Advanced

Interna motverkansåtgärder i förhållande till skatteavtalen

Beharic, Adis LU (2012) JURM02 20122
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
I syfte att undvika dubbelbeskattning och på så sätt skapa goda för-utsättningar för tillväxt på den globala marknaden, väljer många stater att ingå skatteavtal. En baksida med skatteavtalen är att de i vissa situationer resulterar i dubbel icke-beskattning. Vissa inkomster beskattas med andra ord inte alls, tack vare skatteavtalet. I syfte att förhindra dessa situationer, väljer många stater att internt lagstifta mot skatteflykt och skatte-undandragande. Frågan som oundvikligen uppkommer är hur denna interna lagstiftning förhåller sig till skatteavtalen.

Det övergripande syftet med denna uppsats är att beskriva och klargör hur svenska interna motverkansåtgärder förhåller sig till av Sverige ingångna skatteavtal. Icke desto mindre... (More)
I syfte att undvika dubbelbeskattning och på så sätt skapa goda för-utsättningar för tillväxt på den globala marknaden, väljer många stater att ingå skatteavtal. En baksida med skatteavtalen är att de i vissa situationer resulterar i dubbel icke-beskattning. Vissa inkomster beskattas med andra ord inte alls, tack vare skatteavtalet. I syfte att förhindra dessa situationer, väljer många stater att internt lagstifta mot skatteflykt och skatte-undandragande. Frågan som oundvikligen uppkommer är hur denna interna lagstiftning förhåller sig till skatteavtalen.

Det övergripande syftet med denna uppsats är att beskriva och klargör hur svenska interna motverkansåtgärder förhåller sig till av Sverige ingångna skatteavtal. Icke desto mindre finner man inte svaret utan att närmare behandla olika element. Förevarande uppsats behandlar innebörden interna motverkansåtgärder, dvs. vad som ligger bakom införandet av denna lagstiftning, samt slutligen hur interna motverkansåtgärder förhåller sig till skatteavtalen vid en regelkonflikt. Uppsatsen behandlar ämnet ur ett svenskt perspektiv, där tre rättsfall från Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen är centrala. Utfallet från fallen ställs därefter i jämförelse med ett globalt perspektiv, med utgångspunkt i OECD:s uttalanden i olika rapporter och i kommentaren till OECD:s Modellavtal.

Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen har, som redan nämnts, i tre principiellt viktiga mål avgjort frågan om regelföreträde. Dessa rättsfall är centrala för uppsatsens syfte. Uppsatsen innehåller således utförlig redogörelse för fallen samt uppfattningar doktrinen. Det första fallet, RÅ 2008 ref. 24 förorsakade en del debatt, efter dess att domstolen uttalat sig om att skatteavtalen inte har någon särställning i svensk rätt. I RÅ 2010 ref. 112 tillade domstolen att så förvisso är fallet men att skatteavtalen som huvudregel ska anses ha företräde framför intern rätt. Detta gäller dock inte om den svenska lagstiftaren gett klart utryck för den interna regelns företräde.

Den 26 mars 2012 meddelade Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen ett avgörande som kommit att kallas för Peru-domarna där domstolen gör obiter dictum uttalanden om förhållandet mellan skatteflyktslagen och skatteavtalen. Kortfattat innebär uttalanden att skatteflyktslagen, med några undantag, inte begränsas av skatteavtalen. Peru-domarna från 2012 har inte analyserats utförligt i doktrin till dagens datum. Jag tar tillfälle att i denna uppsats analysera domen utförligt samt att jämföra utgången av domen med de tidigare fallen.

Min slutsats är att rättsläget inte förändrats avseende huvudregeln. Skatte-avtalen ska fortfarande ha företräde. Icke desto mindre verkar HFD ha för avsikt att skapa en del undantag från huvudregeln. Senast i raden är skatteflyktslagen och sedan tidigare CFC-lagstiftningen. Vidare finner jag att obiter dictum uttalanden kan ses i ett bredare perspektiv och inte bara omfatta skatteflyktslagen utan istället omfatta alla interna motverkansåtgärder. (Less)
Abstract
In order to avoid double taxation and thus create good conditions for the growth on the global market, many states choose to conclude tax treaties. However, the downside of tax treaties is that they in certain cases results in double non-taxation. Some income is in other words not taxed at all, due to the tax treaty. To prevent these situations, many states legislate against tax evasion and tax avoidance. The question that inevitably arises is how these domestic acts relate to the tax treaties.

The overall aim of this paper is to describe and clarify how Swedish anti-avoidance acts relates to the tax treaties concluded by Sweden. Nevertheless, the answer is not to be found without further processing different elements. This paper deals... (More)
In order to avoid double taxation and thus create good conditions for the growth on the global market, many states choose to conclude tax treaties. However, the downside of tax treaties is that they in certain cases results in double non-taxation. Some income is in other words not taxed at all, due to the tax treaty. To prevent these situations, many states legislate against tax evasion and tax avoidance. The question that inevitably arises is how these domestic acts relate to the tax treaties.

The overall aim of this paper is to describe and clarify how Swedish anti-avoidance acts relates to the tax treaties concluded by Sweden. Nevertheless, the answer is not to be found without further processing different elements. This paper deals with the meaning of the term domestic anti avoidance act, i.e. what is the cause for implementation of these legislations, and finally how these anti avoidance acts relate to tax treaties in a conflict of laws. The paper deals with this issue from a Swedish point of view, where three cases from the Swedish Supreme Administrative Court are central. The outcome of these cases is than compared with a global approach to the issue, based on the OECD's statements in different rapports and in the commentaries to the OECD Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital.

