The (Absence of) Member State Autonomy in the Interpretation of DAC6: A Call for EU Guidance

IF 0.9 Q2 LAW
EC Tax Review Pub Date : 2021-12-01 DOI:10.54648/ecta2021026
D. Weber, J. Steenbergen
{"title":"The (Absence of) Member State Autonomy in the Interpretation of DAC6: A Call for EU Guidance","authors":"D. Weber, J. Steenbergen","doi":"10.54648/ecta2021026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"DAC6 concerns the spontaneous exchange of information on potentially aggressive tax arrangements. With the implementation of DAC6 into the national laws of the Member States comes a lot of uncertainty, along with diverging interpretations among Member States. In this article, the authors analyze the autonomy of Member States in the definition and interpretation of the concepts used in DAC6. The authors also analyze the relevant sources of the interpretation of DAC6, such as the relevant BEPS reports. The authors argue that DAC6 lays down a uniform framework for the spontaneous exchange of information of potentially aggressive tax arrangements. Member States do not have a margin of discretion regarding the interpretation of the concepts that are essential to the uniform framework. Other concepts may leave a margin of discretion for the Member States, such as several concepts used in the Hallmarks. In their margin of discretion, the Member States must ensure the full effectiveness of Union law. On the basis of that, the concepts must be defined (and interpreted) in line with the object and purpose of the Directive. Member States should use BEPS Action 12 as a source of interpretation and illustration insofar DAC6 is based on this report.\nDAC6, Directive 2018/822, Main Benefit Test, Reporting, BEPS, Union concepts, quasi-Union concepts, autonomy of Member States, Interpretation of Directives, EU Guidance.","PeriodicalId":43686,"journal":{"name":"EC Tax Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EC Tax Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2021026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

DAC6 concerns the spontaneous exchange of information on potentially aggressive tax arrangements. With the implementation of DAC6 into the national laws of the Member States comes a lot of uncertainty, along with diverging interpretations among Member States. In this article, the authors analyze the autonomy of Member States in the definition and interpretation of the concepts used in DAC6. The authors also analyze the relevant sources of the interpretation of DAC6, such as the relevant BEPS reports. The authors argue that DAC6 lays down a uniform framework for the spontaneous exchange of information of potentially aggressive tax arrangements. Member States do not have a margin of discretion regarding the interpretation of the concepts that are essential to the uniform framework. Other concepts may leave a margin of discretion for the Member States, such as several concepts used in the Hallmarks. In their margin of discretion, the Member States must ensure the full effectiveness of Union law. On the basis of that, the concepts must be defined (and interpreted) in line with the object and purpose of the Directive. Member States should use BEPS Action 12 as a source of interpretation and illustration insofar DAC6 is based on this report. DAC6, Directive 2018/822, Main Benefit Test, Reporting, BEPS, Union concepts, quasi-Union concepts, autonomy of Member States, Interpretation of Directives, EU Guidance.
DAC6解释中的(缺乏)成员国自主性:呼吁欧盟提供指导
DAC6涉及自发交换有关潜在激进税收安排的信息。随着DAC6在成员国国家法律中的实施,带来了许多不确定性,同时成员国之间也有不同的解释。在这篇文章中,作者分析了成员国在定义和解释DAC6中使用的概念时的自主权。作者还分析了DAC6解释的相关来源,如相关的BEPS报告。作者认为,DAC6为潜在激进税收安排的自发信息交换奠定了统一的框架。会员国在解释对统一框架至关重要的概念方面没有自由裁量权。其他概念可能会给会员国留下一定的自由裁量权,例如Hallmarks中使用的几个概念。成员国必须在其自由裁量权范围内确保欧盟法律的充分效力。在此基础上,必须根据指令的目的和宗旨对概念进行定义(和解释)。成员国应将BEPS行动12作为DAC6基于本报告的解释和说明来源。DAC6,指令2018/822,主要利益测试,报告,BEPS,联盟概念,准联盟概念,成员国自主性,指令解释,欧盟指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
33.30%
发文量
16
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信