Advanced

Skattebrott och skattetillägg i ljuset av förbudet mot dubbelbestraffning

Hassan Nur, Faria LU (2012) JURM01 20122
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Ne bis in idem innebär att en person inte får lagföras eller straffas för samma brott mer än en gång och kallas också dubbelbestraffningsförbudet. Principen finns i Europakonventionen genom artikel 4 i dess sjunde tilläggsprotokoll samt även i artikel 50 i EU:s rättighetsstadga.

Sverige har två olika skilda sanktionssystem för när en skattskyldig lämnar en oriktig uppgift som skall ligga till grund för bedömningen av rätt beskattning. Den skatteskyldige som lämnat den oriktiga uppgiften kan både påföras skattetillägg och ställas till ansvar för skattebrott för samma oriktiga uppgiftslämnande. Det har sedan länge diskuterats huruvida det svenska skattetilläggssystemet är förenlig med förbudet mot dubbelbestraffning i Europakonventionen.... (More)
Ne bis in idem innebär att en person inte får lagföras eller straffas för samma brott mer än en gång och kallas också dubbelbestraffningsförbudet. Principen finns i Europakonventionen genom artikel 4 i dess sjunde tilläggsprotokoll samt även i artikel 50 i EU:s rättighetsstadga.

Sverige har två olika skilda sanktionssystem för när en skattskyldig lämnar en oriktig uppgift som skall ligga till grund för bedömningen av rätt beskattning. Den skatteskyldige som lämnat den oriktiga uppgiften kan både påföras skattetillägg och ställas till ansvar för skattebrott för samma oriktiga uppgiftslämnande. Det har sedan länge diskuterats huruvida det svenska skattetilläggssystemet är förenlig med förbudet mot dubbelbestraffning i Europakonventionen.

År 2009 kom det nya avgöranden från Europadomstolen där domstolen ändrar sin tidigare praxis om när dubbelbestraffning föreligger. Genom Zolotukhin mot Ryssland avgörandet harmoniserade Europadomstolen sin tidigare praxis och konstaterade att dubbelbestraffningsförbudet i Europakonventionen skall tolkas som ett förbud mot åtal eller rättegång för ett andra brott då detta härrör från identiska fakta eller fakta som i huvudsak är detsamma.

Högsta förvaltningsrätten och Högsta domstolen har tagit ställning till Europadomstolens nya praxis och funnit att den svenska ordningen är förenlig med Europakonventionens dubbelbestraffningsförbud. Högsta domstolen har i sina senaste avgöranden NJA 2010 s. 168 I och II fastslagit att Europadomstolen genom sin senaste praxis etablerat ett nytt synsätt gällande tolkningen av dubbelbestraffningsförbudet. Trots Europadomstolens nya praxis är Högsta domstolens bedömning att det saknas klart stöd i Europakonventionen eller i Europadomstolens praxis för att generellt underkänna det svenska systemet med dubbla förfaranden.

Högsta domstolens beslut har varit utsatt för kritik och domstolens domslut har väckt debatt. I flera fall har vissa underinstanser valt att inte döma i enlighet med HD:s praxis om dubbelbestraffning. Hovrätten för västra Sverige beslutade i ett mål att avvisa ett åtal för skattebrott efter att personen påfördes skattetillägg. Haparanda TR har begärt ett förhandsavgörande från EU-domstolen och hittills har ett förslag till dom lämnats av generaladvokaten Pedro Cruz Villalón. Min slutsats är att det svenska systemet med dubbla förfaranden strider mot dubbelbestraffningsförbudet i Europakonvention. Rättsläget har förändrats sedan Europadomstolen har harmoniserat sin tidigare praxis och klarlagt vad som anses vara samma brott. (Less)
Abstract
Ne bis in idem is a principle that means a person cannot be tried or punished for the same criminal offence more than once. The principle of ne bis in idem is a prohibition against double punishment under article 4 of the protocol 7 of The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and also in article 50 of the EU charter.

Sweden has two separate procedures for when a taxpayer submits incorrect information as the basis for the assessment of the correct tax. The taxpayer who submitted the incorrect information can be charged with both tax surcharges and be held liable for tax offence regarding the same incorrect information. There are a lot of discussions about whether the Swedish tax surcharge system is in accordance with the... (More)
Ne bis in idem is a principle that means a person cannot be tried or punished for the same criminal offence more than once. The principle of ne bis in idem is a prohibition against double punishment under article 4 of the protocol 7 of The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and also in article 50 of the EU charter.

