Whereabouts of 6 Million Hermes Shares Remain Unknown
The whereabouts of 6 million shares of the world-renowned luxury brand Herm?s are unknown. The heir pointed to the asset manager as being behind the issue, but the asset manager denied it, calling it the heir’s ‘fabrication.’
The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported on the 1st (local time) that the embezzlement case claimed by Nicolas Puech (81), a direct descendant of Herm?s founder Thierry Herm?s, shows no signs of being resolved. Puech is the fifth-generation descendant of the founder of Herm?s, one of the top three global luxury brands, and as an individual, he is the largest shareholder of Herm?s. He is single and has no direct heirs.
Last year, Puech claimed that 6 million Herm?s shares he owned had disappeared. The missing shares represent 6% of Herm?s’ stake, with a market value of 1.2 billion euros (approximately 18 trillion won), an astronomical amount. Since the surge in luxury demand after COVID-19, Herm?s’ stock value has quadrupled since 2020. Puech suspected ?ric Pr?mont, who had been managing his assets since the 1980s. Pr?mont, who had access to Puech’s accounts, was accused of embezzling the shares.
Pr?mont dismissed the claim as nonsense and presented a completely different argument. He said that years ago, a Moroccan gardener employed at Puech’s mansion and the gardener’s girlfriend psychologically dominated Puech, who has no spouse or children, and manipulated him into making false claims. He stated that Puech was fabricating the story while being legally incapacitated.
Pr?mont claimed that the gardener and his girlfriend had already received 54 properties scattered across Switzerland, Spain, and Portugal as gifts from Puech. In particular, the gardener is reportedly in the process of being adopted as Puech’s foster son. According to Pr?mont, Swiss local law exempts transfer taxes and other fees when becoming an adopted child, which is the motive behind this. He also suggested that the gardener was behind Puech’s recent withdrawal of his promise to leave part of his assets as an inheritance to the charitable foundation he established.
For now, the court has ruled that Pr?mont is not the culprit of the stock embezzlement. It dismissed Puech’s lawsuit claiming that the asset manager embezzled the shares.
All of this started because Puech’s shares are bearer shares, which do not require the owner to be registered. While members of the Herm?s family received registered shares with their names on them, only Puech’s stake was bearer shares. Therefore, even if the current owner of Puech’s shares receives dividends, it is difficult to trace their identity.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
