Advanced

Rättssäkerheten vid tredjemansrevisioner - en granskning av SOU 2013:62 och de i betänkandet föreslagna lagändringarnas förenlighet med Europakonventionen

Engvall, Gustav LU (2014) JURM02 20141
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Sammanfattning
Skatteverket kan företa revisioner hos i huvudsak bokföringsskyldiga skattskyldiga, i regel näringsidkare, för att granska riktigheten av de uppgifter som lämnats till Skatteverket i deklarationer och kontrolluppgifter. Vid dessa revisioner granskas den skattskyldiges bokföring och andra underlag för att stämmas av mot de uppgifter som lämnats till Skatteverket.

Skatteverket kan även företa så kallade tredjemansrevisioner för kontroll av någon annan än den hos vilken revisionen utförs. Vid dessa revisioner inhämtas underlag hos tredje man för att stämmas av mot de uppgifter som lämnats av den som kontrollen avser.

Skatteverket kan använda sig av två typer av tredjemansrevisioner, urvalsrevisioner och generella... (More)
Sammanfattning
Skatteverket kan företa revisioner hos i huvudsak bokföringsskyldiga skattskyldiga, i regel näringsidkare, för att granska riktigheten av de uppgifter som lämnats till Skatteverket i deklarationer och kontrolluppgifter. Vid dessa revisioner granskas den skattskyldiges bokföring och andra underlag för att stämmas av mot de uppgifter som lämnats till Skatteverket.

Skatteverket kan även företa så kallade tredjemansrevisioner för kontroll av någon annan än den hos vilken revisionen utförs. Vid dessa revisioner inhämtas underlag hos tredje man för att stämmas av mot de uppgifter som lämnats av den som kontrollen avser.

Skatteverket kan använda sig av två typer av tredjemansrevisioner, urvalsrevisioner och generella tredjemansrevisioner. Vid urvalsrevisioner företar Skatteverket en revision hos tredjeman med avsikt att inhämta underlag för kontroll av en viss annan skattskyldig. Vid en generell tredjemansrevision företar Skatteverket en bredare underlagsinhämtning hos tredjeman som förberedelse för en vidare granskning av kontrollvärda subjekt.

Förfarandet med tredjemansrevisioner i allmänhet och generella tredjemansrevisionerna i synnerhet har kritiserats för att brista i rättssäkerhet för såväl den reviderade som den som kontrollen avser. Våren 2012 beslutade regeringen att tillsätta en särskild utredare med uppdrag att se över hur rättssäkerheten för vissa delar av skatteförfarandet kunde stärkas. Den tillsatta utredaren kom att ta namnet ”Utredningen om rättssäkerhet i skatteförfarandet” (RIS-utredningen). En av de frågor som RIS-utredningen fick i uppdrag att granska var rättssäkerheten vid tredjemansrevisioner. RIS-utredningen lämnade hösten 2013 sitt slutbetänkande, SOU 2013:62 ”Förbudet mot dubbla förfaranden och andra rättssäkerhetsfrågor i skatteförfarandet”, med förslag på ändringar av regleringen för tredjemansrevisioner för att stärka rättssäkerheten.

I slutbetänkandet föreslås flera förändringar av lagstiftningen. RIS-utredningen ansåg bl.a. att förutsättningarna för när en tredjemansrevision får företas bör ses över, att generella tredjemansrevisioner endast får företas om uppgifterna från den reviderade kan antas vara av betydelse för kontrollen samt att det ska bli lättare för den som kontrollen avser att begära undantagande av handlingar från kontrollen. RIS-utredningen ansåg inte att det fanns anledning att införa en ny beslutsordning eller krav på underrättelse till den som kontrollen avser om att en granskning skett.