Sweden has two separate procedures for when a taxpayer submits incorrect information as the basis for the assessment of the correct tax. The taxpayer who submitted the incorrect information can be charged with both tax surcharges and be held liable for tax offence regarding the same incorrect information. There are a lot of discussions about whether the Swedish tax surcharge system is in accordance with the prohibition against double punishment of the ECHR.

In 2009, the European Court of Human Rights changed its previous practice of when double punishment is at hand. Through Zolotukhin v. Russia case the European Court harmonised its previous practice and established that prohibition against double punishment shall be interpreted as prohibition against prosecution or trial for a second offence, as this is derived from identical facts or facts which are substantially the same.

The Swedish Supreme Administrative Court and the Swedish Supreme Court has considered the European Courts new practices and found that the Swedish system is not in conflict with ECHR:s prohibition against double punishment. The Swedish Supreme Court has in its latest decision NJA 2010 p 168 I and II concluded that European Court in its recent practice established a new approach regarding the interpretation of double punishment prohibition. Despite the European Court’s new practice is the Supreme Court's assessment that there is no clear support in the European Convention or in the European Court’s practice to generally reject the Swedish dual procedures system.

The Supreme Court's decision has been criticized and the court verdict has raised debate. In several cases some lower courts has chosen not to judge according to the Supreme Court's practice of double punishment. Court of Appeals for Western Sweden stated in a case to dismiss a prosecution for tax offence after the person was imposed tax surcharge. The Haparanda District Court has requested a preliminary ruling from the European Court of Justice and to date a proposed judgment submitted by the Advocate-General Pedro Cruz Villalón. My conclusion is that the Swedish system with dual procedures violates the prohibition of double punishment in ECHR. The legal position of the prohibition of double punishment has changed since the European Court has harmonised its previous practice and clarified what is considered the same offence. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Hassan Nur, Faria LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Tax offence and tax surcharge in the light of the prohibition against double punishment
course
JURM01 20122
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
skatterätt, skattetillägg, skattebrott, ne bis in idem
language
Swedish
id
3470189
date added to LUP
2013-02-18 13:31:32
date last changed
2013-02-18 13:31:32
@misc{3470189,
  abstract     = {Ne bis in idem is a principle that means a person cannot be tried or punished for the same criminal offence more than once. The principle of ne bis in idem is a prohibition against double punishment under article 4 of the protocol 7 of The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and also in article 50 of the EU charter.

Sweden has two separate procedures for when a taxpayer submits incorrect information as the basis for the assessment of the correct tax. The taxpayer who submitted the incorrect information can be charged with both tax surcharges and be held liable for tax offence regarding the same incorrect information. There are a lot of discussions about whether the Swedish tax surcharge system is in accordance with the prohibition against double punishment of the ECHR.

In 2009, the European Court of Human Rights changed its previous practice of when double punishment is at hand. Through Zolotukhin v. Russia case the European Court harmonised its previous practice and established that prohibition against double punishment shall be interpreted as prohibition against prosecution or trial for a second offence, as this is derived from identical facts or facts which are substantially the same.

The Swedish Supreme Administrative Court and the Swedish Supreme Court has considered the European Courts new practices and found that the Swedish system is not in conflict with ECHR:s prohibition against double punishment. The Swedish Supreme Court has in its latest decision NJA 2010 p 168 I and II concluded that European Court in its recent practice established a new approach regarding the interpretation of double punishment prohibition. Despite the European Court’s new practice is the Supreme Court's assessment that there is no clear support in the European Convention or in the European Court’s practice to generally reject the Swedish dual procedures system.

The Supreme Court's decision has been criticized and the court verdict has raised debate. In several cases some lower courts has chosen not to judge according to the Supreme Court's practice of double punishment. Court of Appeals for Western Sweden stated in a case to dismiss a prosecution for tax offence after the person was imposed tax surcharge. The Haparanda District Court has requested a preliminary ruling from the European Court of Justice and to date a proposed judgment submitted by the Advocate-General Pedro Cruz Villalón. My conclusion is that the Swedish system with dual procedures violates the prohibition of double punishment in ECHR. The legal position of the prohibition of double punishment has changed since the European Court has harmonised its previous practice and clarified what is considered the same offence.},
  author       = {Hassan Nur, Faria},
  keyword      = {skatterätt,skattetillägg,skattebrott,ne bis in idem},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Skattebrott och skattetillägg i ljuset av förbudet mot dubbelbestraffning},
  year         = {2012},
}