eu tax policy report - nob · 2018-01-05 · eu tax policy report cfe tax advisers europe authors...

EU Tax Policy Report

CFE TAX ADVISERS EUROPE

AUTHORS

AleksandarIvanovskiandMaryDineen

DATE CREATED

21December2017

DATE ISSUED

22December2017

ADDRESSAv.deTervuren188-AB-1150Brusselswww.cfe-eutax.org

CONTACTT:+3227610092+3227610091E:[email protected]

The European Association of Tax Advisers founded in 1959.

2

CFETAXADVISERSEUROPE-EUTAXPOLICYREPORT2/2017

TheEstonianPresidencysetoutanumberofprioritieshowever, inrealitythe last6monthshasbeenall

aboutthebigproposalsandlessabouttheexistingfiles.Onthedirecttaxside,thefairtaxationofthedigital

economyhasbeeninthespotlightwhilstontheindirecttaxside,theEuropeanCommissionpublishedlong

awaitedproposalsforamovetowardadestination-baseddefinitiveVATregime.

BackinNovember2017theInternationalConsortiumofInvestigativeJournalists("ICIJ")revealeddocuments

relatedtooff-shoreactivitiesofindividualsandcompaniesnamed"ParadiseLeaks".

Simultaneouslywiththesepublicdisclosures,thelastsixmonthshasseentheresultsofmanytransparency

initiatives,includingthefinalreportandrecommendationsofEUParliament’s‘PANA’CommitteeofInquiry,

newbeneficialownership transparencyrequirements incontextof thepoliticialagreementonthe5thEU

Anti-Money Launderign Directive, aswell as policy initiatives formandatory disclosure of aggressive tax

avoidance schemes at both EU (The ‘Tax Intermediaries’ Directive) and OECD level (model mandatory

disclosurerules).

Highlights

CFE’s EU Tax Policy Report provides an analysis of key tax and other policy issues at EU level of interest to the European tax advisers covering the period July through December 2017.

3


Contents

SEC 0 HIGHLIGHTS 02

SEC 1 TAX INTERMEDIARIES DIRECTIVE 04

SEC 2 DIRECT TAX - #DIGITAX 07

SEC 3 DIRECT TAX – ‘THE OTHER FILES’ 12

SEC 4 INDIRECT TAX – ‘THE MAIN EVENT’ 17

SEC 5 EU POLICY- AML 23

SEC 6 EU ‘BLACKLIST’, ‘PANA’ & #STATEAID 26

4


Tax Intermediaries Directive 01

5


EU Commission’s ‘Tax Intermediaries’ proposal…

Renewed anti-tax avoidance efforts BackinMay2016,theECOFINCouncilofEUfinanceministersinvitedtheCommissiontoconsiderlegislativeinitiativesonmandatorydisclosurerulesinspiredbyOECDBEPSAction12inordertointroduceeffectivedisincentivesforintermediarieswhoassistintaxevasionoravoidanceschemes.TheEuropeanCommissionproposal arrivedmid-2017 as a directive on mandatory disclosure of reportable cross-border schemescoupled with automatic exchange of information among Member states. Commission had in mindtransparencyrulesfortax intermediariesthatdevelop,market,sellandassist intaxavoidanceschemes.PressuretointroducemandatorydisclosurerulesatEUlevelcamefromtheEuropeanParliamentwiththeresolutionof6July2016ontaxrulingsandothermeasuressimilarinnatureoreffect.

Technical aspects of the proposed directive The proposal foresees that intermediaries bear the burden of disclosure to tax authorities, if they areinvolved in the design or promotion of an aggressive tax planning arrangement with cross-borderimplications.Thedisclosedinformationtonationaltaxauthoritiesshallbeautomaticallyexchangeablebytaxauthoritiesofallmemberstates.Wheretheobligationtodiscloseisnotenforceableduetoabsenceofanintermediary,orduetolegalprofessionalprivilege,thedirectivedefaultsthedisclosureobligationtoataxpayerwhoisbenefitingfromthearrangement.Onbasisoftheproposal,intermediariesshalldisclosereportablearrangementswithin5daysbeginningonthedayafteranarrangementbecomesavailableforimplementationtothetaxpayer.Withtaxpayers,theobligationtodiscloseiswithin5daysonceimplementationhascommenced. Inrespectofhallmarks,theproposeddirectiveoperateswithamainbenefitstestalongsidegenericandspecifichallmarks.Thegenerichallmarksinclude:confidentialityfromcompetitors,confidentialityfromthetaxauthorities,premiumfeesand‘off-the-shelf’schemes.Specifichallmarksincludehallmarksrelatedtothemainbenefittest,specifichallmarks related to cross-border transactions, to transfer-pricing and specific hallmarks concerningautomaticexchangeofinformation. TheCommissionproposalcomesintheformofa5thamendmenttotheDirectiveonmandatoryautomaticexchangeofinformationinthefieldoftaxation(“DAC”).Aswithalltaxfiles,perArticle115oftheTreatyon the functioningof the EuropeanUnion, this Commissionproposal requires a unanimous support inCouncilbyallmemberstates,followinganopinionfromtheEuropeanParliament.

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/taxation/files/intermediaries-proposal-2017_en.pdf

6


…and European tax advisers’ position.

CFE Tax Advisers Europe welcomed Commission’s policy direction on increased tax transparency, but urged a cautious approach and technical refininement of the proposal before adoption. The European tax advisers welcomed EU’s policy direction for increased transparency and efforts tostrengthentheintegrityofthetaxsystems,inparticulartherenewedeffortsfor increasedtaxcertainty.CFEopinedthatthedesignofcertainaspectsoftheproposalhadneverthelessleftscopeforuncertaintyandcouldfacethechallengeofdivergentimplementationinmemberstates.Atechnicalrefinementoftheproposalnecessitatesclearandconcisedefinitions.Rulesthataretoowidelydrawn are overly burdensome for taxpayers and unhelpful for tax authorities, which stand to receivemassivenumbersofdisclosuresbutverylittleusefulinformation. CFE argued that the proposal could benefit from including a requirement for member states’ taxadministrations to issue implementation guidance, providing clarity in relation to determining what isrequiredtobedisclosed.CFEfurtheradvocatedadherencetotheOECDBEPS12principles,wherebythememberstatesdefinecountryspecifichallmarkstogetherwithalistofexcludedtaxregimesandoutcomesthatarenotrequiredtobedisclosed.Bearing in mind that hallmarks define what constitutes a reportable cross-border arrangement, theseessentialfeaturesshouldbewell-defined,clearandconcise.CFEarguedthatthe‘mainbenefitstest’needsto be applicable to all hallmarks in order to ensure that the reporting obligation is limited to relevantarrangementsonly.ThedirectiveshouldspecifyarangeofpenaltiesapplicabletoinfringementofnationalprovisionsadoptedpursuanttothedirectiveconcerningArticle8aa)andArticle8aaa).Conversely,penaltiesthatare‘effective,proportionateanddissuasive’couldbesubjecttodifferentinterpretationbymemberstates. CFEwelcomedtheprofessionalprivilegewaiveroftheproposal,howeverremarkedthatacleardistinctionneeds to be acknowledged between ordinary tax advice (as it is provided by the vast majority of taxadvisers)andmarketed,‘off-the-shelf’schemes(providedbyasmallminority).

