Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The State Aid Review against Aggressive Tax Planning: ‘ Always Look a Gift Horse in the Mouth ’

The State Aid Review against Aggressive Tax Planning: ‘ Always Look a Gift Horse in the Mouth ’ ec Editorial TAX REVIEW 2015­6 Luc de Broe* Since the early 1990s, the traditional concepts of income taxation have been under continuous pressure within the Union as in a never ending series of judgments the CJEU has ruled that the fundamental freedoms (Articles 45­66 TFEU) impose serious restrictions on the sovereignty of Member States to design their income tax rules. Although case law of the CJEU already in the 1990s indicated that the EU state aid rules (Articles 107­109 TFEU) may also seriously affect the tax sovereignty of the Member States, the full effect of the state aid prohibition on the design of corporate tax rules within the Union and their application and interpretation by the tax authorities was probably unclear for the majority of companies and their tax advisors before the summer of 2014.1 Since then the question got a new impetus as a result of the formal investigations of the EU Commission's DG Comp into tax rulings (so-called Advance Pricing Agreements or APAs) obtained by Apple (Ireland), Fiat and Amazon (Luxembourg) and Starbucks (Netherlands) and the tax aid scheme of Belgium (so-called excess profit regime). The actions of the DG Comp in the area of direct http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png EC Tax Review Kluwer Law International

The State Aid Review against Aggressive Tax Planning: ‘ Always Look a Gift Horse in the Mouth ’

EC Tax Review , Volume 24 (6) – Dec 1, 2015

Loading next page...
 
/lp/kluwer-law-international/the-state-aid-review-against-aggressive-tax-planning-always-look-a-hlwZDxprYu
Publisher
Kluwer Law International
Copyright
Copyright © Kluwer Law International
ISSN
0928-2750
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

ec Editorial TAX REVIEW 2015­6 Luc de Broe* Since the early 1990s, the traditional concepts of income taxation have been under continuous pressure within the Union as in a never ending series of judgments the CJEU has ruled that the fundamental freedoms (Articles 45­66 TFEU) impose serious restrictions on the sovereignty of Member States to design their income tax rules. Although case law of the CJEU already in the 1990s indicated that the EU state aid rules (Articles 107­109 TFEU) may also seriously affect the tax sovereignty of the Member States, the full effect of the state aid prohibition on the design of corporate tax rules within the Union and their application and interpretation by the tax authorities was probably unclear for the majority of companies and their tax advisors before the summer of 2014.1 Since then the question got a new impetus as a result of the formal investigations of the EU Commission's DG Comp into tax rulings (so-called Advance Pricing Agreements or APAs) obtained by Apple (Ireland), Fiat and Amazon (Luxembourg) and Starbucks (Netherlands) and the tax aid scheme of Belgium (so-called excess profit regime). The actions of the DG Comp in the area of direct

Journal

EC Tax ReviewKluwer Law International

Published: Dec 1, 2015

There are no references for this article.