Article: Economic Substance for Holding Companies in the Post- BEPS World and after Recent ECJ Case-Law: An Analysis of Developments in Europe

IF 1.2 Q2 LAW
Intertax Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.54648/taxi2023002
Felipe Thé Freire
{"title":"Article: Economic Substance for Holding Companies in the Post- BEPS World and after Recent ECJ Case-Law: An Analysis of Developments in Europe","authors":"Felipe Thé Freire","doi":"10.54648/taxi2023002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over the last decade, following the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting project (BEPS), the international tax framework has been in constant change. Some of those changes, such as the introduction of the Principal Purpose Test (PPT) in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Model Convention and the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD I and II) in the European Union (EU) aim at denying benefits to corporate structures and transactions put in place by Multinational Corporations (MNEs) whenever those are deemed to be abusive. Recent European Court of Justice (ECJ) judgments arguably further modified the international tax framework. One of the most important elements – following those developments – commonly analysed to assess abuse is ‘economic substance’. This article focuses on the analysis of substance requirements particularly for holding companies, which typically are less robust than those of companies generating active income. After analysing the definition and object of a holding company, the author explores the current views of the OECD and the EU on this topic, including ECJ jurisprudence, to assess to what extent those have converged. The article compares different instruments and concepts, as well as their underlying principles, aiming at applying them to specific cases of cross-border holding structures.\nHolding companies, substance, anti-tax avoidance directive (ATAD), principle purpose test (PPT), abuse of rights, tax treaty abuse, principal purpose test (PPT), general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR), beneficial ownership","PeriodicalId":45365,"journal":{"name":"Intertax","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intertax","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/taxi2023002","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

Over the last decade, following the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting project (BEPS), the international tax framework has been in constant change. Some of those changes, such as the introduction of the Principal Purpose Test (PPT) in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Model Convention and the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD I and II) in the European Union (EU) aim at denying benefits to corporate structures and transactions put in place by Multinational Corporations (MNEs) whenever those are deemed to be abusive. Recent European Court of Justice (ECJ) judgments arguably further modified the international tax framework. One of the most important elements – following those developments – commonly analysed to assess abuse is ‘economic substance’. This article focuses on the analysis of substance requirements particularly for holding companies, which typically are less robust than those of companies generating active income. After analysing the definition and object of a holding company, the author explores the current views of the OECD and the EU on this topic, including ECJ jurisprudence, to assess to what extent those have converged. The article compares different instruments and concepts, as well as their underlying principles, aiming at applying them to specific cases of cross-border holding structures. Holding companies, substance, anti-tax avoidance directive (ATAD), principle purpose test (PPT), abuse of rights, tax treaty abuse, principal purpose test (PPT), general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR), beneficial ownership
文章:后BEPS世界和最近ECJ判例法之后控股公司的经济实质:对欧洲发展的分析
在过去十年中,继税基侵蚀和利润转移项目(BEPS)之后,国际税收框架一直在不断变化。其中一些变化,如在经济合作与发展组织(OECD)示范公约中引入主要目的测试(PPT),以及在欧盟(EU)引入反避税指令(ATAD I和II),旨在否认跨国公司(MNEs)实施的公司结构和交易的利益,只要这些被认为是滥用。最近欧洲法院(ECJ)的判决可以说进一步修改了国际税收框架。根据这些发展,通常用来评估滥用的最重要的因素之一是“经济实质”。本文侧重于对实体需求的分析,特别是对控股公司的分析,这些公司通常不如那些产生主动收入的公司健壮。在分析了控股公司的定义和对象之后,作者探讨了经合组织和欧盟在这一主题上的当前观点,包括欧洲法院的判例,以评估这些观点在多大程度上趋同。本文比较了不同的工具和概念,以及它们的基本原则,旨在将它们应用于跨境控股结构的具体案例。控股公司、实质、反避税指令(ATAD)、主要目的测试(PPT)、权利滥用、税收协定滥用、主要目的测试(PPT)、一般反避税规则(GAAR)、受益所有权
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
Intertax
Intertax LAW-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
50.00%
发文量
45
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信