GAARS

Italy has recently introduced a GAAR in its tax system. While the wording of the clause is not original, considering the experience the other countries might have about it, it is the context in which the provision shall operate that arose the interest of the firs commentators.
The article considers is particular the ways in which it will be arguably applied, taking into account the similar (although tailor-made) regulations that address the phenomenon, and that that have not been repealed by it. Treaty based, EU inspired, special law enacted clauses are still there and may potentially collide with the GAAR, making the overall outcome unpredictable for the Interpreter and for the taxpayer as well.

In 2012, public opinion focussed on what has been called 'aggressive tax planning of multinational enterprises'. Since then, the G20 and OECD developed the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Action Plan – a phenomenon that has received enormous attention. Despite this attention, the efforts, methodology and outcomes, and the instruments used to implement them, pose very little innovation. This article analyses the issues raised by the BEPS Action Plan from a historical perspective, showing that they remain grounded on the same basis of discussions that took place decades ago. This is probably because the project was triggered by a decrease in tax revenue, and not by an actual study of the failures of the system. The only real innovation of the BEPS Project is the change in the public state of mind and attitude towards tax planning, as well as a totally new way of developing international tax rules through consensus with the participation of a broad number of countries. Future steps should take advantage of this actual innovation, get rid of previous analysis and, taking into account of the current economic situation, study (1) the structure of the tax system and tax burden; (2) the jurisdiction to tax rules and the source and residence principles; and (3) the relationship between private law and tax law, i.e. legal personality and recognition of foreign persons and contracts. Without such in-depth analysis, any changes would be changes that only deepen already existent failing principles forming the base of the current system.

La circolare n. 27 del 18.12.2018 costituisce l'occasione, per Assonime, di commentare brevemente la nozione di «abuso del diritto» domestica, in relazione a quella contenuta nella Direttiva n. 2016/1164 (cd. ATAD 1): ne emergono, accanto alla sostanziale identità tra la clausola generale anti abuso di matrice comunitaria e quella interna contenuta nell'art. 10-bis della Legge 212/2000, alcune riflessioni sparse, derivanti dai principi elaborati dalla giurisprudenza europea, che suggeriscono come la questione sia meno ovvia di quanto appare.

Este artículo analiza la posibilidad de que la declaración de conflicto en la aplicación de la norma conlleve una sanción en algunos casos, tal y como propone el anteproyecto de ley de reforma de la Ley General Tributaria (LGT). Estudia el contenido y efectos de la cláusula del artículo 15 de la LGT, así como los debates doctrinales sobre el particular, y propone una reinterpretación del artículo a la luz del derecho de la Unión Europea que rechaza su asimilación al fraude de ley y lo aproxima al abuso. Se sugieren determinados ajustes normativos a partir de directrices extraídas de la Sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional 145/2013, que analizó la constitucionalidad de las sanciones en el régimen de operaciones vinculadas del Impuesto sobre Sociedades, y de la Recomendación de la Comisión sobre planificación fiscal agresiva de 2012.

There is no universal legal or academic definition of avoidance. It is either defined negatively or combined with terms such as ‘impermissible’ or ‘unacceptable’. In order to circumvent this conceptual dilemma but, at the same time, to prevent misinterpretations, my approach will proceed on the definitions based on the legal consequences of the taxpayer’s conduct. Hence, I will, where appropriate, use the term ‘evasion’ for criminal tax conduct, ‘avoidance’ for unsuccessful tax avoidance and ‘minimisation’ for successful tax planning.

Mergers and acquisitions of Croatian target companies may involve significant tax risks for domestic and foreign acquirers. Over the recent years, Croatian tax authorities have started to vigorously assess the economic substance of the envisaged M&As, often denying the acquirer different tax benefits, thus making the entire restructuring costlier. In doing so, Croatian tax authorities rely on a myriad of domestic anti-tax avoidance rules according to which M&A operations may be characterised as abusive. Accordingly, this paper offers a descriptive and systematic account on how Croatian anti-tax avoidance legislation may hinder M&A activity. Thereby, our aim is primarily to explore, both from a substantive and procedural point of view, the imagined boundary between legitimate and abusive tax planning. Keywords: mergers and acquisitions; tax planning; lawfully avoiding payment of taxes; tax neutrality; burden of proof; the general rule against tax evasion.

U ovom se radu, uzimajući u obzir više ciljeva porezne politike, analizira pristup izbjegavanju poreza u Hrvatskoj te ukazuje na njegove postojeće nedostatke. Ističe se kako Hrvatska tek treba razviti koherentan normativni okvir za sprječavanje izbjegavanja poreza. U tom smislu posebno se ističe nedostatak općeg pravila protiv izbjegavanja poreza, ključnog instrumenta poreznih sustava mnogih
svjetskih država. Autori predlažu uvođenje općeg pravila u hrvatsko porezno zakonodavstvo, polazeći od aktualnih prijedloga i inicijativa institucija Europske unije (EU). Prijedlog je usklađen s više ciljeva porezne politike. Pritom se posebno naglašava načelo pravne sigurnosti, koje je dosad zanemareno u dinamici razvoja hrvatskog poreznog sustava. Također, autori ističu kako ovu analizu valja
razmatrati u kontekstu posljednje ekonomske krize, koja dodatno nameće potrebu za stvaranjem održivog sustava javnih financija.

