1,721,007 research outputs found
Sijoitusrahastotoiminnan tuloveropoliittiset vaihtoehdot : oikeudellisessa tarkastelussa läpivirtaava verotusmalli
No full textPeer reviewe
Should the EU implement a minimum corporate taxation directive?
No full textThe century old international tax system is in the middle of being rebuilt. Between the hope for a compromise and the fear of a tax war breaking out, this article inquires whether the EU should implement a minimum corporate taxation directive along the lines of the OECD GLOBE proposal. This question has legal and political dimensions. On the one hand, Art. 115 TFEU, which would be the basis for such a directive, demands an EU minimum taxation regime to promote the Internal Market. The article suggests that this may succeed. On the other hand, Art. 115 TFEU requires unanimity in the Council. Thus, and given the heterogeneity of Member States’ interests, additional tax policy reasons favouring such a directive are needed. Considering expectable reactions of taxpayers in a competitive environment and taking account of potential developments outside the EU, the author concludes that, overall, the implementation of an EU minimum taxation regime may – especially as a safeguard of origin based taxation – benefit the EU and all of its Member States. With the credible enforceability of minimum taxation rules being key, the author suggests EU action to establish minimum corporate taxation even if all EU Members States support the OECD proposal.
Date and Place21. April 2021; Espoo, FinlandAcknowledgementsThe author thanks Marjaana Helminen, Dennis Weber, Jan Klabbers, Karine Caunes, Noora Mäki, and Linda Sydänmaanlakka and two unknown peer-reviewers for discussing a draft version of the article and giving invaluable comments. The author thanks Suomen veromiehet - Finlands beskattningsmän ry for their financialsupport
The “Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting” : An analysis of the Principal Purpose Test from the perspective of Finnish tax treaty practice
Full text linkThe heated political debate on aggressive tax practices of multinational entities starts to produce tangible outcomes. On 7th of June 2017 Finland signed the so-called “Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting” (MLI). Certain rules related to the abuse of tax treaties will, as a result, start to become applicable soon. They can be seen as quite disruptive in international tax law. Hence, it appears worthwhile to present them to a broader audience. The reader will be introduced into the topic via a short outline of the flaws in the current international tax system leading to concerns on international (OECD, UN) and supranational (EU) level. Embedding it into the bigger picture of action against “Base Erosion and Profit Shifting”, the MLI and one of the Finnish choices – the Principal Purpose Test – will be elaborated. The article aims to assess the impact of this provision on Finnish tax treaty practice. It will be shown that, with respect to different occasions, the Principal Purpose Test leads to consequences considerably stricter than provided for by current rules. By itself, this was subject to severe critique in specialist literature. Furthermore, it raises a number of dogmatic problems. In this context the author attempts to provide for an interpretation of the provision towards alleviating its effects. The first two chapters are meant to give non-tax specialists some background information. They can be widely skipped by readers familiar with the subject. Due to space limitations constitutional law and European law questions are not within the scope of the investigation. Also, the analysis of Sec. 28 VML does not reflect the discussions held in scholarship in detail. That being said, the author is still confident to be able to make his point based on what is included in the article.Peer reviewe
Increasing Direct Tax Harmonization and the Role of Tax-Relevant Economic Guarantees in Primary EU Law - a Reflection on a (yet to be Formed) Trend
No full textThe court is showing a tendency towards exposing secondary EU law to a less intensive review under primary EU law than it does for national law. With a potentially large wave of direct tax law harmonization ahead, this has been met with alertness in literature as it may not be adequate for the field of taxation. Against this background, this article elaborates on the development of a direct tax relevant doctrine on the enforcement of economic rights enshrined in primary EU law. The core argument worked out by the author can be summarized as follows. Given the weak democratic legitimation of EU direct tax directives, and having regard to the fact that they are extraordinary difficult to adapt or abolish, the court has an increased responsibility to protect taxpayers’ economic rights – particularly when the underlying legislative decision or value is not worth being upheld at the cost of an infringement of such rights.Peer reviewe
Legislative Action against Tax Arbitrage with Hybrid Financial Instruments : A Multidisciplinary Study of Selected Approaches and a Proposal of Guidelines for Developed and Developing Countries
No full textIn many different circumstances, hybrid financial instruments (HFIs) can be an appealing source of finance. At the same time, however, such instruments may also be used in tax planning. Its differential treatment in the affected jurisdictions can give rise to double non-taxation of a payment. Exploiting this allows for significant reductions in the corporate tax liability.