7


Direct Tax

02

8


Taxation of the digital economy. Thelast6monthshasseentheEU,OECDandnationalgovernmentsintensivelyfocusingonthefairtaxation

ofthedigitaleconomy–andinparticularensuringthatthelargeU.S.techgiantspaya“fairshare”oftaxin

Europe,wherethesecompanieshavethrivingconsumermarkets.Thefollowingisasummaryofthemain

developmentsacrossthedifferentinstitutions.

Priority of Estonian Presidency & European Commission letter of intent. The Estonian Presidency highlighted that the taxation of the digital economy would be a priority and

followedthroughbyinitiatingahigh-leveldiscussioninJuly2017.TheEstonianpositionwasbolsteredwith

alettertothePresidencyon13SeptemberfromPresidentJunckerindicatingtheEuropeanCommission’s

intentthatalegislativeproposalwouldbepublishedinspring2018establishingEUrulesforthefairtaxation

ofprofitsgeneratedbydigitalisedMNEsinEurope.

ThiswasfollowedbytechnicalworkbeingcarriedoutanddiscussedattheinformalECOFINinEstoniaon

15 and 16 September. Finance ministers discussed the proposals for a fundamental reform of the

international tax rules to amend the definition of the concept of permanent establishment, with the

introductionoftheconceptof‘virtual’PE,wherebyataxablepresenceformultinationalcompanieswould

beconsideredsufficienttohaveataxablepresence.Technicaldiscussionalsoexaminedthespecificsofthe

sharingeconomyandthevaluationofdatafortaxpurposes.

France, Germany, Spain & Italy put the pressure on tech giants….

Concurrently,thedomesticpoliticalestablishmentsofFranceandGermanybegananinitiativetotaxlarge

U.S.Techcompaniesoperatingintheirmarkets.TheFrenchTaxauthoritieshadrecentlysuffereddefeatin

theFrenchSupremeCourtandfailedintheirattempttoestablishtheexistenceofaPEbyGoogle’sIrish

entity(GoogleIrelandLimited)inFranceandconsequentlylevy1.2billioneurointax.France,GermanyItaly

andSpainissuedalettercallingontheEuropeanCommissiontoexploreoptionsand“proposeanyeffective

solutionsbasedontheconceptofestablishingaso-called“equalisationtax”ontheturnovergeneratedin

Europebythedigitalcompanies”.Theletterfurtherstatedthat‘Theamountsraisedwouldaimtoreflect

someofwhatthesecompaniesshouldbepayingintermsofcorporatetax.”Theletterwassubsequently

signedby6otherMemberStates.

9


European Commission’s #DigiTax proposal.TheproposalcameatatimewhentheOECDwasalsoindicatingitsopennesstoexaminingthedefinition

ofPE inthecontextof thetaxationofthedigitaleconomy.TheOECDreleasedapublicconsultationfor

inputonthetaxchallengesofthedigitalisedeconomyinOctober2017.Theconsultationformedpartof

theworkbeingcarriedoutbytheOECDTaskforcefortheDigitalEconomy’s.Aninterimreportisexpected

in 2018 with a final report due in 2020. CFE submitted an Opinion Statement in response to this

consultation.

On21September2018,daysafter taxingthedigitaleconomytookcentrestageattheinformalECOFIN

meeting inEstonia,theEuropeanCommissionpublished itscommunicationtotheEuropeanParliament

andCouncilentitled,‘AfairandefficienttaxSystemintheEuropeanUnionfortheDigitalSingleMarket’

(the “Commission Communication”). The accompanying Commission Press Release stated that the

CommissionwaspursuinganambitiousEUagendaonthefairtaxationofthedigitaleconomyinorderto

ensurea“commonEUapproachtoinfluencetheinternationaldiscussion”,inordertocreate“meaningful

solutions” at international level by Spring 2018. At this point the press release indicated that the

CommissionwishedtoutilisetheexistingCCCTBframeworkastheoptimalmeansbywhichtoaddressthe

taxchallengesthatarisefromthedigitaleconomyinthecontextoftherevisedpermanentestablishment

rulesand theuseof formularyapportionment forallocating theprofit of largemultinational groups. In

addition, theCommunicationstated that“There is scopewithin thecurrentCCCTBproposal to examine

furtherenhancementstoensurethatiteffectivelycapturesdigitalactivities”.

TheCommissionCommunicationcontainedadetailedanalysisofdigitalisationanditsgrowingimpacton

theeconomy.Newbusinessmodelsemerging inthedigitaleconomywerealsoexamined.Ithighlighted

theeffectiveaveragetaxratespaidbytraditionalbusinessmodelsversusthenewerdigitalbusinessmodels

–withtraditionalinternationalbusinessmodelpayinganaverageeffectivetaxrateof23.2%comparedto

adigitalB2Cmodelpaying10.1%anddigitalB2B8.9%.

http://www.cfe-eutax.org/sites/default/files/CFE Response to OECD Request for Input on tax challanges of the digitalised economy.pdf

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/taxation/files/1_en_act_part1_v10_en.pdf

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/company-tax/fair-taxation-digital-economy_en

10


TheCommunicationidentifiedtwomainpolicychallengeswhenseekingtotaxthedigitaleconomy:nexus

andvaluecreation,i.e.wheretotaxandhowbesttotax.Itacknowledgedthat“theidealapproachwould

betofindmultilateral,internationalsolutionstotaxingthedigitaleconomygiventheglobalnatureofthis

challenge”buthighlightedthelackoninternationalmomentumorconsensusatthatpointintime.Itwas

proposedthattheEUwouldbeinamuchstrongerpositiontoleadtheinternationaldebateifacommon

positionwithintheEUcouldbereached.

