Vilka faktorer gör Sverige konkurrenskraftigt som holdingbolagsland? – En internationell jämförelse
(2010) JURM01 20101Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Detta arbete kommer först gå igenom olika definitioner om vad som konstituerar ett holdingbolag. Sedan undersöks hur de svenska skattereglerna ser ut som är relevanta för lokaliseringen av ett holdingbolag. Därefter diskuteras de kriterier som ska vara uppfyllda för att betraktas som ett offshore centrum. I det sammanhanget diskuteras begreppet skatteparadis. I nästa del redogörs kort om det kan anses finnas något holdingbolagsland som i alla avseenden kan betraktas som bäst.
I nästföljande del kommer den komparativa studien redovisas. Där jämförs Nederländerna, Luxemburg, Schweiz, Tyskland och Storbritannien angående vissa skatterättsliga regler. De regler som jämförs berör mottagna utdelningar, källskatt på betalda utdelningar,... (More) - Detta arbete kommer först gå igenom olika definitioner om vad som konstituerar ett holdingbolag. Sedan undersöks hur de svenska skattereglerna ser ut som är relevanta för lokaliseringen av ett holdingbolag. Därefter diskuteras de kriterier som ska vara uppfyllda för att betraktas som ett offshore centrum. I det sammanhanget diskuteras begreppet skatteparadis. I nästa del redogörs kort om det kan anses finnas något holdingbolagsland som i alla avseenden kan betraktas som bäst.
I nästföljande del kommer den komparativa studien redovisas. Där jämförs Nederländerna, Luxemburg, Schweiz, Tyskland och Storbritannien angående vissa skatterättsliga regler. De regler som jämförs berör mottagna utdelningar, källskatt på betalda utdelningar, räntor och royalties, beskattning av kapitalvinster, avdragsmöjligheter för kostnader, värdeminskning vanliga förluster och kapitalförluster, underkapitaliserings-regler, skatteutjämning inom en koncern, skatteavtalsnätverk och dubbelbeskattningslindring, CFC regler, skatteflyktsregler, skattesatser, Handelsskatt, Capital duty och stämpelskatt, beskattning av anställda och mervärdesskatt.
Dessa länders regler inom dessa områden poängsätts kapitel till kapitel i en så kallad scorekort tabell. Poängen motiveras och jämförs land för land. Löpande ges kommentarer. I slutet av uppsatsen företas en diskussion där resultatet analyseras mer övergripande. En del av denna analys kommer att vara de lege ferenda, alltså vad Sverige bör vidta för lagändringar i framtiden för att vara mer konkurrenskraftigt som holdingbolagsland. Samtidigt kommer detta jämföras med vilka ändringar Sverige skulle kunna vidta som inte skadar Sveriges skatteinkomster. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- This work will first go through different definitions about what constitute a holding company. Thereafter the Swedish tax rules, relevant for the localisation of a holding company, will be examined. Subsequently different definitions will be discussed about what constitute a holding company. In that context the concept tax paradise will be discussed. In the next chapter those criterias will be discussed that have to be fulfilled for a holding location to be called an offshore centre. I will also shed a light upon the issue of if there is any holding location that in any circumstances is the best.
In the following part the comparative study will be carried through. The following countries, the Netherlands, Luxemburg, Schweiz, Germany and... (More) - This work will first go through different definitions about what constitute a holding company. Thereafter the Swedish tax rules, relevant for the localisation of a holding company, will be examined. Subsequently different definitions will be discussed about what constitute a holding company. In that context the concept tax paradise will be discussed. In the next chapter those criterias will be discussed that have to be fulfilled for a holding location to be called an offshore centre. I will also shed a light upon the issue of if there is any holding location that in any circumstances is the best.
In the following part the comparative study will be carried through. The following countries, the Netherlands, Luxemburg, Schweiz, Germany and Great Britain will be compared regarding certain tax rules. Those rules that are going to be compared are received dividends, source taxation on paid dividends, rents and royalties, taxation of capital gains, the opportunity of deduction for costs, value depreciation, usual losses and capital losses, thin capitalization rules, tax consolidation rules, tax treaty network/double taxation relief, CFC rules, tax evasion rules, tax rates, trade tax, Capital duty and stamp duty, taxation of employees and value added tax.
The rules of these countries in these areas will get points on a so called scorecard table, from chapter to chapter. The points will be motivated and are compared country by country. Regularly comments will be given. In the end of the paper a general discussion will take place. A part of this analysis will be conducted de lege ferenda, that is what actions Sweden should take to change Swedish tax law in such a way to make Sweden more attractive as a holding company and what they reasonably can change. This will be compared with what steps could reasonably be taken so it will not damage the tax revenues of Sweden. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/1712930
- author
- Knutsson, John LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- What factors make Sweden competitive as a holdingcompany country? - An international comparison
- course
- JURM01 20101
- year
- 2010
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- Holdingcompany, holdingbolag, skatteavtal, utdelning, skatteparadis, offshore, tax paradise, tax haven, skatteflykt, skatteplanering, fiscal law, finansrätt, skatterätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 1712930
- date added to LUP
- 2010-11-11 15:20:59
- date last changed
- 2010-11-17 14:21:43
@misc{1712930,
abstract = {{This work will first go through different definitions about what constitute a holding company. Thereafter the Swedish tax rules, relevant for the localisation of a holding company, will be examined. Subsequently different definitions will be discussed about what constitute a holding company. In that context the concept tax paradise will be discussed. In the next chapter those criterias will be discussed that have to be fulfilled for a holding location to be called an offshore centre. I will also shed a light upon the issue of if there is any holding location that in any circumstances is the best.
In the following part the comparative study will be carried through. The following countries, the Netherlands, Luxemburg, Schweiz, Germany and Great Britain will be compared regarding certain tax rules. Those rules that are going to be compared are received dividends, source taxation on paid dividends, rents and royalties, taxation of capital gains, the opportunity of deduction for costs, value depreciation, usual losses and capital losses, thin capitalization rules, tax consolidation rules, tax treaty network/double taxation relief, CFC rules, tax evasion rules, tax rates, trade tax, Capital duty and stamp duty, taxation of employees and value added tax.
The rules of these countries in these areas will get points on a so called scorecard table, from chapter to chapter. The points will be motivated and are compared country by country. Regularly comments will be given. In the end of the paper a general discussion will take place. A part of this analysis will be conducted de lege ferenda, that is what actions Sweden should take to change Swedish tax law in such a way to make Sweden more attractive as a holding company and what they reasonably can change. This will be compared with what steps could reasonably be taken so it will not damage the tax revenues of Sweden.}},
author = {{Knutsson, John}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Vilka faktorer gör Sverige konkurrenskraftigt som holdingbolagsland? – En internationell jämförelse}},
year = {{2010}},
}