2020•Research portal (Tilburg University)Requires access

CFE ECJ Task Force: Opinion Statement ECJ-TF 3/2019 on the ECJ Decision of 22 November 2018 in Sofina (Case C-575/17) on Withholding Taxes, Losses and Territoriality

Eric C.C.M. Kemmeren, Alfredo García Prats, Werner Christof Haslehner, Volker Heydt, Michael Lang, Georg Kofler, João Félix Pinto Nogueira, Pasquale Pistone, Stella Raventós-Calvo, Raingeard de la Blétière, Isabelle Richelle, Alexander Rust, Rupert Shiers

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

The CFE Tax Advisers Europe note that the Court’s decision in Sofina may have extended the standard of comparability, requiring (foreign) non-dividend income of the recipient to be taken into consideration in comparing the tax treatment of domestic and outbound dividends. This comparator, however, upsets the principle of territoriality, as accepted by the Court in Futura (Case C-250/95) and Centro Equestre (Case C-345/04), by requiring the source state to take into account losses that the non-resident taxpayer has in the residence state. Taken at face value, Sofina ’s [1.] impact may extend well beyond withholding taxes, specifically, and dividend taxation, more generally, by attaching a “no-loss” condition to all source state taxing rights. It may arguably even bar the permanent establishment (PE) state from taxing profits attributable to that PE if the foreign head office is in a loss position. Moreover, applying Sofina to everyday international tax law might also not be an easy task and push administrative feasibility to its limits. The Court effectively seems to propose a non-discriminatory deferral of taxation, combined with a domestic regime, that leads to a subsequent recapture if (and only if) the non-resident taxpayer becomes profitable during a subsequent tax year.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The CFE Tax Advisers Europe note that the Court’s decision in Sofina may have extended the standard of comparability, requiring (foreign) non-dividend income of the recipient to be taken into consideration in comparing the tax treatment of domestic and outbound dividends. This comparator, however, upsets the principle of territoriality, as accepted by the Court in Futura (Case C-250/95) and Centro Equestre (Case C-345/04), by requiring the source state to take into account losses that the non-resident taxpayer has in the residence state. Taken at face value, Sofina ’s [1.] impact may extend well beyond withholding taxes, specifically, and dividend taxation, more generally, by attaching a “no-loss” condition to all source state taxing rights. It may arguably even bar the permanent establishment (PE) state from taxing profits attributable to that PE if the foreign head office is in a loss position. Moreover, applying Sofina to everyday international tax law might also not be an easy task and push administrative feasibility to its limits. The Court effectively seems to propose a non-discriminatory deferral of taxation, combined with a domestic regime, that leads to a subsequent recapture if (and only if) the non-resident taxpayer becomes profitable during a subsequent tax year.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The CFE Tax Advisers Europe note that the Court’s decision in Sofina may have extended the standard of comparability, requiring (foreign) non-dividend income of the recipient to be taken into consideration in comparing the tax treatment of domestic and outbound dividends. This comparator, however, upsets the principle of territoriality, as accepted by the Court in Futura (Case C-250/95) and Centro Equestre (Case C-345/04), by requiring the source state to take into account losses that the non-resident taxpayer has in the residence state. Taken at face value, Sofina ’s [1.] impact may extend well beyond withholding taxes, specifically, and dividend taxation, more generally, by attaching a “no-loss” condition to all source state taxing rights. It may arguably even bar the permanent establishment (PE) state from taxing profits attributable to that PE if the foreign head office is in a loss position. Moreover, applying Sofina to everyday international tax law might also not be an easy task and push administrative feasibility to its limits. The Court effectively seems to propose a non-discriminatory deferral of taxation, combined with a domestic regime, that leads to a subsequent recapture if (and only if) the non-resident taxpayer becomes profitable during a subsequent tax year.

Key concepts: Statement (logic), Territoriality, Task (project management), Law, Task force, Political science, Law and economics, Economics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
CFE ECJ Task Force: Opinion Statement ECJ-TF 3/2019 on the ECJ Decision of 22 November 2018 in Sofina (Case C-575/17) on Withholding Taxes, Losses and Territoriality — Research Paper | ScholarLens