Domestic responses against international tax avoidance have sharply increased in the latest years worldwide (in this sense, DAC 6-type rules are worth mentioning).
In this contest, GAAR shopping by competent authorities and tax administrations is a great challenge. These agencies are often inclined to pile up anti-avoidance rules of a treaty or domestic nature without any hierarchy or prevalence of application, and to surf back and forth on them to enhance the scope of the taxable event and revenue collection to its maximum possible reach.
As a refinement of previously existing domestic GAAR, bilateral and multilateral (MLI) treaty anti-abuse responses have established a set of standards for transactions under the treaty umbrella that might create an overlapping effect, and hence, increase uncertainty unless sound ordering principles are followed in their application.
Some ordering principles are advanced in MLI itself, but others must be developed considering the nuances of each jurisdiction’s domestic rules and treaty network, as demonstrated in the attached discussion which is particularly focused on Argentina.

Poland has had a GAAR in force since 15 of July 2016. In substantive terms, the conditions for ignoring an arrangement (i.e. ignoring the effectiveness of a transaction or series of transactions) in Poland are similar to solutions that can be found in other countries’ GAARs, particularly when considering rules enacted in recent years. The Directive laying down rules against tax avoidance practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market 2016/1164 of 12 July 2016 establishes inter alia the obligation to introduce a GAAR to the tax systems of the Member States and provides for a model regulation. In accordance with Art. 11 of the Directive, Member States are obliged to apply the ATAD, including the EU GAAR, with effect from 1 January 2019. Thus, from the present-day perspective ATAD is the key normative model that should be used in comparisons with Polish legislation in effect. While it is true that such a rule is in effect in Poland, the question remains of whether it accurately reflects the model provided for by the Directive. It should be stated that the Polish rule essentially fulfils the requirements set out by the Directive. All the criteria provided for in Art. 119a GTA applied in defining tax avoidance are, in the Author’s view, aligned with the criteria set out in Art. 6 ATAD.
Certain doubts can arise as, according to Article 119b of the General Tax Act 1997 ('Ordynacja podatkowa'), the Polish GAAR shall not apply if the tax benefit obtained or intended to be obtained by a taxpayer does not exceed PLN 100,000 (approx. 27,500 USD) during the settlement period, or in the case of taxes that are not settled periodically, if the tax advantage from the arrangement does not exceed PLN 100,000. The  problem may also be caused by the fact that article 6 of the ATAD holds that Member States may ignore an arrangement or series of arrangements if they have been put into place ‘for the main purpose or one of the main purposes’ to obtain a tax benefit defeating the object or purpose of the applicable tax law. The key phrase is ‘the main purpose or one of the main purposes’. Following in the footsteps of the Commission Recommendation 2012, the Polish legislator has declared in Art. 119a § 1 of the GTA that the GAAR is applicable when the taxpayer has acted ‘primarily’ in order to obtain a tax benefit (…)”. In Art. 119d GTA ‘primarily’ is defined entirely consistent with 4.6. of the Commission Recommendation 2012 but the question is, whether Art. 119a GTA is in line with Art. 6 ATAD as well. This issue is analysed more closely. In the Author’s opinion, the conclusion that the requirement as to the purpose of the arrangement as provided for by 119a § 1 GTA is incompatible with the Directive would be hasty and excessive.

The paper takes a tax policy perspective in analysing the approach to tax avoidance in Croatia and expounding its existing shortcomings. It is argued that Croatia is yet to develop a coherent legislative framework suitable for curbing tax avoidance in an equitable, efficient and simple way. One instrument that has hitherto been ignored is the general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR), a keystone of anti-avoidance policies in other countries. The authors propose the introduction of a specific GAAR, based on recent developments in the European Union (EU), in Croatian tax legislation. This proposal is supported by multiple tax policy arguments.
Special emphasis is placed on the requirements of legal certainty, a traditional weak spot of the Croatian tax system. The proposal is put in the context of the persistent quest for a sustainable public finance system in times of crisis.

Introduction. 1. Differences between OECD and emerging countries' tax systems. 2. The challenges and constraints to promote effective reforms and to counter noncompliance in emerging countries. 3. Is tax avoidance a problem that calls for a GAAR in emerging countries? 4. Conclusions. Bibliography.

RESUMEN La Ley N° 20.780/2014 introdujo en Chile la regulación de normas generales antielusivas: el abuso de las formas jurídicas y la simulación. Sin embargo, esta última figura no tiene una naturaleza elusiva, sino evasiva. Su actual consagración legal, a lo que debe sumarse la interpretación administrativa emanada del Servicio de Impuestos Internos, han generado dificultades aplicativas y constitucionales que el presente trabajo revisa desde una perspectiva crítica.

