved materials for, inter alia, the construction, rehabilitation, remodelling, equipping, and furnishing of a new or existing hotel or resort (taking into account both large and small-scale projects) together with a concession from real property taxes for a prescribed period.
Moreover, any entertainment facility, nightclub, restaurant, and shop within a designated area (described by an order of the responsible minister) is also afforded the same concessions.
The concessions under the Hotels Encouragement Act are geared towards any person or company or any group of persons or companies who are (acting in conjunction) prepared to undertake the construction or remodelling of a new or existing hotel or resort.
The Family Island Development Encouragement Act
The Family Island Development Encouragement Act allows persons to receive duty concessions on the importation of building materials (inclusive of plumbing, electrical, mechanical, and construction materials of all kinds) for residential and/or commercial development on certain islands within The Bahamas.
The Industries Encouragement Act
The Industries Encouragement Act allows for duty-free concessions for the importation of machinery, building, and other materials or appliances for an approved manufacturer who is manufacturing an approved product together with an exemption from real property tax for 15 years concerning any relevant factory premises.
The concessions under the Industries Encouragement Act are geared towards such manufacturers and products approved by the responsible minister to encourage the establishment and development of certain industries within The Bahamas.
Hawksbill Creek, Grand Bahama (Deep Water Harbour and Industrial Area) Act
The Hawksbill Creek, Grand Bahama (Deep Water Harbour and Industrial Area) Act allows for the Port Area known as Freeport, a free trade zone, to be free from certain taxes (eg, excise tax, stamp duties, and most customs duties) until 2054.
The City of Nassau Revitalisation Act
The City of Nassau Revitalisation Act allows incentives and duty concessions for owners of property situated in the city of Nassau (located on the island of New Providence) who are desirous of restoring, repairing, and upgrading the buildings, both commercial and residential.
The Bahamas Vacation Plan and Time-Sharing Act
The Bahamas Vacation Plan and Time-sharing Act allows duty-free concessions for persons who have been granted a developing owner’s licence with respect to building supplies for the construction of timeshare facilities.
This is not applicable in The Bahamas as there are no laws governing the same.
In The Bahamas this is not applicable as there are no laws governing the same.
Transfer pricing is not applicable in The Bahamas as there are no laws governing the same.
There are no anti-evasion rules in The Bahamas as there are no relevant laws.
The Bahamas’ tariff regime is in the form of taxes imposed on goods imported into the country. Most of the goods purchased by Bahamian residents are imported. These import duties are a significant source of income for the Bahamian government, and in some instances, provide a level of protection for Bahamian businesses. Items imported into the country that compete with locally produced goods are typically taxed at a higher rate.
The government has lowered or eliminated tariffs in the construction, agriculture, fisheries and renewable sectors to encourage economic activity.
The Bahamas is directly impacted by global developments and the levying of tariffs on goods imported into the United States increases the costs of those goods. The United States is The Bahamas’ principal trading partner. Approximately 83.3% of the country’s total imports in 2024 were from the United States, valued at an estimated BSD5 billion.
Any slowdown in the economy of the United States as a result of concerns around inflationary pressures and increased cost of living may impact The Bahamas’ tourism industry.
Merger control notification is not applicable in The Bahamas as there are no laws governing the same.
There is no merger control procedure in The Bahamas.
The topic of cartels is not applicable in The Bahamas as there are no relevant laws.
Abuse of dominant position is not relevant in The Bahamas.
For the most part, the legal regime applicable to IP rights as outlined below includes:
A patent for an invention is the title granted by the government to protect an invention. The right conferred by a patent excludes others from making, using, or selling the invention.
A patent is granted by the Bahamian government through the Intellectual Property Office through the following process:
The entire process, from the date of submission to obtaining the Letters of Patent, could take up to one year.
Generally, the term of every patent shall be 20 years from the date of the application. However, an annual maintenance fee, in an amount as prescribed by the Intellectual Property Office, must be paid before the expiration of the first year from the date of filing the application and thereafter before the expiration of each successive year during the term of the patent. The failure to pay the annual maintenance fee will result in the lapse of the patent.
