En skatteekonomisk jämförelse av holdingbolagsjurisdiktioner vid rysk etablering i EU
(2011) JURM02 20112Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- När en investerare med hemvist i ett land utanför EU ska etablera eller förvärva ett operativt dotterbolag inom EU beror investeringens lönsamhet delvis på den beskattning dotterbolagets vinster är föremål för. Inte bara skattereglerna i den stat som dotterbolaget etableras i spelar in utan även skattereglerna i investerarens hemviststat samt den lindring eller eliminering av dubbelbeskattning som kan uppnås genom eventuella skatteavtal mellan de båda staterna. Vid internationella etableringar kan det dessutom ofta vara intressant att undersöka de skattemässiga villkor som råder mellan hemviststat respektive etableringsstat och andra länder för att försöka åstadkomma ett skattebilligare ägande.
När etablering i EU sker från en stat... (More) - När en investerare med hemvist i ett land utanför EU ska etablera eller förvärva ett operativt dotterbolag inom EU beror investeringens lönsamhet delvis på den beskattning dotterbolagets vinster är föremål för. Inte bara skattereglerna i den stat som dotterbolaget etableras i spelar in utan även skattereglerna i investerarens hemviststat samt den lindring eller eliminering av dubbelbeskattning som kan uppnås genom eventuella skatteavtal mellan de båda staterna. Vid internationella etableringar kan det dessutom ofta vara intressant att undersöka de skattemässiga villkor som råder mellan hemviststat respektive etableringsstat och andra länder för att försöka åstadkomma ett skattebilligare ägande.
När etablering i EU sker från en stat som inte är EU-medlem kan det ibland vara mer lönsamt för investeraren att äga dotterbolaget genom ett mellanliggande holdingbolag beläget i en medlemsstat som har ett förmånligare skatteavtal med investerarens hemviststat än vad dotterbolagets hemviststat har. Moder-/dotterbolagsdirektivet (90/435/EEC) och ränte-/royaltydirektivet (2003/49/EC) är i detta avseende av stort intresse då direktiven under vissa förhållanden helt eliminerar källskatt vid utdelningar eller ränte- och royaltybetalningar från dotterbolag till moderbolag när de båda bolagen har hemvist inom EU.
I denna uppsats tas sikte på den situation då etablering från Ryssland sker i en EU-stat via ett europeiskt mellanliggande holdingbolag. Fyra EU-medlemsstater jämförs genom en skatteekonomisk analys med avseende på deras lämplighet som hemvist för ett mellanliggande holdingbolag när investeraren är en rysk fysisk eller juridisk person. De jurisdiktioner som jämförs är Sverige, Nederländerna, Cypern och Luxemburg. Jämförelsen görs med fokus på den effektiva beskattningen av utdelning från ett europeiskt operativt bolag, via det europeiska holdingbolaget, till den ryska investeraren samt beskattning av kapitalvinst vid avyttring av det operativa bolaget eller holdingbolaget. Dessutom ges en överblick över i vilka fall underkapitalisering är lönsam samt över hur stora besparingar som teoretiskt sett kan göras. Nationella och internationella regler som reglerar skattefrihet för utdelningar och vinster samt underkapitaliseringsregler ges också visst utrymme i uppsatsen.
Resultatet av analysen visar bland annat att jurisdiktionerna varierar i lämplighet beroende på vilken typ av struktur de används i samt att de krav, restriktioner och även förmåner som uppställs i relevanta regleringar kan göra respektive jurisdiktion mer eller mindre lämplig beroende på av vilken anledning etablering sker. Dessutom kan konstateras att underkapitalisering oftast ger en teoretisk möjlighet till skattebesparingar. De reella möjligheterna till skattebesparingar är dock i slutänden beroende på i vilken utsträckning underkapitalisering kan utnyttjas med hänsyn till nationella underkapitaliseringsregler. (Less) - Abstract
- When an investor resident in a state outside of the European Union wishes to establish or purchase a subsidiary within the Union, the profitability of the investment is partly dependent on the taxation the profits are subject to. Not only the tax regulations in the state in which the subsidiary is established is determinant, but also tax regulations in the investor’s state of residence and the possible reduction or elimination of double-taxation that can be achieved by application of tax treaties, if such exists between the states. Generally when creating international structures of companies, it can also be interesting to examine the reigning fiscal conditions between the state of residence, the state of the subsidiary and other countries... (More)
- When an investor resident in a state outside of the European Union wishes to establish or purchase a subsidiary within the Union, the profitability of the investment is partly dependent on the taxation the profits are subject to. Not only the tax regulations in the state in which the subsidiary is established is determinant, but also tax regulations in the investor’s state of residence and the possible reduction or elimination of double-taxation that can be achieved by application of tax treaties, if such exists between the states. Generally when creating international structures of companies, it can also be interesting to examine the reigning fiscal conditions between the state of residence, the state of the subsidiary and other countries to examine whether a more tax efficient structure is possible.
