International and European Union Tax Law in the Post-BEPS World

Keyword(s):  
2019 ◽  
pp. 445-456
Author(s):  
César García Novoa

The permanent establishment is an essential concept in International Tax Law. The traditional definition was based on the existence of a fixed place of business. At present, the new economy requires a change in the concept of permanent establishment. The topic of permanent establishment is based today on the so-called sufficient economic presence. The European Union is working on the definition of a permanent digital establishment.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (2) ◽  
pp. 231-242
Author(s):  
Anders Nørgaard Laursen

Abstract This paper reports on an investigation of a recent decision by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in case C-48/13, Nordea Bank Denmark, concerning the Danish rules for reincorporation of losses from permanent establishments situated in European Union/ European Economic Area (EU/EEA) member states other than Denmark. The article includes comments on various EU tax law aspects of the case - namely the restriction test applied by the ECJ, the justifications brought forward by the intervening governments and the question of proportionality - and examines the consequences of the Danish tax law going forward.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 230
Author(s):  
Carlos María López Espadafor

Abstract: One of the basic preliminary issues that would contribute to a better development of EU Tax Law should consist on a definition, within its own judicial discipline, of the material principles of Tax Justice. We cannot expect to make progress in the technical development of the community tax rules and in the enlargement of their scope of action, without having previously defined certain taxation parameters. These, in turn, could be seen as a reassurance by the taxpayers of the various Member States of the European Union regarding its tax rules. It should be able to define some principles that were somewhat similar to those included in the Constitutions or the Constitutional Law of the various member States.Keywords: law, European Union, states, tax justice, European taxpayers.Resumen: Una de las cuestiones preliminaries básicas que contribuirían a un mejor desarrollo del Derecho Tributario de la Unión Europea, sería la concreción de una definición, sin perjuicio de su propia disciplina jurisprudencial, de los principios materiales de justicia tributaria. No podemos pretender progresar en el desarrollo técnico de las normas tributarias comunitarias y en una ampliación del alcance de su actuación sin haber definido previamente ciertos parámetros tributarios. Éstos, a su vez, podrían verse como una garantía para los contribuyentes de los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea con respecto a sus Ordenamientos jurídico-tributarios internos. Esto podría desembocar en la definición de algunos principios que en cierto modo serían paralelos a los recogidos en las Constituciones de los Estados miembros.Palabras clave: derecho, Unión Europea, estados, justicia tributaria, contribuyentes europeos.


2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 409-424
Author(s):  
Artur TIM

The issue of economic security and fiscal matters are closely connected to each other, especially taking into account the massive non-taxation of the digital business models, which can be observed in the present economic reality. The non-effective taxation of the digital business models together with fiscal losses caused by this phenomenon are nowadays as high on the international, political agenda as e.g. climate change. European Union has been even called as “vulnerable” to tax planning activities, made by digital enterprises. The essence of the discussed in the Article issue is that the fundamental rules of the international tax law were created in the late 19th century and well-established during the 20th century – in the reality, in which the digital business models could not have been even predicted. As a result of application of these outdated rules, the income generated in the source state cannot be there taxed. Furthermore, this activity does not constitute a breach of tax law and cannot be perceived as tax evasion or tax avoidance. The European Commission initiated the proceedings against Ireland for illegal state aid, received by Apple in the amount of 13 billion EUR (taxes unpaid in relation to transfer pricing rules, unlawfully approved by the Irish tax authorities). Almost at the same time, as a result of D. Trump’s tax reform, Apple agreed to pay voluntary in the U.S. 38 billion USD in taxes, invest350 billion USD and create there over 20.000 jobs. In Spring 2018, as a result of the demand requested by the Member States, the European Commission presented a project to overcome non-effective taxation of the digital business models in the European Union. However, the adoption of the project is unlikely to happen– for the reason of the requirement to reach unanimity between states (until now some states expressed objections or even rejected the project), as well as grounding the long-term solution on the idea, which has already been rejected by the Member States in 2011.In the article the Author describes the reasons for a lack of effective taxation of the digital business models in the source state, outlines the essence of the economic security and influence on it made by the tax planning schemes, applied by digital enterprises, as well as drafts the particular position of the Multi-National Enterprises in the post-globalised world. In the article are also presented means of reaction, coined on the international and European level to overcome that challenge, posed before the modern societies. The Author stresses also that having regard these particularities of the income taxation, in the international tax law doctrine more and more often the idea of abolishing income taxes is taken into consideration, especially in relation to the CIT (corporate income tax).