As mentioned above, the Swedish Supreme Administrative Court has in three essentially important cases dealt with the issue of the conflict of laws. These cases are vital for the purpose of this paper. The paper thus provides detailed description of cases and perceptions doctrine. The first case, RÅ 2008 ref. 24 caused some debate due to the fact that the court stated that a tax treaty has no special position in Swedish hierarchy of norms. In RÅ 2010 ref. 112 the court added that this certainly is the case, but that tax treaties as a main rule should be considered to have precedence over the domestic laws. However, this does not apply if the Swedish legislature has made clear expression for precedence for the domestic rule.

On the 26th of March 2012 the Swedish Supreme Administrative Court decided a chain of similar cases that has become known as the Peru-cases. In the judgement, the court made an obiter dictum statement about the relationship between the Swedish Tax Avoidance Act and tax treaties. Briefly, according to the court, the tax treaties, with a few specific exceptions, does not restrict application of the Swedish Tax Avoidance Act. Peru-judgments from 2012 have not been analysed in detail by the doctrine to date. I take the opportunity in this paper to analyse the case extensively, and to compare the output with the previous cases.

Briefly, my conclusion is that the legal situation has not changed regarding the main rule after the Peru-judgements. Tax treaties should still have priority over the domestic laws. Nevertheless the Swedish Supreme Administrative Court appears have the intention to create a few ways of derogation from this rule. The latest is the Swedish Tax Avoidance Act and prior to that, the Swedish CFC legislation. Furthermore, I find that the obiter dictum statement can be seen in a wider perspective, and include not only The Swedish Tax Avoidance Act, but cover all domestic anti-avoidance acts. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Beharic, Adis LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Interna motverkansåtgärder i förhållande till skatteavtalen
course
JURM02 20122
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Skatteavtal, Interna motverkansåtgärder, skatteflyktslagen, cd-lagstiftning, tioårsregeln, domestic anti-avoidance rules, double tax conventions.
language
Swedish
id
3349714
date added to LUP
2013-01-16 12:03:14
date last changed
2013-01-16 12:03:14
@misc{3349714,
  abstract     = {In order to avoid double taxation and thus create good conditions for the growth on the global market, many states choose to conclude tax treaties. However, the downside of tax treaties is that they in certain cases results in double non-taxation. Some income is in other words not taxed at all, due to the tax treaty. To prevent these situations, many states legislate against tax evasion and tax avoidance. The question that inevitably arises is how these domestic acts relate to the tax treaties.

The overall aim of this paper is to describe and clarify how Swedish anti-avoidance acts relates to the tax treaties concluded by Sweden. Nevertheless, the answer is not to be found without further processing different elements. This paper deals with the meaning of the term domestic anti avoidance act, i.e. what is the cause for implementation of these legislations, and finally how these anti avoidance acts relate to tax treaties in a conflict of laws. The paper deals with this issue from a Swedish point of view, where three cases from the Swedish Supreme Administrative Court are central. The outcome of these cases is than compared with a global approach to the issue, based on the OECD's statements in different rapports and in the commentaries to the OECD Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital.

As mentioned above, the Swedish Supreme Administrative Court has in three essentially important cases dealt with the issue of the conflict of laws. These cases are vital for the purpose of this paper. The paper thus provides detailed description of cases and perceptions doctrine. The first case, RÅ 2008 ref. 24 caused some debate due to the fact that the court stated that a tax treaty has no special position in Swedish hierarchy of norms. In RÅ 2010 ref. 112 the court added that this certainly is the case, but that tax treaties as a main rule should be considered to have precedence over the domestic laws. However, this does not apply if the Swedish legislature has made clear expression for precedence for the domestic rule. 

On the 26th of March 2012 the Swedish Supreme Administrative Court decided a chain of similar cases that has become known as the Peru-cases. In the judgement, the court made an obiter dictum statement about the relationship between the Swedish Tax Avoidance Act and tax treaties. Briefly, according to the court, the tax treaties, with a few specific exceptions, does not restrict application of the Swedish Tax Avoidance Act. Peru-judgments from 2012 have not been analysed in detail by the doctrine to date. I take the opportunity in this paper to analyse the case extensively, and to compare the output with the previous cases.

Briefly, my conclusion is that the legal situation has not changed regarding the main rule after the Peru-judgements. Tax treaties should still have priority over the domestic laws. Nevertheless the Swedish Supreme Administrative Court appears have the intention to create a few ways of derogation from this rule. The latest is the Swedish Tax Avoidance Act and prior to that, the Swedish CFC legislation. Furthermore, I find that the obiter dictum statement can be seen in a wider perspective, and include not only The Swedish Tax Avoidance Act, but cover all domestic anti-avoidance acts.},
  author       = {Beharic, Adis},
  keyword      = {Skatteavtal,Interna motverkansåtgärder,skatteflyktslagen,cd-lagstiftning,tioårsregeln,domestic anti-avoidance rules,double tax conventions.},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Interna motverkansåtgärder i förhållande till skatteavtalen},
  year         = {2012},
}