Establishment in the EU from a state that is not a member in the European Union, a more tax efficient structure can be accomplished by establishing an intermediate holding company in a third EU state that the state of the investor has concluded a tax treaty with that is more advantageous than the treaty with the state of the subsidiary. In this respect the Parents-Subsidiary Directive (90/435/EEC) and the Interests and Royalties Directive (2003/49/EC) are of great interest since the directives during certain conditions fully abolishes withholding tax on payments of dividends, royalty and interest within groups of companies which are resident in EU.
This thesis targets the situation when a Russian investor seeks to establish a European holding company as an intermediary. Four member states are compared in a tax economic analysis with respect to their suitability as resident states of an intermediary when the investor is a Russian physical or legal person. The compared states are Sweden, the Netherlands, Cyprus and Luxembourg. The comparison focuses on the effective tax levied upon dividends made by the European operative company trough the intermediary to the Russian investor. Also, an overview over the situations in which thin capitalization is profitable and how great savings that theoretically can be made is done. National and international participation exemption rules and thin capitalization rules that are affecting the transactions are in some degree treated in the thesis.
The analysis shows that the compared jurisdictions have varying suitability depending on which kind of structure they are supposed to be used in and that the requirements, thresholds, restrictions and advantages that are stipulated in the relevant regulations can make the jurisdictions more or less suitable depending on the reasons for and the type of establishment. Besides this, it is established that thin capitalization most often is at least theoretically most profitable. In reality the possibilities of thin capitalization are depending on to which extent thin capitalization can be used with regards to national thin capitalization rules. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/2277534
- author
- Heldqvist, Fredrik LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- A tax economic comparison of european holding company jurisdictions when investing in EU from Russia
- course
- JURM02 20112
- year
- 2011
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- skatterätt, internationell skatterätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 2277534
- date added to LUP
- 2012-03-14 09:47:57
- date last changed
- 2012-03-14 09:47:57
@misc{2277534,
abstract = {{When an investor resident in a state outside of the European Union wishes to establish or purchase a subsidiary within the Union, the profitability of the investment is partly dependent on the taxation the profits are subject to. Not only the tax regulations in the state in which the subsidiary is established is determinant, but also tax regulations in the investor’s state of residence and the possible reduction or elimination of double-taxation that can be achieved by application of tax treaties, if such exists between the states. Generally when creating international structures of companies, it can also be interesting to examine the reigning fiscal conditions between the state of residence, the state of the subsidiary and other countries to examine whether a more tax efficient structure is possible.
Establishment in the EU from a state that is not a member in the European Union, a more tax efficient structure can be accomplished by establishing an intermediate holding company in a third EU state that the state of the investor has concluded a tax treaty with that is more advantageous than the treaty with the state of the subsidiary. In this respect the Parents-Subsidiary Directive (90/435/EEC) and the Interests and Royalties Directive (2003/49/EC) are of great interest since the directives during certain conditions fully abolishes withholding tax on payments of dividends, royalty and interest within groups of companies which are resident in EU.
This thesis targets the situation when a Russian investor seeks to establish a European holding company as an intermediary. Four member states are compared in a tax economic analysis with respect to their suitability as resident states of an intermediary when the investor is a Russian physical or legal person. The compared states are Sweden, the Netherlands, Cyprus and Luxembourg. The comparison focuses on the effective tax levied upon dividends made by the European operative company trough the intermediary to the Russian investor. Also, an overview over the situations in which thin capitalization is profitable and how great savings that theoretically can be made is done. National and international participation exemption rules and thin capitalization rules that are affecting the transactions are in some degree treated in the thesis.
The analysis shows that the compared jurisdictions have varying suitability depending on which kind of structure they are supposed to be used in and that the requirements, thresholds, restrictions and advantages that are stipulated in the relevant regulations can make the jurisdictions more or less suitable depending on the reasons for and the type of establishment. Besides this, it is established that thin capitalization most often is at least theoretically most profitable. In reality the possibilities of thin capitalization are depending on to which extent thin capitalization can be used with regards to national thin capitalization rules.}},
author = {{Heldqvist, Fredrik}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{En skatteekonomisk jämförelse av holdingbolagsjurisdiktioner vid rysk etablering i EU}},
year = {{2011}},
}