In the aftermath of the recent financial crisis, such “tax arbitrage” has increasingly entered debate within the G20, OECD, EU and UN. As a result various concepts of how to engage with the problem were developed. Besides these, some states already rely on provisions that can be of relevance in this context.
Starting from these developments, the objective of the monograph is to help those in charge of solving the problem to make a more educated decision. As such, it addresses tax policymakers around the world. For the sake of reaching its goals, the thesis applies a socio-legal method. This should acknowledge that tax policymakers design rules in a context that is broader than existing tax law. They have to consider the traditional principles of tax policy, including tax competition constraints, as well as legal dogmatic restrictions – and does this thesis. Against this background, the dissertation is structured in the following way:
In chapter 1, the reader is introduced into the topic and the design of the research. In chapter 2, HFIs are shed light on from the perspective of tax law, corporate finance and economics. The goal is to understand their role in reality. In chapter 3, the guiding principles for company taxation are reviewed. Contemporary tax research relies on the triumvirate: (i) equity, (ii) efficiency and (iii) administrability. So does this thesis. The literature on these issues is considered in sufficient depth, but with a strong focus on the research objectives.
Chapter 4 builds the bridge between the above preparatory part and the core research. This happens by working out the non-legal concerns attached to tax arbitrage with HFIs. They include three from an inter-taxpayer equity perspective, three from an inter-nation equity perspective and two from an efficiency perspective. This is the problem definition. Chapters 5¬8 investigate how four approaches address these concerns. These are the “OECD approach”, the “low tax approach”, the “UN approach” and the “recharacterisation approach”. The focus will be on tax arbitrage transactions with HFIs that rely on a qualification conflict and substitute transactions with financial instruments that reach the same, or a similar, result. The research on these approaches also takes into account their administrability and legal dogmatic considerations. In doing so, the collateral damage caused by the rules is assessed as well. Also this happens from a multi-disciplinary perspective. In chapter 9, the author presents his own thoughts on what developed and developing countries may want to consider in dealing with the problem of tax arbitrage with HFIs.
The author is aware of tax arbitrage with HFIs only being a part of the challenges tax policymakers have to deal with. In an attempt to consider this, the discussion is put into a broader context. As a direct consequence thereof, the thesis also lacks a clear solution. Rather, it aims to provide information that should improve tax policymakers´ ability to address the issue. It is left up to them to trade-off equity, efficiency and administrability considerations, paying attention to what is possible de lege lata.Väitöskirja tutkii sääntöjä, joilla pyritään ehkäisemään rahoitusvälineillä tehtävää veroarbitraasia. Erilaisilla rahoitusvälineillä, kuten tietyillä hybridirahoitusinstrumenteilla, voidaan luoda tilanne, jossa rahoitusvälineen perusteella suoritettava maksu on vähennyskelpoinen maksajalle ilman, että vastaava tulo sisällytetään maksun saajan veropohjaan. Tällaisessa veroarbitraasissa hyödynnetään eri maiden verojärjestelmien eroavuuksia. Sen haitallisuuteen on herätty erityisesti finanssikriisin jälkeen, ja sen ehkäiseminen on myös merkittävä osa OECD:n, EU:n ja YK:n niin sanottuja BEPS-projekteja (Base Erosion and Profit Shifting), joiden tavoitteena on estää valtioiden veropohjan rapautumista ja voitonsiirtoa.