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-79
Author(s):  
Miroslav Štrkolec ◽  
Ladislav Hrabčák

The present article deals with one of the phenomena of the Industrial (Digital) revolution 4.0, which is digital currency in broader sense, respectively virtual currencies, as some authors refer to them. Despite the fact that this phenomenon is not such a novelty in society, it has demanded the focus of legal science only in recent years and the discussion has not subsided, it can be stated that it is only in the beginning. Along with digital currency in broader sense, there are several issues, such as the correctness of their naming, their legal status and, as far as the area of tax law is concerned, these are also questions of the manner and possibilities of taxing transactions with them. Authors set as a goal of this article to verify the following hypotheses: - the naming of digital currency in broader sense as a currency is incorrect given the existing knowledge of financial law science. - the legal regulation of digital currency in broader sense in selected Member States of the European Union is not sufficient. To verifying the above hypotheses, the authors used several methods of writing scientific works, but especially analysis, synthesis, the method of comparison and the historical method, which the authors used in combination with each other.


2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 375
Author(s):  
Carlos María López Espadafor

Resumen: Si el Derecho Tributario de la Unión Europea aspira a un mayor desarrollo y legitimidad, necesariamente debería partir de la articulación de unos principios de justicia tributaria en la disciplina de la Unión. En ausencia de una Constitución Europea, sólo cabe la deducción de tales principios de los derechos fundamentales que forman parte del Derecho de la Unión. Es más, ni el fracasado proyecto de Constitución Europea daba expresamente respuesta a esta necesidad. Posteriormente, en los cuerpos normativos resultantes del Tratado de Lisboa, ni el Tratado de la Unión Europea, ni el Tratado de Funcionamiento de ésta, dieron tampoco respuesta expresa a esta necesidad.Palabras clave: Unión Europea, Derecho Tributario, principios, lagunas.Abstract: If the Tax Law of the European Union aspires to further development and legitimacy, it should necessarily start from the articulation of principles of tax justice in the discipline of the Union. In the absence of a European Constitution, the deduction of such principles is only possible from the fundamental rights included in the law of the Union. Moreover, even the failed draft European Constitution did not expressly address this need. Later, in the norms derived from Treaty of Lisbon neither the Treaty of the European Union nor the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union addressed expressly this need.Keywords: European Union, Tax Law, principles, gaps.


2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 79-89
Author(s):  
Beata Jolanta Kowalczyk

This publication analyzes three legislative factors functioning in Roman law, i.e., the activity of a praetor – creating law through appropriate handling of processing means and sanctions, jurisprudence – whose opinions by ius publice respondendi, had the force of law in force, and the emperor – who, as the supreme judge, issued decrees which were binding interpretations of the law as well as rescripts, which were replies to individual inquiries of citizens on legal matters. The aim of this analysis is to find their modern counterparts. The content of the article includes selected forms of law-making activity of these entities, which will be juxtaposed with contemporary activities of the judiciary which creates “precedents”, interprets and subsides the law, as well as elected officials who prepared binding interpretations of the law, e.g., within the tax law and the Court of Justice of the European Union which issued rescripts and decrees equivalent to the activity undertaken by the emperor in Roman law. As a result, an attempt is made to demonstrate whether, and if so, to what extent, their activities affect the quality and reliability of the law formed currently.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document