TheCommunicationoutlinedthreeoptionswhichshouldbeconsideredasshort-termsolutions.

• Equalisation tax on turnover of digitalised companies

This is envisaged to be a tax on all untaxed or insufficiently taxed income generated from all

internet-basedbusinessactivities, includingbusiness– to- businessandbusiness-to-consumer,

creditableagainstthecorporateincometaxorasaseparatetax.

• Withholding tax on digital transaction

Thecommunicationstatesthatthiswouldconstituteastandalonegross-basisfinalwithholdingtax

oncertainpaymentsmadetonon-residentprovidersofgoodsandservicesorderedalone.

• Levy on revenues generated from the provision of digital services or

advertising activity

Thepossibilityofapplyingaseparate levytoalltransactionsconcludedremotelywith in-country

customerswhereanon-residententityhasasignificanteconomicpresence.

TheCommunicationwasfollowedwith thepublicationofaPublicConsultationwithstakeholderson26

Octoberseekinginputontheshortcomingsofthecurrent internationaltaxationframeworkandpossible

solutions–bothlongandshort-termtoaddressthoseshortcomings.

CFEsubmittedbotharesponseandanOpinionStatementinrelationtotheCommissionConsultation.

http://www.cfe-eutax.org/sites/default/files/04.CFE Opinion Statement FC9_17 Proposals towards a single European VAT area_0.pdf

11


What was agreed at the December ECOFIN… The December ECOFIN Council Conclusions (the “Conclusions”) will form the input for discussions at

internationallevelon'digitaltaxation'.TheConclusionswillalsoserveasareferenceforfurtherworkatEU

level,includingwithaviewtoCommissionlegislativeproposalsexpectedinspring2018.TheConclusions

highlighttheurgentneed toreachagloballyacceptedtaxpolicyresponsetothe taxationof thedigital

economy.Whilstaccepting thatthe implementationoftheOECDBEPSactionitemsshouldsubstantially

addresstheBEPSissuesexacerbatedbythedigitaleconomy,ithighlightstheneedtoaddresstheremaining

challengeofensuringthatinternationaltaxrulesaremodernisedandmadesuitableforboththedigitaland

traditions sectors of the economy. In this regard it identifies the concept of permanent establishment,

togetherwithtransferpricingandprofitallocationrulesastheessentialprinciplesfortheglobalallocation

oftaxingrightsonprofits.

TheconceptofavirtualPEisaddressedalongwithrevisitingthetransfer-pricingandprofitallocationrules

inlinewiththearm’slengthprinciple.TheConclusionsexpresstheviewthattheappropriatenexusinthe

form of a virtual permanent establishment, alongside any changes to the transfer pricing and profit-

allocationrulesshouldtakeintoaccounthowvalueiscreatedwithinvariousbusinessmodels.Furthermore,

theConclusionsurgetheOECDtocomeupwithappropriatesolutionsforthenetworkofdoubletaxtreaties

that are fit for purpose for the global challenges related to taxationof thedigital economy. They also

reiteratethatunilateralsolutions in theabsenceof international consensuscan lead todoubletaxation

disputesbetweenMemberstatesthatcouldunderminetheSingleMarket.Finally,theConclusionsstate

that the EU should closely follow the international response in particular at OECD level and consider

appropriateresponses.TheOECDisexpectedtopublishitsreportonthetaxationofthedigitaleconomyin

April2018.TheBulgarianEUpresidencyintendstofollow-upwithanEUlegislativeproposalinspring2018.

Meanwhile at the OECD. TheproposalcameatatimewhentheOECDwasalsoindicatingitsopennesstoexaminingthedefinition

ofPE inthecontextof thetaxationofthedigitaleconomy.TheOECDreleasedapublicconsultationfor

inputonthetaxchallengesofthedigitalisedeconomyinOctober2017.Theconsultationformedpartof

theworkbeingcarriedoutbytheOECDTaskforcefortheDigitalEconomy’s.Aninterimreportisexpected

in 2018 with a final report due in 2020. CFE submitted an Opinion Statement in response to this

consultation.


12


Direct Tax – The ‘Other Files’

03

13


CCTB/CCCTB. DuringthesummermonthstheFrenchGovernmentworkedwiththeGermangovernmenttoformulatea

simplifiedbilateralCCTBproposalnolaterthan2018thattheybelieveshouldserveasbasisfortax(rates)

harmonisation within the Eurozone. A multilateral agreement known as ‘enhanced coopoeration’ is

possiblewithintheEU,withapossibilityforotherEUmemberstatestojoinatalaterstage.Undertheso-

called ‘enhanced cooperation’ procedure at least nine EU member states can do so, with voluntary

participationofotherEUcountries.TheCCCTBwasdiscussedalsointhecontextofthedigitaleconomyas

aneffectivelongtermmeansoftaxingthedigitaleconomy.TheEuropeanCommissionPublicConsultation

ontheFairtaxationoftheDigitalEconomylisteditasapossiblelongtermsolutionbyimplementingnew

permanentestablishmentandprofitattributionrulesthroughmodificationstotheexistingCCCTBproposal.

TwodraftreportswerepublishedintheEuropeanParliamentinJuly.Thefollowingisasummaryofthe

mainpointscontainedintheReportregardingCCTB:

• Alignment with CCCTB (Cannot exist without CCCTB, therefore link must be strengthened;

Propose aligning implementation date of 2 directives (2020) Temporary provisions (cross-

borderlossrelief)shouldbeexcluded

• Digital PE (Inclusion of factors to define digital presence in terms of establishment of a

permanentestablishment,Definitionshouldalsoaddress“situationsinwhichcompanieswhich

engage in fully dematerialised digital activities are considered to have a permanent

establishmentinaMemberStateiftheymaintainasignificantpresentintheeconomyofthat

country”(Amendment19)

• LowerThreshold(Reductionof750millioneuroto40millioneuro,MinimumRateofTaxation,

Proposeintroductionofaminimumrateoftaxationinordertoleveltheplayingfieldbetween

MNEsandSMEs)

Thefollowingaresomeofthemainpointsmade intheReportconcerningtheconsolidationaspect,the

CCCTB:FlexiblemechanismsarenecessarytoadjusttoBREXITandexpectedoverhauloftheU.Scorporate

taxsystem;ThespecificsoftheDigitalEconomymustbecaptured;Commercialvalueofpersonaldatamust

be taken into consideration. More specifically it was proposed thatwithin formulary apportionment a

fourth factor should be included – personal data collection and exploitation for commercial purposes.

