Låter staten kapitalet sitta i valfri båt? - En analys av de svenska ränteavdragsbegränsningsreglernas förenlighet med EU-rättens fria rörlighet för kapital
(2021) JURM02 20212Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- The rules on whether a company may deduct interest expenses or not was first introduced in Sweden in 2009 to make sure that the country’s tax base wasn’t emptied to countries with preferable tax laws. These rules have since then been developed to fill in any gaps that may have been discovered.
In 2021 the European Court of Justice determined that the rules regarding the deduction of interest expenses from 2013 was deemed unlawful in relation to the freedom of establishment within the European Union. The ruling started a discussion on what effect this might have on the rules and the Swedish tax base.
In 2020 the Supreme Administrative Court of Sweden established what the term associated companies meant in relation to the rules... (More) - The rules on whether a company may deduct interest expenses or not was first introduced in Sweden in 2009 to make sure that the country’s tax base wasn’t emptied to countries with preferable tax laws. These rules have since then been developed to fill in any gaps that may have been discovered.
In 2021 the European Court of Justice determined that the rules regarding the deduction of interest expenses from 2013 was deemed unlawful in relation to the freedom of establishment within the European Union. The ruling started a discussion on what effect this might have on the rules and the Swedish tax base.
In 2020 the Supreme Administrative Court of Sweden established what the term associated companies meant in relation to the rules regarding deduction of interest expenses. In the case the court found that companies could be seen as associated even though no shareholding was present between the two.
The ruling could mean that the rules on when deduction of interest expense isn’t allowed is applied to more situations than those where a shareholding enable the holder to exert a definite influence. If that is a case the European Court of Justice could find that the rules could be tested against the free movement of capital.
In this thesis the background of the Swedish rules regarding deduction of in-terest expenses is presented as well as the case law from the European Court of Justice regarding the freedoms. Then the case from the Supreme Adminis-trative Court of Sweden from 2020 will be presented and what effect it could have on the rules. Lastly a test whether the Swedish rules conflict with the free movement of capital and if that is the case could the rules be justified with reference to the public interest. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- De svenska ränteavdragsbegränsningsreglerna infördes 2009 för att förhindra att vinster fördes ut ur Sverige till länder med en mer förmånlig beskattning med hjälp av olika typer av ränteupplägg. Dessa regler har utvecklats succesivt för att täcka in ytterligare situationer där det har upptäckts att brister i regler-na.
2021 avgjorde EU-domstolen det så kallade Lexel-målet kopplat till ränteav-dragsbegränsningsreglerna. Domen fastställde att de svenska reglerna stod i strid med etableringsfriheten och därmed inte var förenliga med EU-rätten. Utfallet i målet skapade diskussion kring vad detta skulle ha för effekt på rän-teavdragsbegränsningsreglernas och den svenska skattebasens framtid.
2020 dömde Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen i ett... (More) - De svenska ränteavdragsbegränsningsreglerna infördes 2009 för att förhindra att vinster fördes ut ur Sverige till länder med en mer förmånlig beskattning med hjälp av olika typer av ränteupplägg. Dessa regler har utvecklats succesivt för att täcka in ytterligare situationer där det har upptäckts att brister i regler-na.
2021 avgjorde EU-domstolen det så kallade Lexel-målet kopplat till ränteav-dragsbegränsningsreglerna. Domen fastställde att de svenska reglerna stod i strid med etableringsfriheten och därmed inte var förenliga med EU-rätten. Utfallet i målet skapade diskussion kring vad detta skulle ha för effekt på rän-teavdragsbegränsningsreglernas och den svenska skattebasens framtid.
2020 dömde Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen i ett mål som även det behandlade ränteavdragsbegränsningsreglerna, men angående vad som ansågs som intresse-gemenskap i reglernas mening. I det komplexa målet kom domstolen slutligen fram till att intressegemenskap kan föreligga utan att företag har ett innehav i låntagaren.
Domen kan innebära att ränteavdragsbegränsningsreglerna tillämpas på fler situationer än när betydande eller bestämmande inflytande föreligger. Därmed kan EU-domstolen anse att reglerna bör prövas mot kapitalets fria rörlighet eftersom den möjligheten finns när regler tillämpas på fler situationer än när betydande eller bestämmande inflytande föreligger.
I framställningen utreds bakgrunden till ränteavdragsbegränsningsreglerna samt EU-domstolens praxis kopplad till de fria rörligheterna. Därefter presenteras Högsta förvaltningsdomstolens dom från 2020 och vad den kan ha för inver-kan på relationen mellan EU-rätten och ränteavdragsbegränsningsreglerna. Slutligen görs en prövning om de svenska ränteavdragsreglerna är förenliga med kapitalets fria rörlighet samt vilka restriktioner som hade kunnat rättfär-digas med hänsyn till allmännyttan. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9070137
- author
- Johansson, Emil LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- An analysis of the Swedish rules on interest expenses deduction in relation to the free movement of capital
- course
- JURM02 20212
- year
- 2021
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- Skatterätt, EU-rätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9070137
- date added to LUP
- 2022-01-23 16:48:59
- date last changed
- 2022-01-23 16:48:59
@misc{9070137,
abstract = {{The rules on whether a company may deduct interest expenses or not was first introduced in Sweden in 2009 to make sure that the country’s tax base wasn’t emptied to countries with preferable tax laws. These rules have since then been developed to fill in any gaps that may have been discovered.
In 2021 the European Court of Justice determined that the rules regarding the deduction of interest expenses from 2013 was deemed unlawful in relation to the freedom of establishment within the European Union. The ruling started a discussion on what effect this might have on the rules and the Swedish tax base.
In 2020 the Supreme Administrative Court of Sweden established what the term associated companies meant in relation to the rules regarding deduction of interest expenses. In the case the court found that companies could be seen as associated even though no shareholding was present between the two.
The ruling could mean that the rules on when deduction of interest expense isn’t allowed is applied to more situations than those where a shareholding enable the holder to exert a definite influence. If that is a case the European Court of Justice could find that the rules could be tested against the free movement of capital.
In this thesis the background of the Swedish rules regarding deduction of in-terest expenses is presented as well as the case law from the European Court of Justice regarding the freedoms. Then the case from the Supreme Adminis-trative Court of Sweden from 2020 will be presented and what effect it could have on the rules. Lastly a test whether the Swedish rules conflict with the free movement of capital and if that is the case could the rules be justified with reference to the public interest.}},
author = {{Johansson, Emil}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Låter staten kapitalet sitta i valfri båt? - En analys av de svenska ränteavdragsbegränsningsreglernas förenlighet med EU-rättens fria rörlighet för kapital}},
year = {{2021}},
}