Ett mer rättssäkert företrädaransvar i SFL? - En jämförelse av personligt ansvar i ABL och SFL med fokus på befrielsegrunden särskilda skäl
(2019) JURM02 20191Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- I aktiebolag har ägarna i regel inget personligt ansvar för bolagets förpliktelser. Ägaren riskerar huvudsakligen bara sin insats i bolaget om bolaget skulle gå dåligt. För att detta inte skall kunna missbrukas så finns det regler som trots det kan göra företrädaren personligt ansvarig
I aktiebolagslagen (2005:551) (ABL) återfinns bland annat regler om medansvar vid kapitalbrist. Borgenärer kan genom bestämmelserna rikta sina anspråk gentemot fysiska personer inom bolaget om den fysiska personen har underlåtit att företa vissa handlingar vid kapitalbrist. Samtliga borgenärer har möjlighet att använda sig av reglerna i ABL, inklusive staten genom Skatteverket.
Skatteverket har även en möjlighet att i enlighet med Skatteförfarandelagen... (More) - I aktiebolag har ägarna i regel inget personligt ansvar för bolagets förpliktelser. Ägaren riskerar huvudsakligen bara sin insats i bolaget om bolaget skulle gå dåligt. För att detta inte skall kunna missbrukas så finns det regler som trots det kan göra företrädaren personligt ansvarig
I aktiebolagslagen (2005:551) (ABL) återfinns bland annat regler om medansvar vid kapitalbrist. Borgenärer kan genom bestämmelserna rikta sina anspråk gentemot fysiska personer inom bolaget om den fysiska personen har underlåtit att företa vissa handlingar vid kapitalbrist. Samtliga borgenärer har möjlighet att använda sig av reglerna i ABL, inklusive staten genom Skatteverket.
Skatteverket har även en möjlighet att i enlighet med Skatteförfarandelagen (2011:1244) (SFL) göra en företrädare personligt ansvarig för skatteskulder, förutsatt att denne har misskött inbetalning, lämnat oriktig uppgift eller inte gjort avdrag med rätt belopp.
Särregleringen i SFL har kritiserats och en utredning har gjorts avseende en eventuell förändring av rekvisiten för befrielse från ansvar.
Uppsatsen analyserar de båda typerna av ansvar utifrån en eventuell lagändring. Framställningen visar framför allt att en lagändring är nödvändig för att öka rättssäkerheten för företrädare i aktiebolag då den inte kan anses vara legitimerad. Den kan däremot anses vara tillfälligt försvarbar av anledning att ett bättre alternativ saknas. (Less) - Abstract
- In limited liability companies, the owners generally have no personal responsibility for the company's obligations. The owner only risks his stake in the company if the company finds itself in dire times. In order for this not to be abused, there are rules which could make representatives personally responsible for the liabilities of the company.
The Swedish Companies Act (2005: 551) (SCA) contains, inter alia, rules on co-responsibility in the event of a capital shortage. Creditors can, by means of the regulations in the SCA, direct their claims against natural persons within the company if the physical person has failed to carry out certain duties in the event of a capital shortage. All of the company’s creditors have the opportunity... (More) - In limited liability companies, the owners generally have no personal responsibility for the company's obligations. The owner only risks his stake in the company if the company finds itself in dire times. In order for this not to be abused, there are rules which could make representatives personally responsible for the liabilities of the company.
The Swedish Companies Act (2005: 551) (SCA) contains, inter alia, rules on co-responsibility in the event of a capital shortage. Creditors can, by means of the regulations in the SCA, direct their claims against natural persons within the company if the physical person has failed to carry out certain duties in the event of a capital shortage. All of the company’s creditors have the opportunity to make use of the rules in SCA, including Swedish Tax Authority.
The Swedish Tax Authority also has the possibility, in accordance with the Tax Procedures Act (2011: 1244) (SFL), to make a representative personally liable for tax liabilities, provided that he has failed to make a payment, provided incorrect information or has not made a certain deduction with the right amount.
The special regulations in SFL have been criticized and there has been an investigation by The Swedish Agency for Public Management regarding a possible change of the requisites for exemption from liability.
The thesis analyzes the two types of responsibility based on a possible change in legislation. In particular, the thesis shows that a legislative amendment is necessary to increase legal certainty for representatives in limited liability companies, since it cannot be considered legitimate with regards to the legality principle. However, for now it could be considered justifiable because of a lack of better alternatives. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8977614
- author
- Äng, Martin LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- An improved legality principle for company representatives in the SCA?
- course
- JURM02 20191
- year
- 2019
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- företrädaransvar, skatteförfarandelagen, medansvar
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8977614
- date added to LUP
- 2019-06-17 14:38:10
- date last changed
- 2019-06-17 14:38:10
@misc{8977614,
abstract = {{In limited liability companies, the owners generally have no personal responsibility for the company's obligations. The owner only risks his stake in the company if the company finds itself in dire times. In order for this not to be abused, there are rules which could make representatives personally responsible for the liabilities of the company.
The Swedish Companies Act (2005: 551) (SCA) contains, inter alia, rules on co-responsibility in the event of a capital shortage. Creditors can, by means of the regulations in the SCA, direct their claims against natural persons within the company if the physical person has failed to carry out certain duties in the event of a capital shortage. All of the company’s creditors have the opportunity to make use of the rules in SCA, including Swedish Tax Authority.
The Swedish Tax Authority also has the possibility, in accordance with the Tax Procedures Act (2011: 1244) (SFL), to make a representative personally liable for tax liabilities, provided that he has failed to make a payment, provided incorrect information or has not made a certain deduction with the right amount.
The special regulations in SFL have been criticized and there has been an investigation by The Swedish Agency for Public Management regarding a possible change of the requisites for exemption from liability.
The thesis analyzes the two types of responsibility based on a possible change in legislation. In particular, the thesis shows that a legislative amendment is necessary to increase legal certainty for representatives in limited liability companies, since it cannot be considered legitimate with regards to the legality principle. However, for now it could be considered justifiable because of a lack of better alternatives.}},
author = {{Äng, Martin}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Ett mer rättssäkert företrädaransvar i SFL? - En jämförelse av personligt ansvar i ABL och SFL med fokus på befrielsegrunden särskilda skäl}},
year = {{2019}},
}