Finally,itwasproposedthatimplementationoftheconsolidationelementmustbealignedwiththeCCTB.

AdebateoftheEuropeanParliamenton30August2017exposedthedivergencesofopinionheldbyMEPS

ontheseReports.Afinalplenaryvoteisscheduledfor18January2018.However,itshouldbenotedthat

theParliamentisonlyempoweredtoissueanon-bindingopinioninrelationtothisandothertaxfiles.

14


Country-by-Country Reporting. The summer months saw a number of developments in the path towards public country-by country

reporting.

European Parliament On12June,twocommitteesoftheEuropeanParliament,theCommitteeonEconomicandMonetaryAffairs

(ECON)andtheCommitteeonLegalAffairs(JURI)approvedaproposalrequiringMNCstoreportdetailsof

theiractivities inevery EU country inwhich theyoperate.The information tobepublishedwill include

turnover,profitsandtaxespaid.Acarve-outwasincludedintheproposalwherebyMNCswillnotbeobliged

to publish commercially sensitive information. The Committees failed to reach the qualified majority

required to enter into negotiations with the Council. Therefore, the draft report was sent to the fully

constitutedParliamenttobedebatedinaplenarysession.

On4JulytheParliamentdebatedtheproposalsandtookavotetoamendtheoriginalCommissionproposal

onpublicCbCR.Undertheproposedchanges,MNCswithaglobalturnoverabove€750millionperyearor

morewillpublishCbCRdataineachcountrytheyoperateintheworld,andnotonlyforEUcountriesand

tax havens as indicated in the original Commission proposal. Under the voted text, the income tax

informationofMNCswillbeavailablepubliclyonastandardisedtemplate,storedinaregistrywhichisto

bemaintainedby theCommission. Inacompromiseamong thevariouspoliticalgroups intheEuropean

Parliament,MEPsvotedtoprotectcommerciallysensitiveinformationbyallowingMStograntexemptions

from the public CbCR requirements. Data shall still be confidentially submitted from the MS to the

Commission.Afterapprovingthereportby534to98voteswith62abstentions,thereportwassentback

totheCommittees(ECON,JURIandDEVE)tocommencenegotiationswithCouncilinfirstreadingonthe

basisofaplenarymandate.

Council On22 June2017,theCouncil issuedaproposedDirectvecompromisetext.ThePresidencycompromise

documenthighlightsthechangescomparedtotheCommission’soriginalproposal.TheParliamentandthe

CouncilhaveopposingpositionsonsomecentralelementsoftheproposalsincludingthethresholdMNCs

mustreachtocomewithintheproposals–withtheParliamentproposinga40millionthresholdasopposed

tothemuchhigher750millionthresholdbeingproposedbytheCouncil.Inaddition,thelatestcompromise

textseestheintroductionofmeasuressuchasanexceptionwherebyMNCswillnotbeobligedtopublish

informationwhichwouldbeseriouslyprejudicialtothecommercialpositionoftheundertakingstowhich

itrelates.

15


ATAD Implementation & Agreement on ATAD2.

MemberStatesareintheprocessofdraftingthenecessarylegislationtoimplementtheAnti-TaxAvoidanceDirectivemeasures.SomeMemberStatesareengagingstakeholdersandhavingconsultationswhilstothersarenot.MemberStatesarerequiredtohavetheATAD1measuresadoptedby1January2019,andtheexittaxprovisionsadoptedby1January2020.TheATAD2wasagreedinMayoftheyear(discussedintheMayeditionoftheEU&TaxPolicyReport)withimplementationduefor1January2020and1January2022forreversehybridmismatches.

16


Dispute Resolution. InMay2017,TheCounciloftheEuropeanUnion(ECOFIN)agreedtheDirectiveintroducinganewsystemforresolvingdoubletaxationdisputesbetweenmemberstates.TheDirectivewasadoptedinOctober.Thedirectivestrengthens themechanisms for resolvingdisputesamongmemberstates thatarise from theinterpretationofdoubletaxationconventions.Theprovisionswillapplyfrom1January2019.

CFEwelcomedtheCommission’sproposalstoexpandandimprovethemechanismsavailabletoMemberStatestoresolvedoubletaxationdisputeswiththeintroductionofaCouncilDirective.

Inparticular,CFEwelcomedthefollowingsalientimprovements:

• Extensionofthescope:AcrucialelementoftheProposedDirectiveistheextensionofthescopeof relevantdisputesbeyond just transferpricing to includeall taxpayers thataresubject totaxesonincomeandcapitalunderbilateraltaxtreatiesandtheConvention.

• Increased effectiveness & efficiency in the process: In order to increase effectiveness theProposedDirectiveintroducesastipulationforthemandatoryresolutionofdisputessubjecttostrict and enforceable timelines, this is a positive development for taxpayers and for taxcertaintygenerally.

• Taxpayers’ role and rights: The Proposed Directive seeks to empower the taxpayer andstrengthen their role in the process. Taxpayers have always had the right to instituteproceedings. However, the Proposed Directive seeks to empower the taxpayer during theprocess,forexample,bynotifyingthemofthetermsofreferenceofthedispute,theproposedtimeframe for completion and the terms of conditions of taxpayers’ or a third partiesinvolvement. CFE welcomes these proposals and believes such measures will increase taxcertainty and reduce administrative burden for taxpayers. CFE believes that the proposalallowingthetaxpayerrecoursetothenationalcourtstoensurecomplianceintheeventthatthe appropriate mechanisms are not applied is essential to a successful system of disputeresolution. In addition, the incorporation of an independent advisory council to makeassessmentsatdifferent stages, for example, ifa taxpayer’scomplaint is rejected,or in theevent that the two Member States fail to reach agreement to eliminate double taxationpursuant to theMAPprocedurewillbean invaluabledevelopment fromtheperspectiveofensuringtaxpayers’rightareprotected.