O presente artigo busca analisar a compatibilidade da norma geral antielisiva introduzida pela Diretiva que estabelece regras contra as práticas de elisão fiscal que tenham incidência direta no funcionamento do mercado interno com a jurisprudência constante do Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia. Para tanto, será apresentado um breve resumo do standard que hoje é aplicado nos casos envolvendo abuso para julgamento no Tribunal de Justiça. A segunda seção será dedicada à apresentação da norma geral antiabuso introduzida pela ATAD, e as principais críticas de caráter geral. Nas seções seguintes cotejaremos as expressões utilizadas pela GAAR com a casuística tradicional do Tribunal.


ABSTRACT The present paper aims to analyze if the general anti-abuse rule set up by the Directive (EU) 2016/1164 laying down rules against tax avoidance practices is compatible with the case-law of the European Court of Justice. Thus, we will present a brief resume of the actual standard that the European Court of Justice adopts in cases involving abuse. In the second section, we will present the GAAR stablished in the ATAD and the main critics set towards it. Finally, in the following section, we will compare the wording of the GAAR with the ECJ Case Law.

El presente trabajo pretende contribuir a una mejor comprensión de las normas generales antielusivas en Chile, y sostiene que tanto el abuso de las formas jurídicas como la simulación-al igual que en España-son figuras objetivas, esto es, que dentro de sus presupuestos de aplicación no es necesario determinar un especial ánimo que habría guiado al contribuyente a eludir. Tal afirmación tiene su fundamento en un análisis normativo, jurisprudencial y doctrinal, tras el cual se concluye que ambas instituciones corresponden a figuras vinculadas al restablecimiento de la legalidad, las que se concretan en el requerimiento que efectúa el ente fiscalizador a un tribunal para que este declare que en un caso concreto existe elusión. PALABRAS CLAVE Normas generales antielusión, restablecimiento de la legalidad, sanción administrativa.

Artykuł stanowi głos w dyskusji dotyczącej właściwego rozumienia „sprzeczności [korzyści podatkowej] z przedmiotem lub celem ustawy podatkowej lub jej przepisu” – przesłanki definicyjnej dla unikania opodatkowania, któremu przeciwdziała klauzula ogólna zawarta w art. 119a i n. ustawy z 29.08.1997 r. – Ordynacja podatkowa.

Celem artykułu jest zbadanie, z punktu widzenia wzorców oceny konstytucyjnej wypracowanych w orzecznictwie Trybunału Konstytucyjnego, przepisu przejściowego zawartego w art. 7 ustawy z 13.05.2016 r. o zmianie ustawy - Ordynacja podatkowa oraz niektórych innych ustaw, , wprowadzającej w ramach nowego działu IIIa "Przeciwdziałanie unikaniu opodatkowania" tzw. klauzulę ogólną przeciwko unikaniu opodatkowania. Wynika z niego, że klauzula będzie mogła zostać zastosowana wobec korzyści podatkowej uzyskanej po dniu jej wejścia w życie, niezależnie od usytuowania na osi czasu samych czynności abuzywnych umożliwiających osiągnięcie tej korzyści.
O ile bezzasadna jest teza o tout court niekonstytucyjności tej reguły prawnej, o tyle jej rozumienie i stosowanie musi podlegać ograniczeniom narzuconym przez standardy konstytucyjne. Próba wytyczenia granic jej dopuszczalnego użycia zostanie przeprowadzona na kilku istotnych dla praktyki przykładach.
Wnioski artykułu mają charakter roboczy i dyskusyjny. Trudno o jednoznaczność w materii złożonej, silnie nacechowanej aksjologicznie, a także - niestety - dotkniętej zamętem pojęciowym.

Las normas generales antielusión chilenas buscan privar de efectos tributarios a aquellas planificaciones tributarias calificadas como abusivas o simuladas por un tribunal. Estas, presentan interesantes características en materia de prescripción, que las alejan de lo que hasta la fecha había sido la regla. En efecto, pese a que el abuso y la simulación están redactados en términos objetivos, el legislador parte de la base de que la actuación del contribuyente en estos casos es de mala fe, lo que genera el aumento del plazo de prescripción de la acción de fiscalización de tres a seis años por aplicación de las reglas de la prescripción extraordinaria. De otra parte, para que la Administración tributaria pueda fiscalizar los efectos emanado de este tipo de planificaciones tributarias, es necesario que los actos, contratos o negocios implementados por el contribuyente y declarados elusivos hayan tenido lugar en períodos tributarios que resulten revisables por parte de la Administración tributaria.

Ustawą z 13.5.2016 r. o zmianie ustawy – Ordynacja podatkowa oraz niektórych innych ustaw wprowadzono do polskiego systemu prawnego klauzulę ogólną przeciwko unikaniu opodatkowania. Została ona ujęta w nowo tworzonym Dziale IIIa ustawy z 29.8.1997 r. – Ordynacja podatkowa. W artykule tym omawiam wybrane zagadnienia związane ze stosowaniem przyszłej klauzuli.