The subject is abroad. How much can be found?

Public registries differ widely

Taiwan's public records cover Taiwan only. When the subject is abroad, the first question is how much the local company registry discloses, and the answer varies enough to change the whole approach.

• The United Kingdom publishes everything free of charge: directors, persons with significant control, historical filings and disqualified directors. It is the transparent end of the scale
• The United States state registries often show only the company name, formation date and registered agent. Directors and shareholders are never on the record
• Hong Kong provides directors and shareholders for a fee, but directors' residential addresses and full identification numbers have been protected data since 2021
• Singapore sells a business profile that includes directors and the shareholder register
• Japan commercial registers show officers but not shareholders
• Thailand offers shareholder lists and foreign ownership percentages free, with an interface mainly in Thai
• Mainland China has a public enterprise credit system covering the legal representative, shareholders and contributions, administrative penalties and abnormal operation records

The same question, "who are the shareholders", has an answer in ten minutes in the UK, may have no answer at all in the US, and requires Thai in Thailand. The report states which system each item came from.

Court records: pending cases are the hard part

Most countries publish decided cases in some form, but litigation still in progress is usually invisible to outsiders. Thailand's online court system is open only to parties and their lawyers. Japan's courts state expressly that not all judgments are published. Singapore requires the case number in advance. The US federal system does show pending cases; state courts each run their own.

"No litigation in the local record" therefore usually means "no litigation found in public sources". Confirming pending matters generally requires a local lawyer to search the court registry.

Regulation of investigators differs by place

Singapore licenses both agencies and individuals. Japan requires notification to the prefectural public safety commission. Malaysia licenses through the home ministry. Hong Kong has no licensing regime for private investigators. The UK has enabling legislation that has never been brought into force. The report names the executing party and jurisdiction for every item.

Data protection and judicial assistance

Taiwan's Personal Data Protection Act restricts international transfers, and the competent authority may limit transfers where the receiving country's protection is inadequate. In the other direction, the EU, Singapore and Japan each have their own data laws, which bind a local team just as much.

On judicial assistance, Taiwan's International Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act covers obtaining evidence and serving documents, but only in criminal cases. Taiwan is not a party to the Hague Evidence Convention, so there is no treaty channel for cross-border evidence in civil matters. In practice, civil cases rely on public records, local counsel and parties who cooperate voluntarily. This is a boundary to understand before commissioning the work.

A common blind spot in Southeast Asia

The legal representative on the register is the company's external face, not necessarily its controller. Several Southeast Asian countries restrict foreign shareholding, and nominee arrangements with local shareholders are common in practice. Thailand penalises nominee holdings and Indonesia treats nominee agreements as void. Beyond the shareholder list, it is directors' other appointments, overlapping registered addresses and the flow of funds that show who actually decides.