• Alternative dispute resolution mechanisms: One of the salient improvements under theDirectiveistheinclusionofanadditionallayerofprotectionintheformofanautomaticandmandatoryarbitrationproceduretobecompletedwithinfifteenmonthsintheeventthattheMemberStatesfailtoreachaconclusiontotheinitialMAPphase.CFEwelcomestheproposalto have anoptionbetween anAdvisory Commission and anAlternativeDispute ResolutionCommission.Inparticular,CFEbelievesthebroaderandmoreflexibleapproachtotheformofalternative resolutionprocedure,whichcanbeapplied,will greatly improve theprocess forboththecompetentauthoritiesandthetaxpayer.


http://www.cfe-eutax.org/sites/default/files/CFE Opinion Statement FC.04.2017 on Dispute Resolution_0.pdf

17


Indirect Tax ‘The Main Event’ 04

18


Commission’s VAT proposal. On4OctobertheEuropeanCommissionpublishedacomprehensiveproposaltocompletelyoverhaulthe

currentsystemofVATintheEU,replacingthetransitionalsystemwiththedefinitivesystemofVAT.The

proposals follow the European Commission’s VAT Action Plan of April 2016. The current system was

intendedtobeonlyatransitionalsystembuthaslasted25years–thenewproposalsforwhatisknownas

thedefinitiveVATsystemhavethereforebeenalongtimegoaloftheCommission.

TheCommissionbelievethetransitionalVATsystemisnolongerfitforpurposeintoday’smoredynamic

andhighlydigitalisedeconomy.Initspresentformofoperation,theVATsystemisfragmented,disrupts

the cross-border operations of digital businesses and SMEs andmost importantly highly susceptible to

fraud. The Commission aim to have a robust simple systemwhich is resilient to fraud and lowers the

complianceburden.

Theproposalsoutlinethecornerstonesofthenewsystemandseektoestablishaso-calleddefinitiveVAT

systemforintra-EUcross-bordertradebasedonthe“destinationprinciple”.Thedestinationprincipleseeks

toensurethatthefinalamountofVATispaidinthefinalconsumer’sMemberStateattherateapplicable

inthatMemberState.

The Cornerstones:

Destination based principle

Thechangetoadestination-principledVATsystemwillsubstantiallyimpactallbusinessestradingintheEU

Single Market. Under a destination-based VAT system, the supplier shall be liable for VAT at a rate

applicable in theMember State of destination. Goods traded cross-borderwill be taxed in the country

wheretheyareconsumed(thedestinationcountry)andatthedestinationcountry’staxrate,ratherthan

wheretheyareproduced(theorigincountry).Undertheproposal,thesupplierwillbeobligedtoaccount

forVATattherateapplicableinthedestinationMemberState.Whilsttaxwillbecollectedbythecountry

oforiginitwillultimatelybetransferredtothedestinationcountry.Themechanismforallowingthisnew

destinationsystemtooperateisknownastheOneStopShop.

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/taxation/files/communication_-_towards_a_single_vat_area_en.pdf

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/vat/action-plan-vat_en

19


One Stop Shop (“OSS”)

ThesupplierswillnotberequiredtoregisterinthedestinationMemberStateforVATpurposes,butcan

availofthe‘one-stop-shop’digitalportal.Bymeansofthe‘one-stop-shop’businesseswillbeabletofile

declarationsanddeclareVAToncross-bordertransactionsinasinglereturnwiththesamerulesandthe

languageoftheirstateofestablishment.MemberstateswillaccordinglysettletheirVATthatisduedirectly.

Cross- border B2B transactions

Underthecurrentrules,B2Bcross-bordersuppliesofgoodsareexemptfromVAT, inthesensethatthe

transaction is split between an exempt intra-EU supply of goods in theMember state of origin, and, a

taxableintra-EUacquisitionintheMemberstateofdestination.ThisdesignoftheVATsystemamounted

tosubstantialrevenuelosses,withtheVATgapestimatedatcirca50billioneuroperyear.TheCommission

thusproposetheintroductionofasingletaxablesupplyinthememberstateofdestination.

Simplification of VAT invoicing rules

Thiswouldallowsellers toprepare invoices inaccordancetotherulesapplicable intheirownMember

State.Therewillalsobeanendtothenecessitytocompleterecapitulativestatements(listofcross-border

transactionsforthetaxauthority).

Certified Taxable Person – a new concept in VAT Theproposednew conceptofacertified taxableperson (”CTP”) isakey elementof thenewproposals

regarding a definitiveVAT regime. The CTP is analogous to the Authorised Economic Operator (“AEO”)

number in the customs context (although the AEO contains 5 eligibility criteria). A business with this

certificationwillbeconsideredareliableVATtaxpayerthroughouttheEUandthereforebesubjecttolesser

administrativeconstraintsandeligibletoapplysomeoftheso-calledquickfixes. Inorder toreceivethe

classification,businessesmustapplytothenationaltaxauthorityoftheMemberStateofestablishment

anddemonstratethattheyhavesatisfiedthe3criteriacontainedintheproposedArticle13a(2)ofDirective

2006/112/EC.The3criteriafocusoncompliancerecord,proceduresandfinancialsolvency.

20


Quick Fixes

• Call-Off stock arrangements - Simplification and harmonisation of rules regarding call-off stockarrangements

• VAT identification number – recognition of VAT identification number of the customer as asubstantiveconditioninordertoexemptfromVATanintra-Communitysupplyofgoods;

• Chain transactions - Simplification of rules in order to ensure legal certainty regarding chaintransactions

• Proof of intra-Community supply – Common frame work of recommended criteria for thedocumentaryevidencerequiredtoclaimanexemptionforintra-Communitysupplies

Steps to implementation ThefullmodernisationoftheexitingVATSystemwillbecarriedoutinvianumerouslegislativeproposals.InadditiontotheprimarylegislativeproposalsinrelationtothedefinitiveVATregimeoutlinedbelowthefollowinglegislativeproposalswillalsobemade:

• ReformofVATrates• SimplificationofVATrulesforSMEsand• ReinforcingtheexistinginstrumentsforVATAdministrativeCooperation(discussedfurtherbelow)

ThedefinitiveVATregimewillbeimplementedin2steps.

• ThenewVATsystemwillinitiallyapplyonlytoB2Bsupplyofgoods;• After5yearsofmonitoringbytheEuropeanCommissionthenewsystemwouldbeexpandedin

scopetoapplyalsotoservices.Theimplementationofphase1willinturnbesplitinto2parts:

• Implementation of temporary measures known as the 4 Quick Fixes to address some of theproblemsintheexistingsystem.Identifythecornerstonesofthenewsystemandreachagreementontheseprinciples.

• Thespecifictechnicalprovisionsofthecornerstoneswillbepublishedin2018.

