Which entity is presumed to have control over another entity?

The assertion that an entity is presumed to have control over another entity primarily revolves around the concept of majority ownership and governance. When an entity holds the majority of voting securities or directs the majority of directors, it is in a position to make significant decisions affecting the other entity. This level of ownership typically grants the entity the ability to influence corporate policies, operations, and strategic directions, establishing a clear hierarchy in control.

Holding a majority interest—generally considered to be more than 50% of the voting rights—empowers an entity to dictate major corporate actions, such as mergers, acquisitions, and operational changes. This foundational principle is rooted in corporate governance laws, which recognize the authority of majority shareholders in directing the actions of a company.

Other options, while they describe various forms of influence or relationships between entities, do not establish the presumption of control as clearly as majority ownership does. For example, having a 10% stake or influencing decisions might indicate some level of involvement, but it does not inherently confer control. Similarly, contractual obligations might establish commitments between entities, yet they do not automatically imply one entity's ability to govern another.

Thus, the presumption of control is most definitively supported by the holding of a majority of voting securities