Unless provided for to the contrary, a holder of an exclusive licence under a patent (as similarly a patentee; ie, a person entered on the register of patents) has a right to take proceedings in respect of any infringement of the patent committed after the date of the licence and, in awarding damages or granting any other relief in such proceedings, the Supreme Court shall take into consideration any loss suffered or likely to be suffered by the exclusive licensee as such or, as the case may be, the profits earned by means of the infringement so far as it constitutes an infringement of the rights of the exclusive licensee as such.
A trade mark is a mark, symbol or picture, or a combination used to distinguish goods to indicate that they are goods of the proprietor separate from the goods of others in the marketplace. A registered trade mark gives a proprietor exclusive rights to use the mark for the designated services of the mark.
The registration of the trade mark is governed by the Trade Mark Act, regulations (to be promulgated) and the policies set by the Intellectual Property Office.
To register a trade mark, the process is as follows:
The entire application process – inclusive of the publishing of the mark in the official gazette, and the final approval and registration of the mark – can take up to 18 months.
A person who has filed an application for protection of a trade mark in a Convention country (any country that is a member of the World Trade Organization; the Convention of the Union of Paris; or any other treaty the Minister responsible for trade marks may by Order designate) has a right to priority, for the purposes of registering the same trade mark under the Trade Marks Act, for a period of six months from the date of filing of the first such application.
The registration of a trade mark is for ten years but may be renewed from time to time in accordance with the provisions of the Trade Marks Act.
Under the Trade Marks Act, persons shall only be entitled to institute proceedings to prevent or recover damages for the infringement of a registered trade mark.
In any legal proceeding in which the validity of the registration of a registered trade mark comes into question and is decided in favour of the proprietor of such trade mark, the Supreme Court may certify the same, and if it so certifies, then in any subsequent legal proceeding in which such validity comes into question, the proprietor of the said trade mark, on obtaining a final order or judgment in their favour, shall have their full costs, charges, and expenses as between attorney and client, unless in such subsequent proceedings the court certifies that they ought not to have the same.
Similarly, in addition to the statutory penalties of a monetary fine or the forfeiture of all goods in respect of which an offence was committed, the Supreme Court can make such order as it sees fit with respect to suitable remedies.
The definition of “design” for the purposes of the Industrial Property Act means features of shape, configuration, pattern or ornament of an article, or features of a pattern or ornament applicable to articles insofar as such features appeal to and are judged solely by the eye.
Generally, design copyright in a design exists for five years from the date of deposit. However, applications for extensions can be made under the Industrial Property Act.
Every claim for design copyright in a design must be accompanied by a representation or, at the Registrar General’s option, a specimen of the design, and must include certain information as specified by the Industrial Property Act. It is anticipated the Industrial Property Act will be amended to reflect applications the new regime and for applications to be made to the Industrial Property Office
Similarly, there are various remedies available through the Supreme Court and applicable to patents under the legislation.
A copyright is a property right that, unless specifically excluded by the Copyright Act, may subsist in the following categories of work of authorship:
Generally, copyright in any work expires after 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the author dies, save for those limited exceptions outlined in the Copyright Act when the period varies.
Although there is no formal system for copyright registration, this is usually made by the owner of the copyright or of any exclusive right in the work, together with the application and the applicable fee for examination and consideration.
An infringement of copyright shall be actionable at the suit of the copyright owner, and, subject to the Copyright Act, any action for such infringement includes all such relief by way of damages, injunctions, accounts, or otherwise.
The government has signalled its intention to continue to modernise the country’s approach to addressing copyright, trade mark and patent protections, including areas like geographical indications, false trade descriptions, and new plant varieties, and join 11 new international conventions in the near future. It is anticipated that additional legislation will follow.
The Data Protection (Privacy of Personal Information) Act, 2003 (DPA 2003) remains the primary legislation governing the protection of a living individual’s personal data in The Bahamas.
The Act applies to data controllers, defined as persons that determine the purpose for which and the manner in which any personal data is used or is to be used.