TheCFEhasissuedaninitialOpinionStatementontheCommissionProposalsandwillbefollowingupwithsubsequentOpinionStatementsasmoredetailsarepublished.

Quick Fixes & Implementation.

http://www.cfe-eutax.org/sites/default/files/04.CFE Opinion Statement FC9_17 Proposals towards a single European VAT area_0.pdf

21


Strenghtning administrative cooperation On30 November, the European Commissionpublished a draft Regulation to strengthen administrative

cooperation between the tax authorities of Member States. It seeks to amend Regulation (904/2010)

regardingmeasurestostrengthenadministrativeco-operationinthefieldofVAT.Thelegislativeinitiative

seekstoswiftly improvehowtaxauthoritiescooperatenotonlywitheachotherbutalsowithotherlaw

enforcementbodiesacrosstheEU.ItcomesinpreparationforthefullimplementationofthedefinitiveVAT

regimeandfollowsonfromtheproposaloffundamentalcornerstonesofthenewsystemaspublishedin

October.

Theprimaryelementsoftheproposalseekto:

StrengthencooperationbetweenMemberStatesbyputting inplaceanonlinesystemfor information

sharingwithin'Eurofisc',theEU'sexistingnetworkofanti-fraudexperts.ThesystemwouldenableMember

Statestoprocess,analyseandauditdataoncross-borderactivitytomakesurethatriskcanbeassessedas

quicklyandaccuratelyaspossible.ToboostthecapacityofMemberStatestocheckcross-bordersupplies,

jointauditswouldallowofficialsfromtwoormorenationaltaxauthoritiestoformasingleauditteamto

combatfraud-especiallyimportantforcasesoffraudinthee-commercesector.Newpowerswouldalso

begiventoEurofisctocoordinatecross-borderinvestigations.

Increaseinteractionwithotherlawenforcementbodiesbyopeningnewlinesofcommunicationanddata

exchange between tax authorities and European law enforcement bodies on cross-border activities

suspectedofleadingtoVATfraud:OLAF,EuropolandthenewlycreatedEuropeanPublicProsecutorOffice

(EPPO).CooperationwithEuropeanbodieswouldallowforthenationalinformationtobecross-checked

withcriminalrecords,databasesandotherinformationheldbyEuropolandOLAF,inordertoidentifythe

realperpetratorsoffraudandtheirnetworks.

SharekeyinformationonimportsfromoutsidetheEUbyfurtherimprovnginformationsharingbetween

taxandcustomsauthoritiesforcertaincustomsprocedureswhicharecurrentlyopentoVATfraud.Under

aspecialprocedure,goodsthatarrivefromoutsidetheEUwithafinaldestinationofoneMemberState

canarriveintotheEUviaanotherMemberStateandtransitonwardsVAT-free.VATisthenonlycharged

whenthegoodsreachtheirfinaldestination.ThisfeatureoftheEU'sVATsystemaimstofacilitatetradefor

honestcompanies,butcanbeabusedtodivertgoodstotheblackmarketandcircumventthepaymentof

VATaltogether.Under thenewrules informationon incoming goodswouldbesharedandcooperation

strengthened between tax and customs authorities in all Member States. The Proposed Regulation is

availablehere.

Other VAT developments:

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/taxation/files/vat_administrative_cooperation_proposal.pdf

22


Temporary reverse charge.

European finance ministers failed to reach agreement on allowing certain member states to apply a

generalisedreversechargemechanism.TheproposalseekstocombatVATfraud.Thegeneralisedreverse

chargeproposalsfollowarequestfrommemberstatessignificantlyaffectedbyVATfraud,namelyAustria

andtheCzechRepublic.

Theproposeddirectiveoffersasolutiontotheso-called‘missingtrader’or‘carousel’fraud,wheresupplies

aretradedseveraltimeswithoutpaymentofVATdueon thetransactions.Underpresentrules,reverse

charge can be applied as temporary measure only, whereas the proposed directive would establish a

generalised system applicable on a voluntary basis until 30 June 2022. The Commission presented an

analysisofthepossibleapplicationofthegeneralisedreversechargemechanisminAustriaandtheCzech

Republic.Whilst the financeministerswerepositive about theproposals at the June ECOFINmeeting,

potential problems were also discussed, including legal difficulties and disputes arising along with an

increase in untaxed goods and services. The initiative did not reach conclusion during the Estonian

Presidency,andnegotiationsareongoingwithnoconclusionsreached.Itremainstobeseenifitwillbea

priorityoftheBulgarianPresidency.

VAT on E-Books. AproposaltoaligntheVATrateonelectronicpublicationswiththatoftraditionalpublicationshadadifficult

road to conclusion with failure to get unanimous support at the June ECOFIN meeting. Although the

proposalhadstrongsupportfrommanymemberstatestheCzechRepublicvotedagainst itrequestinga

widersolutionforVATratesandthedigitaleconomybelookedat.Thiswaswidelyseenasanegotiation

tactic in thebattle on theother proposal for a temporary reverse chargemechanismdiscussed above.

However,agreementwasreachedbetweenFranceandtheCzechRepublicandtheproposalonEBookswas

approvedwithoutdebateattheDecemberECOFINmeeting.

23


EU Policy – Anti- Money Laundering 05

24


Agreement on the 5th AMLD.

TheCouncilofEUandtheEuropeanParliamentreachedapoliticalagreementon15DecemberontheEUCommission'sproposaltoamendtheFourthAnti-MoneyLaunderingDirective.Theamendeddirective(‘5thAMLD’) seeks to prevent large scale concealment of funds and to introduce increased corporatetransparencyrules,wherebycorporateandotherlegalentitieswillberequiredbylawtopubliclydiscloseinformationonthebeneficialownership.

Transparency requirements for corporate entities and trusts

Underthenewrules,memberstatesshallberequiredtoensurecompulsorypublicdisclosureofcertaininformation on beneficial owners in respect of companies and legal entities engaging in profit-makingactivitiesasperArticle54TFEU.Conversely,publicaccessrequirementsarenotputinplaceinrespectoftrusts andother legal arrangements. The 5th AMLD recognises that trustsmay also be set up for non-commercialpurposes,suchascharitableaims,useoffamilyassets,andotherpurposesbeneficialtothecommunity/generalpublic.Consideringthatsucharrangementsdonotqualifyasbusinessbenefits,theessentialdataontrusts’beneficialownersshallonlybegrantedtopersonsholdingalegitimateinterest.Similarly,the4thAMLDalreadygrantscompetentauthoritiesaccesstobeneficialownershipoftrustsandotherlegalarrangements,albeitinlimitedcircumstances.

