Advanced

Gränsöverskridande förlustutjämning - ett nödvändigt ont

Seyed Zadeh Tabrisi, Amir LU (2010) JURM01 20092
Department of Law
Abstract
Today’s society is globalised with international trade as a consequence. In our part of the world the EU with it’s advantages and disadvantages concerning the free movement of capital, people and business affects us all, but also our taxes. Companies, big and small are in the centre of the cross-border trade with their expansion into new markets. Business adventures of this kind can generate increased profits over the long run, but are marked by huge investments and losses in the start up years. Another risk is cross-border losses or rather the no-existence of the utilization of these kinds of losses. This is no small thing. In fact, 60 percent of European companies revealed in a survey that this plays a vital role in their expansion plans... (More)
Today’s society is globalised with international trade as a consequence. In our part of the world the EU with it’s advantages and disadvantages concerning the free movement of capital, people and business affects us all, but also our taxes. Companies, big and small are in the centre of the cross-border trade with their expansion into new markets. Business adventures of this kind can generate increased profits over the long run, but are marked by huge investments and losses in the start up years. Another risk is cross-border losses or rather the no-existence of the utilization of these kinds of losses. This is no small thing. In fact, 60 percent of European companies revealed in a survey that this plays a vital role in their expansion plans and can in some cases mean that the company decides to stay at home. In all of the member states losses are utilized in domestic situations but no possibilities exist in the case of cross-border establishment.
The last year has seen the demise of the long planned directive proposal CCCTB which would have meant the end of these kind of tax problems. On the other hand the courts are still busy with this matter. Both the ECJ and the Swedish High Administrative Court have delivered several judgements, which have been scrutinized by this paper. The conclusion is that the requirements that were introduced by the ECJ in the famous case of Marks and Spencer are still holding. The grounds for justification is on the other hand evolving with the unexpected return of the fiscal cohesion ground that the ECJ now accepted in two judgements. The Swedish cases were all delivered without any requests for preliminary rulings from Luxembourg. This paper condemns this mentality, which is a threat to community law and its coherence. The danger is that we will have community law and a Swedish version of community law.
With no directive proposal and unsatisfying case law this paper presents some alternative legislative proposals that are believed to solve the problem. The proposals will mean that Sweden alters its rules unilaterally which will render in less income for the treasury in the short run, but the advantages of this kind of rules will in the long term have significant advantages that will outweigh the immediate downsides. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Dagens samhälle präglas av globalisering och gränsöverskridande handel. I vår del av världen verkar EU och den fria rörligheten som inte bara ger människor och företag rättigheter utan även påverkar våra skatter. I centrum för handeln återfinns företagen, stora som små, som vågar ta klivet över till andra marknader för att se om de klarar av konkurrensen och på sikt öka vinsten då nya marknader innebär nya möjligheter, men också många risker. Etableringar innebär stort insatskapital och är i de flesta fall förknippade med förluster i inledningen av verksamheten. En risk som företagarna står inför i samband med utlandsetableringar är gränsöverskridande förlustutjämning, eller snarare bristen på detta. Denna brist spelar en vital roll... (More)
Dagens samhälle präglas av globalisering och gränsöverskridande handel. I vår del av världen verkar EU och den fria rörligheten som inte bara ger människor och företag rättigheter utan även påverkar våra skatter. I centrum för handeln återfinns företagen, stora som små, som vågar ta klivet över till andra marknader för att se om de klarar av konkurrensen och på sikt öka vinsten då nya marknader innebär nya möjligheter, men också många risker. Etableringar innebär stort insatskapital och är i de flesta fall förknippade med förluster i inledningen av verksamheten. En risk som företagarna står inför i samband med utlandsetableringar är gränsöverskridande förlustutjämning, eller snarare bristen på detta. Denna brist spelar en vital roll gällande många företagsbeslut, särskilt i samband med utlandsetableringar. Närmare 60 procent av de tillfrågade europeiska företagarna uppgav att det spelar en närmast avgörande roll som ibland kan medföra att planerna på etablering slopas. I alla rådande rättsystem inom EU erbjuds förlustutjämning i rena inhemska situationer, men detta saknas vid gränsöverskridande transaktioner.

Det senaste året har inneburit att det planerade direktivförslaget CCCTB lagts på is för obestämd tid. Ifall direktivet blivit verklighet hade det rått bot på problemen kring gränsöverskridande förlustutjämning. Istället har detta arbete analyserat ett antal domar som meddelats inom området av både EGD och RegR. Slutsatserna är att den praxis som introducerades i och med domstolens dom i Marks and Spencer numera är vardag. Däremot skiljer sig rättfärdigandegrunderna avsevärt med en klar ”comeback” för den sedan så länge dödsförklarade grunden ett skattesystems inre sammanhang. De svenska domarna har alla meddelats utan inblandning ifrån EGD vilket det riktas en del kritik mot i detta arbete. Faran i denna kontext är att vi kan få en egen version av gemenskapsrätten istället för den verkliga gemenskapsrätten. Vidare föreslås en rad åtgärder i analysen som är ägnade åt att reformera området med målet att få större inblandning av EGD i de svenska fallen.

Då både praxis och lagförslag uteblivit avseende en förändring på denna problematik presenteras olika lagförslag. Förslagen innebär i korthet att Sverige ändrar sina regler vilket kommer att medföra en minskning på skatteintäkter på kort sikt. Men de förmåner som sådana regler skulle innebära för företagandet och riskerna inblandade däri skulle på lång sikt överväga de omedelbara nackdelarna (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Seyed Zadeh Tabrisi, Amir LU
supervisor
organization
course
JURM01 20092
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
language
Swedish
id
1600116
date added to LUP
2010-05-07 08:59:11
date last changed
2010-05-07 08:59:11
@misc{1600116,
  abstract     = {Today’s society is globalised with international trade as a consequence. In our part of the world the EU with it’s advantages and disadvantages concerning the free movement of capital, people and business affects us all, but also our taxes. Companies, big and small are in the centre of the cross-border trade with their expansion into new markets. Business adventures of this kind can generate increased profits over the long run, but are marked by huge investments and losses in the start up years. Another risk is cross-border losses or rather the no-existence of the utilization of these kinds of losses. This is no small thing. In fact, 60 percent of European companies revealed in a survey that this plays a vital role in their expansion plans and can in some cases mean that the company decides to stay at home. In all of the member states losses are utilized in domestic situations but no possibilities exist in the case of cross-border establishment.
The last year has seen the demise of the long planned directive proposal CCCTB which would have meant the end of these kind of tax problems. On the other hand the courts are still busy with this matter. Both the ECJ and the Swedish High Administrative Court have delivered several judgements, which have been scrutinized by this paper. The conclusion is that the requirements that were introduced by the ECJ in the famous case of Marks and Spencer are still holding. The grounds for justification is on the other hand evolving with the unexpected return of the fiscal cohesion ground that the ECJ now accepted in two judgements. The Swedish cases were all delivered without any requests for preliminary rulings from Luxembourg. This paper condemns this mentality, which is a threat to community law and its coherence. The danger is that we will have community law and a Swedish version of community law.
With no directive proposal and unsatisfying case law this paper presents some alternative legislative proposals that are believed to solve the problem. The proposals will mean that Sweden alters its rules unilaterally which will render in less income for the treasury in the short run, but the advantages of this kind of rules will in the long term have significant advantages that will outweigh the immediate downsides.},
  author       = {Seyed Zadeh Tabrisi, Amir},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Gränsöverskridande förlustutjämning - ett nödvändigt ont},
  year         = {2010},
}