The Minister with responsibility for information privacy and data protection may make regulations to:
Though for the purposes of this section the DPA 2003 will be the legislation referenced as it is the one currently in force, it should be noted that in December 2025, parliament enacted the Data Protection Act 2025 (DPA 2025). Once it is brought into force, the DPA 2025 will repeal and replace the DPA 2003.
The DPA 2025 substantially modernises the Bahamian data protection framework and brings it in line with its regional counterparts such as Jamaica and the Cayman Islands, as well as the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation. Key changes under the DPA 2025 include, inter alia:
A foreign company targeting customers within The Bahamas will be governed by the provisions of the DPA 2003 where it is deemed a data controller and establishes a legal presence within The Bahamas for the purpose of processing personal data in the context of that establishment or, where no legal presence is established within The Bahamas, such data controller uses equipment in The Bahamas for processing data otherwise for the purpose of transit through The Bahamas.
The office of the Data Protection Commissioner (DPC) is established by the DPA 2003 as a corporation solely to enforce data protection rules as enacted by the DPA 2003. Its function is to regulate data controllers and processors and provide internationally accepted rules to ensure that the personal information of citizens is collected, kept up to date, stored, used, disclosed, and disposed of lawfully.
The DPC is also empowered to encourage trade associations and other bodies to prepare codes of practice for dealing with personal data and to approve such codes of practice.
Under the DPA 2003, the DPC has the authority to do the following:
Sassoon House
Shirley Street & Victoria Avenue
PO Box N-272
Nassau
The Bahamas
+1 242 322 4130
+1 242 328 1069
info@gtclaw.com www.grahamthompson.com
Moving The Bahamas Forward
The Bahamas has been a well-established destination from the 1950s and continues to enjoy a stable government and a parliamentary democracy based on the Westminster model. Investors rely on a seasoned and experienced legal infrastructure underpinned by a well-regarded court system with ultimate appeal to the Privy Council in the UK. World-class housing, internationally accredited education and medical facilities, and easy accessibility to the United States make it an attractive destination for ultra-high-net-worth homeowners and investors. Immigration and residency options include permanent residence and annual residence. For business owners, the Commercial Enterprises Act facilitates expedited approvals for a variety of entrepreneurial ventures that can be operated both within and outside of The Bahamas.
On 28 May 2025, the Prime Minister of The Bahamas, the Hon. Philip Davis KC, tabled “Budget 2025/2026: Expanding Opportunities Island by Island” in the House of Assembly. The government’s budget communication has made it clear that the government’s focus during this budget cycle is on security, opportunity, affordability and reform with the aim of allowing The Bahamas, its citizens and residents to exploit new opportunities and usher in a new era of progress and renewal.
A general election was held on 12 May 2026. The government’s 2026/2027 budget communication is expected to be tabled in the House of Assembly in a few weeks.
Real property
Overview
The most significant recent development in Bahamian land law is the introduction of two complementary pieces of legislation: the Land Adjudication Act, 2025 and the Registered Land Act, 2025. Together, these Acts create the statutory framework for the new system of land adjudication and registered title in The Bahamas.
Both Acts were brought into force and deemed effective from 1 January 2026.
The new regime is intended to operate in two stages. Firstly, the Land Adjudication Act provides the process for identifying and determining the rights and interests in land, and secondly, the Registered Land Act provides the framework for registering those rights and regulating future dealings with registered land.
The Land Adjudication Act, 2025
The Land Adjudication Act provides for the systematic adjudication of rights and interests in land in The Bahamas, the demarcation of boundaries, and related matters.
The Act applies where the Minister declares an area to be an adjudication area. That declaration must be published in the Gazette and must also be publicised more broadly, including through newspapers and an official government website. For Family Islands, notice must also be posted in the relevant administrator’s office. Lands held in common under the Commonage Act cannot be declared adjudication areas.
An adjudicator (a Bahamian counsel and attorney of at least seven years’ standing with relevant experience) is appointed, along with local assessors. The area is divided into sections and claimants are required to submit claims within specified timeframes and to identify boundaries.
Once adjudication begins, civil proceedings relating to interests in land in the section generally cannot be commenced without the adjudicator’s written consent, and existing proceedings may be stayed.