Väitöskirjan tavoitteena on auttaa päätöksentekijöitä löytämään heille sopivat keinot rahoitusvälineillä tehtävän veroarbitraasin ehkäisemiseksi. Tutkimuksen tavoitteeseen päästään käyttämällä oikeudellista ja yhteiskunnallista tutkimusta (socio-legal research). Lähtökohtana on päätöksentekijän näkökulma. Tästä näkökulmasta rahoitusvälineillä tehty veroarbitraasi aiheuttaa tiettyjä haittoja, joita tutkitaan neljännessä luvussa. Luvuissa 5–8 tutkitaan neljää erilaista lähestymistapaa, joilla voidaan ehkäistä rahoitusvälineillä tehtävää veroarbitraasia. Lähestymistapojen valinnassa on kiinnitetty huomiota siihen, että niistä olisi hyötyä eri kehitysvaiheissa oleville valtioille. Tutkituista lähestymistavoista niin sanotut OECD-approach ja UN-approach on kehitetty yllämainittujen kansainvälisten projektien yhteydessä. Niin sanottu low tax approach ja recharacterisation approach perustuvat puolestaan jo tietyissä valtioissa käytössä oleviin sääntöihin. Luvuissa tutkitaan, miten eri lähestymistavat vaikuttavat luvussa neljä esiteltyihin haittoihin, mitä haittoja lähestymistavoista voi aiheutua, miten toteuttamiskelpoisia lähestymistavat ovat ja estävätkö hierarkkisesti ylempiasteiset normit niiden soveltamista. Yhdeksännessä luvussa esitellään kirjoittajan omia ajatuksia siitä, miten eri tilanteissa olevat maat voivat ehkäistä rahoitusvälineillä tehtävää veroarbitraasia ottaen huomioon maiden erilaiset tarpeet ja mahdollisuudet.
Väitöskirja ei päädy yksittäiseen lopputulokseen, vaan siinä tutkitaan, kuinka erilaisilla rahoitusvälineillä tehtävän veroarbitraasin ehkäisemiseksi kehitetyillä keinoilla voidaan vaikuttaa veroarbitraasista aiheutuviin haittoihin ja onko näillä keinoilla itsessään haittavaikutuksia. Päätöksentekijöiden on punnittava keinojen etuja ja haittoja maidensa tarpeiden ja verojärjestelmien mukaisesti. Väitöskirjassa käsitelty aihe on vain osa BEPS-ongelmaa. Tämän takia väitöskirja ei pyri tarjoamaan valmiita ratkaisuja, vaan sen tavoitteena on lisätä tietoa, jonka avulla päätöksentekijät voivat tehdä paremmin perusteltuja ratkaisuja rahoitusvälineillä tehtävän veroarbitraasin ehkäisemiseksi.ei saavutettav
The ECJ’s Decision in A SCPI (C-342/20) – A Missing Piece of One Puzzle and a New Piece of Another?
No full textNon peer reviewe
E, Veronsaajien Oikeudenvalvontayksikkö C-480/19: A Remarkable Case
No full textVeronsaajien oikeudenvalvontayksikkö C-480/19 (hereafter the E case) is the first case dealing with the taxation of income received by a shareholder in an investment fund in her residence state. While the ultimately decisive element for the court to strike down the Finnish rule at stake seems to have been an inconsistency in Finnish law, the case includes various nuances that are of broader relevance. Foremost, this concerns the rather particular perspective taken in by the court in the comparability analysis that appears to include elements of an equivalence test used in the mutual recognition doctrine – an area that is rarely relevant in direct taxation matters.Peer reviewe
The fundamental freedoms and the taxation of dividends received by non-resident investment funds
No full textThis objective of this article is to discuss outbound cases involving investment funds focusing particularly on the issue of discrimination. The motivation to engage in this inquiry is two-fold. On the one hand, the fund taxation systems in Fidelity and Köln-Aktie Deka Funds include requirements not found in those fund taxation regimes subject to ECJ scrutiny long ago. It is of interest to analyse to what extent this can make a difference. Secondly, the opinions of AG Saugmandsgaard Øe in A SCPI and AG Kokott in Allianzgi merit a closer examination. In the case of the former, it is the AG’s unique approach to comparability that necessitates analysis. In the latter case, it is the variety of far-reaching questions raised by this complex case.Peer reviewe
The Imported Mismatch Rule in Light of the Fundamental Freedoms
No full textThis article analyses the imported mismatch rule contained in Article 9(3) of the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD) from the perspective of the fundamental freedoms. At the core of the analysis stands the insight that intra-EU payments can trigger the national implementation of the imported mismatch rule. This is not what the drafters of Action 2 of the OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) project Action 2 and, thereupon, Article 9 of the ATAD wanted to see. Yet, it became possible due to Member States not applying the anti-hybrid mismatch rules consistently.Peer reviewe
- …