Virtual currencies and verification

The 5th AMLD introduces a requirement for member states to verify beneficial ownership informationsubmitted to their beneficial ownership registers as well as an extension of anti-money launderinglegislationapplicabilitytovirtualcurrencies.

Third-countries

Withrespecttotransactionsinvolvingthirdcountries,theobligedentitiesshallapplyenhancedcustomerduediligencemeasuressetoutinthedirective.MemberStateswillintroducesuchrulesasarequirementforalltransactionswithnaturalpersonsorlegalentitiesestablishedinthirdcountriesidentifiedashigh-riskcountriespursuanttoArticle9(2)oftheDirective.

Timeline and background

On 12 February 2016, the ECOFIN Council (EU financeministers) called on the Commission to initiateamendmentstothe4thAMLDinthesecondquarterof2016thelatest.TheinformalECOFINCouncilalsocalledforactioninApril2016toenhancethetransparencyofbeneficialownershipregisters,toclarifytheregistration requirements for trusts, to speed up the interconnection of national beneficial ownershipregisters, to promote automatic exchange of information on beneficial ownership, and to strengthencustomerduediligencerules.

TheEU’scurrentAMLrevisedframeworkwasadoptedon20May2015,consistingofthe4thAMLDandRegulation(EU)2015/847oninformationaccompanyingtransfersoffunds.Thetranspositiondeadlineforthe4thAMLDandtheentry intoforceofRegulation (EU)2015/847wassetfor26 June2017.TheEU’ssupranationalriskassessmentwasalsopublishedinJune2017.Followingthepoliticalagreementbetweentheco-legislatorsandsubsequentadoptionof thedirective,EUmemberstateswillhave18months toimplementthe5thAMLDintonationallegislation.

25


AML Supranational Risk Assessment Report.

Simultaneouslywith thepolicydevelopmentsrelated tothe5thEuropeanUnionAnti-MoneyLaunderingdirective, the European Commission continued with steps on implementation of the 4th Anti-MoneyLaunderingDirective. Pursuant to themandateofArticle 6 of the Directive (EU) 2015/849, before thesummerholidaystheEuropeanCommissionfinalisedthesupranationalriskassessmentreport.TheReportincludes mapping of risks per relevant area, recommendation for member states how to identify andaddresstherisksaccordinglywithfocusonthesupervisoryactivities.

http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/document.cfm?doc_id=45319

26


PANA Committee of Inquiry, EU ‘Blacklist’ & #StateAid Update

06

27


European Parliament Inquiry Report & Recommendations.

EuropeanParliament’sprominentandassertive role in theareaof tax hasbeenvisible throughout thesecondhalfoftheyear.FollowingthepublicationofthePANACommitteeDraftReportontheinquiryonmoneylaundering,taxavoidanceandtaxevasionandDraftRecommendationstotheEuropeanCommissionandtheCouncilofEUof28June2017,667amendmentstotheDraftReportand783amendmentstotheDraftRecommendationsweretabled. Withrelevanceforthetaxadvisoryprofession,theDraftinquiryrecommendationscalledforashiftfromself-regulation to appropriate supervision and state controlled regulation for currently self-regulatedprofessions via a separate and independent national regulator/supervisor. The Committee furtherrecommendedforregulationoftaxintermediarieswithincentivestorefrainfromengagingintaxevasionand tax avoidance and shielding beneficial owners, as well as creation of an EU legal framework forcompulsorycodesofconductfortaxintermediaries.Finally,anEUcertificationofintermediariestopracticeastaxprofessionalswasrecommendedwithcallstowithdrawlicencesfromtaxprofessionalswheretheyareengagedinenablingtaxevasion,aggressivetaxplanningandmoneylaundering.TheCommitteealsocalled on the Commission to propose EU-wide legislation on the protection of whistleblowers with ahorizontallegislationcoveringboththepublicandprivatesectors.

The Report and the 211 recommendations to Council and Commission were approved at Parliament’splenary mid-December in Strasbourg, by 492 votes to 50with 136 abstentions. The recommendationsinclude formation during the next Parliament (2019 -2024) of a Permanent Committee of Inquiry ontaxation,modelledonbasisoftheUScongressionalcommittees.Inthemeantime,aSpecialCommitteetofollowupon the recommendationswouldcontinue the investigativework through themandateof thisParliament,untilMay2019.ThePANACommitteeofInquiryheldthelastsessionontheParadisePapersbefore itsmandateexpiredon8December2017,followedbyanaddressfromCommissionerMoscoviciwhoprovidedaround-upontheEUanti-taxavoidanceinitiatives.

Thefinalrecommendationsincludeunrestrictedpublicaccesstobeneficialownershipregistersandstricterregulation, sanctions for tax intermediaries aiding aggressive tax planning, then better regulation forprotectionofwhistleblowersandacommoninternationaldefinitionofwhatconstitutestaxhaven,offshorefinancialcentre,non-cooperativetaxjurisdictionandahigh-riskcountry.MEPscalledformoretransparencyintheCodeofConductGrouponbusiness taxationandradicaloverhaulofitsgovernanceandmodusoperandi.The European Parliament also supported shift from unanimity to qualified majority voting in Councilregardingtaxation.

28


EU ‘blacklist’ of non-cooperative jurisdictions. Aimingtoencouragefairtaxcompetitionandglobaltaxtransparencystandards,theEUapprovedalistof

non-cooperativejurisdictionfortaxpurposesthisDecember.Thelistincludes17countriesthatarefailing

tomeetEuropeantaxgoodgovernancestandards:AmericanSamoa,Bahrain,Barbados,Grenada,Guam,

Korea (Republic of), Macao, Marshall Islands, Mongolia, Namibia, Palau, Panama, Saint Lucia, Samoa,

TrinidadandTobago,TunisiaandtheUnitedArabEmirates.ThefirstEuropeanlistispartoftheEU’sefforts

to promote tax good governance, to dissuade external threats to EUMember states’ tax bases and to

addressstandardsofthirdcountriesthatrefusetocooperateintaxmatters.