Key roles include the demarcator (boundaries and rights of way), surveyor (demarcation index map), and records officer (investigates claims and prepares the adjudication record).
The Act distinguishes absolute title (good documentary title or sufficient open and peaceful possession) from provisional title (where absolute title is not established). Relevant possession periods are 12 years (private land), 30 years (Crown land), and 60 years (foreshore). After inspection and objections are dealt with, the adjudicator certifies the record as final and delivers it to the Registrar of Lands to support first registration under the Registered Land Act. Appeals to the Supreme Court are limited to errors of law or procedural non-compliance.
The Registered Land Act, 2025
The Registered Land Act 2025 supports the second stage of the framework. It provides for the registration of titles to land and dealings in registered land and applies to parcels adjudicated under the Land Adjudication Act.
The Act establishes the Land Registry, which is responsible for maintaining the new land registration system. The Registry is to keep the following items.
The Land Register is the central record. It will contain a register for every parcel adjudicated under the Land Adjudication Act and for every lease required to be registered. Each register will state whether the land is private land or Crown land and, where the land is private land, whether title is absolute or provisional.
Each register has three sections.
First registration occurs once the adjudication record is final and delivered to the Registrar, who prepares and signs the register for each parcel and registrable lease.
Registration with absolute title vests ownership in the registered proprietor, subject to registered interests and overriding interests. Provisional title remains subject to the recorded qualification but may later be upgraded.
Overriding interests can bind registered land even if not noted on the register (for example, certain easements, short leases, statutory rights, limitation or prescription rights, and rights of persons in actual occupation or receiving rents and profits).
The Act regulates dealings in registered land, so the register is continuously updated, reducing reliance on repeated historical title investigations once land is on the register. The Act also provides protections such as inhibitions, cautions and restrictions. A caution may be lodged by certain claimants and generally prevents inconsistent dealings without consent or a court order. Finally, the Act includes rectification and indemnity provisions for specified errors, omissions, fraud or mistakes, subject to statutory limits and protections.
Registrar of Lands
The Registered Land Act provides for the appointment of a Registrar of Lands, who is responsible for the administration of the Land Registry. The Registrar may be assisted by a Deputy Registrar or Assistant Registrars and Registration Officers as required.
Following the passage of the Acts, a Registrar of Lands was appointed effective 19 January 2026. This role includes responsibility for the administration of the new Land Registry and the systematic adjudication of land throughout The Bahamas.
The previous unregistered land system
Prior to these reforms, The Bahamas operated an unregistered land system derived from the conveyancing laws of England and Wales prior to 1925.
Under that system, the seller of land must deduce title extending to a root title being no less than 30 years in date, unless title begins with a Crown grant, Crown lease or a certificate of title granted by the court under the Quieting Titles Act, whichever period is shorter.
As a result, purchasers customarily instruct counsel to investigate titles, review the chain of ownership, identify defects or encumbrances and issue a title opinion confirming whether the seller has good and marketable documentary title. Instruments affecting land are filed for record in the Registry of Records to establish priority under the Registration of Records Act 1928.
Conclusion
The reforms mark a major shift from The Bahamas’ historically unregistered land system, under which purchasers generally rely on documentary title investigations, title opinions and, where required, title insurance. While the Acts are in force, practical implementation appears to be ongoing, and further operational guidance will be needed to confirm how and when the new system will be fully functioning in practice. Once fully implemented, the new system should improve transparency, certainty and efficiency in land transactions. It should also reduce reliance on repeated back-title investigations for registered parcels, since the Land Register will become the central record of ownership and registrable interests.
Estate planning
Usufruct and the evolution of estate planning in The Bahamas
The enactment of the Usufruct Interest Act, 2026 is one of the more interesting developments to emerge from The Bahamas’ private client sector in recent years. Not necessarily because usufruct itself is new – civil law jurisdictions have used the concept for centuries – but because of what its enactment says about the direction of international wealth planning and how The Bahamas sees its role within that evolving landscape.
For a long time, offshore estate planning was largely built around common law structures. Trusts became the cornerstone of cross-border wealth preservation, succession planning and asset protection, particularly for families connected to the United Kingdom, North America and other common law jurisdictions. The Bahamas continues to maintain an exceptionally strong reputation in the trust space and remains one of the leading trust jurisdictions internationally.
What has changed over the past decade is the profile of international wealth itself. Private wealth is increasingly global, increasingly mobile and increasingly concentrated in jurisdictions that do not necessarily share common law traditions. Latin America is perhaps the clearest example. Families from Brazil, Mexico, Colombia and elsewhere are often sophisticated users of offshore structures, but they frequently approach ownership, succession and family wealth through an entirely different legal lens.
One of the recurring challenges in cross-border estate planning is not whether a structure works technically, but whether the family itself is comfortable with it conceptually. Many civil law clients understand direct ownership intuitively. They understand splitting economic rights from ultimate ownership. They understand family succession through retained lifetime benefits. Trusts, while highly effective, can sometimes feel less natural because they require a different way of thinking about ownership altogether.
By introducing the usufruct interest into this jurisdiction, The Bahamas enhances its competitiveness in global wealth structuring, providing an additional mechanism for succession planning, asset protection, and intergenerational wealth transfer.
In particular, the legislation responds to a clear market demand, especially from civil law regions such as Latin America, where usufruct is a familiar and widely used planning tool. Its introduction positions The Bahamas as a jurisdiction capable of bridging common law and civil law legal traditions, thereby attracting a broader client base without displacing its existing strengths, particularly the strength and flexibility of its trust regime.
What is a usufruct?
To understand why this matters, it is necessary to begin with the concept of ownership itself. Under Roman and civil law traditions, ownership has historically been viewed as comprising three distinct rights:
In common law jurisdictions, these three rights are generally consolidated into full ownership. Civil law systems, however, permit these rights to be separated and allocated between different persons.
In a usufructuary arrangement, the usufructuary retains the rights of usus and fructus, namely the ability to use the asset and derive economic benefit from it, while another party, often referred to as the bare or naked owner, retains the right of abusus, residual ownership interest and ultimately receives full ownership once the usufruct terminates. In practical terms, usufruct allows a person to transfer underlying ownership while continuing to enjoy the economic benefits of the asset during their lifetime.
This concept has long been familiar in many civil law jurisdictions, where usufruct structures are commonly used in succession planning. A parent, for example, may transfer ownership of shares, real estate or investment assets to children while retaining the right to occupy the property, receive dividends or maintain economic control during their life.
Does the usufruct replace the trust?
One of the most important questions arising from the introduction of usufruct legislation is whether it diminishes the relevance of trusts in The Bahamas. The answer is unequivocally no. Trusts continue to occupy a central role in sophisticated estate planning and remain one of the most effective tools available for asset protection, intergenerational succession, confidentiality and governance.
Indeed, many of the core advantages of trusts cannot be replicated by usufruct alone. Trusts allow for discretionary distributions, fiduciary oversight, complex family governance arrangements and long-term wealth preservation across multiple generations. They remain particularly valuable where family dynamics are complex or where asset protection considerations are paramount.
Usufruct serves a different purpose and rather than replacing trusts, it introduces an additional planning layer that may be used independently in some cases or integrated into broader structures in others. The most interesting developments are therefore likely to emerge through hybrid planning arrangements.
For example, a Bahamian trust may continue to hold family real estate while usufruct rights are granted to the settlor, allowing the settlor to retain the use and economic benefit of the property during their lifetime. Upon the termination of the usufruct, the trust would thereafter hold the asset free from those retained rights for the benefit of the next generation in accordance with the terms of the trust.
Similarly, ownership of underlying shares or investment assets may be transferred into trust for the benefit of future generations while senior family members retain usufruct rights over dividend income or other economic returns during their lifetime. Such structures can facilitate gradual succession planning while preserving continuity, economic security and, in some cases, a degree of family control during transitional periods.
Bridging civil law and common law concepts
For common law practitioners, the closest comparison to usufruct is often a life interest trust, sometimes referred to as an interest in possession trust. Under a traditional life interest trust structure, one beneficiary, commonly a surviving spouse or parent, is entitled to benefit from trust assets during their lifetime, usually through a right to receive income generated by the trust or to occupy trust property. Another beneficiary, often children or future generations, holds the residual entitlement to the trust capital once the life interest comes to an end.