The EU listing criteria included transparency, BEPS implementation and commitment to fair tax

competition. In addition, 47 countries have been ‘grey’ listed, and have committed to addressing the

deficienciesintheirtaxsystemsandtomeettherequiredcriteria,followingadialoguewiththeEU.Inorder

toensurecompliancewiththeEUmeasures,theEUhasdesigneddefensivemeasuresintaxareacouldbe

takenbytheMemberStates.Suchactionsinclude:

• Non-deductibilityofcosts;

• CFCrules;

• Withholdingtax;

• Limitationofparticipationexemption;

• Switch-overrule;

• Reversaloftheburdenofproof;

• Specialdocumentationrequirements;

• Mandatorydisclosureofspecifictaxschemeswithrespecttocross-borderarrangements.

InreactiontotheEU‘blacklist’,thegovernmentsofSouthKorea,Macau,Mongolia,Tunisia,Namibiaand

Panama condemned this EU action. Panama recalled its ambassador to the EU, whilst other countries

denouncedtheEUmeasuresas“unfair,arbitraryanddiscriminatory”. In thisglobaldisplayofdivergent

understandingof tax transparency, Korea’s financeministryadded that theEuropeanUnion isnot ina

positiontoimposeitstaxstandardsoncountrieslikeSouthKorea.

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/31876/background.pdf

29


#StateAid: EU Commission looks into U.K. CFC rules.

TheEuropeanCommissionpublisheditsPreliminaryStateAidDecisionaspartoftheinvestigationintotheU.K.’sControlledForeignCompany(CFC)legislationandwhetheritisincontraventionofEUstateaidrules.Theinvestigationwasannouncedon26October2017.Specifically,theEuropeanCommission is lookingintoU.K.’sgroupfinancingexemptionforcertainfinancing income(i.e. loaninterestpayments)thatareexemptfromtheremitoftheCFCrules.

U.K.GroupFinancingExemption TheCommissionisinvestigatingalegislative‘scheme’,theUK’sFinanceAct2012whichintroducedaGroupFinancingExemption,effectivefrom1 January2013.This ‘scheme’exemptsfromUKcorporate taxationfinancingincomereceivedbyanoff-shoresubsidiaryfromanotherforeigngroupcompany,whichallowsaUKbasedmultinational company to provide for financing toa CFCgroupmember viaanoffshoreshellwithouttaxingthisincome.IntheabsenceoftheGroupFinancingExemption,interestincomepaidonloanstosubsidiarieswhenthatinterestispaidintoanoff-shorejurisdictionwouldhavebeensubjecttotax. Inaccordancewith theEUAnti-TaxAvoidanceDirective,asof1 January2019,allMemberstatesmustintroduceCFClegislation,albeitwithacaveatthattheATADdoesnotintendagroupfinancingexemptionsuchastheoneunderCommission’sStateaid investigation. TheCommission investigationfocusesonalegislativeschemeregardingaGroupFinancingExemption introducedby theUK’sFinanceAct2012andeffective from1 January2013.TheUKGroupFinancingExemption,according to the EUCommission, isprovidingforselectiveadvantagetomultinationalgroupcompanieswhencomparedwithotherUKresidententitiesthatdonotoperatecross-border.AccordingtoECJsettledcase-law,nationalanti-abuseprovisionsmustnotbeselectiveandmustbecompliantwiththeStateaidrulesstill.

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/cases/271690/271690_1940938_12_2.pdf

30


#StateAid: The Amazon ruling. Continuingtheirinvestigationintopotentialcorporatetax‘sweetheartdeals’withEUgovernments,theEUCommissionadoptedadecisionestablishingatax liabilityforAmazoninLuxembourgof€250milliononbasisoftheEUStateAidrules. Commission'sAmazonStateaidinquiryfocusedonataxrulingissuedtoAmazonin2003andextendedin2011.TheCommissionclaimthatthisrulingendorsedamethodofcalculationofannualpaymentsfromtheoperating company to the holding company for the rights to the Amazon intellectual property, whichexceeded,onaverage,90%oftheoperatingcompany'soperatingprofits.CommissionsaythattheprofitsweresignificantlyhigherthanwhattheholdingcompanywasduetopaytoAmazonUSunderthetermsofthecost-sharingagreement. UnderLuxembourg'staxlaw,theoperatingentityissubjecttocorporatetaxwhilsttheholdingcompanyisnotduetothechosenlegalform-alimitedpartnershipwithUSpartners.Thetaxationrightstothepartners’profitsthusbelongtotheUnitedStates,withtheUStaxliabilitybeingconsistentlydeferred.Underthetaxruling,theholdingcompanywasashellcompanythatpassedonintellectualpropertyrightsto theoperating company. TheCommission furtherclaim that theholding companywasnotactivelyinvolved in thedevelopment the IPanddidnotperformanyactivities thatwould justify the levelofroyaltyitreceived.Inthisway,threequartersofAmazon'sprofitswereundulyattributedtotheholdingcompany,wheretheyremaineduntaxed.ThistaxstructurewasendorsedbyataxrulingissuedbytheLuxembourggovernment,whichamountedtoselectiveadvantageforAmazon.TheCommissiondoesnotchallengethestructureitself,ratherthetaxrulingthatendorsedartificialmethodsfortaxationofprofitsthatamountedtoselectiveadvantageforAmazon. Commissionhavesetoutthemethodologytocalculatethebacktaxesinitiallyestimatedat€250million,plus interest.AnactionforannulmentofaCommissionStateaiddecisiondoesnothaveasuspensoryeffect,thustheLuxembourggovernmentisobligedtorecovertheassessedtax.UnderEUlaw,assessedbacktaxesunderStateairrulesarenotapenalty,ratheranassessmentthatlevelstheplayingfield,anddoesnotpenalisetheoperatingcompanybeneficiaryoftheStateaid. Currently,DGCompetitionislookingintothemoretaxrulingsfromLuxembourg,asregardsthecorporatetaxtreatmentofIKEA,McDonald’sandGDFSuez(nowEngie).

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/case_details.cfm?proc_code=3_SA_38944

31


EU Tax Policy Report DECEMBER 2017

This publication may be not be reproduced withoutpermissionoftheCFETaxAdvisersEurope.Tothebestof our knowledge, the information and the law citedherein is accurate at thedateof publication. CFE TaxAdvisers Europe does not assume any liability. Theinformation contained cannot be considered advicefromthetaxadvisersworkingundertheumbrellaoftheCFE.

eu tax policy report - nob · 2018-01-05 · eu tax policy report cfe tax advisers europe authors...

Documents