A common example would involve a family home or investment portfolio being settled into trust for the benefit of a surviving spouse during his or her lifetime, with the underlying assets ultimately passing to the children upon the spouse’s death. The surviving spouse retains the economic enjoyment of the assets, while the next generation effectively holds the future ownership interest.
The similarity to usufruct is immediately apparent. In both cases, economic benefit and ultimate ownership are separated between different people. However, a life interest trust operates through fiduciary relationships and the separation of legal and beneficial ownership, whereas usufruct creates a direct proprietary division of rights in the asset itself.
Historically, offshore planning has often required civil law families to adapt themselves to entirely common law structures. While trusts remain highly effective, they can sometimes feel conceptually unfamiliar to families accustomed to direct ownership models or civil law succession principles. Usufruct provides a framework that many international families intuitively understand while still allowing them to benefit from the stability, sophistication and flexibility of The Bahamas as an international financial centre.
The introduction of usufruct should also be viewed in the context of The Bahamas’ broader track record of successfully integrating civil law concepts into its common law framework. The enactment of the Foundations Act in 2004 represented a similar moment of legal convergence. While foundations are traditionally associated with civil law jurisdictions, The Bahamas was able to incorporate the concept into its legislative framework in a way that preserved the integrity of its common law system while expanding its attractiveness to international clients. That earlier development demonstrated both the jurisdiction’s willingness and ability to adapt civil law constructs for use within a common law offshore environment. Usufruct follows a similar trajectory, reinforcing the idea that The Bahamas is not constrained by legal tradition and can accommodate multiple conceptual approaches to wealth structuring.
Usufruct and digital assets
The legislation is not confined solely to traditional forms of property such as real estate or shares in private companies. Rather, it contemplates application across a wide range of asset classes, including financial assets and intellectual property. This flexibility is significant because modern wealth itself is increasingly diverse.
The legislation is particularly interesting because it contemplates the application of usufruct arrangements to digital assets. That is a notable development and one that reflects how seriously The Bahamas is engaging with modern wealth structures. Increasingly, large estates include cryptocurrency holdings, tokenised investments, intellectual property, online businesses and other digital assets that derive value less from physical possession and more from access rights, governance rights and economic participation.
The real value of digital wealth often lies not in holding the asset itself, but in controlling the income or benefits generated from it. Staking rewards, licensing income, governance participation and token economics are all examples of rights that can potentially be separated from ultimate ownership. One can easily envisage structures where ownership of digital assets passes to the next generation while senior family members retain economic participation during their lifetime. Equally, governance rights connected to decentralised projects or tokenised ecosystems may eventually become divisible in ways that resemble traditional usufruct principles. Although usufruct is rooted in ancient Roman law concepts, it may ultimately prove highly adaptable to modern digital wealth precisely because it focuses on separating use, economic benefit and ultimate ownership.
Conclusion
More broadly, the introduction of usufruct says something important about the direction of the Bahamian private client industry itself. International financial centres are increasingly competing on tax neutrality or technical expertise, as well as their ability to accommodate different legal traditions and different types of international families. The jurisdictions likely to remain competitive over the next decade are those capable of operating comfortably across both common law and civil law concepts. The Bahamas is positioning itself accordingly.
Importantly, this does not represent a departure from the jurisdiction’s traditional strengths. The usufruct does not replace trusts. It is expanding the language of estate planning in The Bahamas. The trust industry remains central to Bahamian private wealth planning and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. What has changed is that advisers now have greater flexibility in how they structure succession arrangements for internationally connected families. As wealth becomes increasingly international, increasingly digital and increasingly multi-generational, that flexibility is likely to become far more valuable than rigid adherence to any single legal tradition.
Sassoon House
Shirley Street & Victoria Avenue
PO Box N 272
Nassau
The Bahamas
+1 242 322 4130
+1 242 328 1069
info@gtclaw.com www.grahamthompson.com