De föreslagna ändringarna stärker i viss mån rättssäkerheten. Flera av de föreslagna ändringarna har för avsikt att tydligare framhålla behovet av avvägningar mellan olika intressen och beaktandet av proportionalitetsprincipen. Jag anser dock att regleringen, även efter införandet av eventuella ändringar, i vissa avseende inte uppfyller kraven enligt art. 6 i europeiska konventionen om skydd för de mänskliga rättigheterna och de grundläggande friheterna (EKMR) om rätt till en rättvis rättegång och art. 8 EKMR om rätt till skydd för privatlivet. Möjligheten för den som kontrollen avser att begära undantagande av handlingar tillgodoser inte tillräckligt den enskildes behov av rättssäkerhet då tidpunkten för undantagande inträder efter det att granskning har skett. Avsaknaden av underrättelse till den som kontrollen avser efter avslutad granskning kan enligt mig utgöra att kraven enligt art. 13 EKMR om rätt till ett effektivt rättsmedel inte uppfylls. (Less)
Abstract
Summary
The Swedish Tax Agency is authorized to carry out audits, mainly with accountable taxable’s, normally corporations, in order to scrutinize the accuracy of the information that has been submitted to the Swedish Tax Agency through income tax returns and statements of earnings. In such audits the taxable’s accounting and other materials are compared against the information that has been submitted to the Swedish Tax Agency.

The Swedish Tax Agency is also authorized to carry out so called ”third party audits” in order to examine another taxable than the one whom against the audit is carried out. In such cases information is gathered from a third party and subsequently compared with the information that has been submitted to the... (More)
Summary
The Swedish Tax Agency is authorized to carry out audits, mainly with accountable taxable’s, normally corporations, in order to scrutinize the accuracy of the information that has been submitted to the Swedish Tax Agency through income tax returns and statements of earnings. In such audits the taxable’s accounting and other materials are compared against the information that has been submitted to the Swedish Tax Agency.

The Swedish Tax Agency is also authorized to carry out so called ”third party audits” in order to examine another taxable than the one whom against the audit is carried out. In such cases information is gathered from a third party and subsequently compared with the information that has been submitted to the Swedish Tax Agency by the taxable that is being examined.

There are two types of “third party audits” available to the Swedih Tax Agency. “Selective audits”, where the Swedish Tax Agency carries out an audit with a third party in order to gather information regarding a certain taxable. The other type is a “general third party audit”, where the Swedish Tax Agency gathers a greater deal of information from a third party in order to examine taxable´s that are deemed to be of interest for further examination.

The use of “third party audits”, and in particular general third party audits has been criticised for lacking in legal certainty for the third party as well as the taxable that is being examined. In the spring of 2012 the Swedish government decided to appoint a committee instructed to conduct a study regarding how the legal certainty in the taxation process could be strengthened. The appointed committee was called the “Utredningen om rättssäkerhet i skatteförfarandet”. One of the matters that was looked at by the committee was the legal certainty aspect of third party audits. The committee delivered its final report in the fall of 2013. The report is called SOU 2013:62 ”Förbudet mot dubbla förfaranden och andra rättssäkerhetsfrågor i skatteförfarandet” and it contains suggestions by the committee to change some legislation regarding third party audits in order to strengthen the legal certainty for the taxables.

The final report suggests various changes to legislation. According to the committee, the conditions of when a third party audit is to be allowed needed an overhaul. The committee furthermore proposed that a general third party audit should only be an option when if the information gathered from the third party is supposed to be of use when examining the taxable. Moreover the committee proposed that it should be made easier for the taxable to make sure that certain information is exempt from the audit. The committee did not however consider that the decision-making process needed to be changed, nor did the committee consider that the taxable being examined needed to be informed that a third party audit had taken place.

The changes that were proposed by the committee do in certain regard strengthen legal certainty in the taxation process. Many of the suggestions are aimed at emphasizing weighing various interests while taking into account principle of proportionality. In my view, however, even if the changes proposed by the committee were to be implemented, the legislation would still not meet the requirements of article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, ECHR, regarding the right to a fair trial and article 8 ECHR regarding the right to respect of one´s private and family life. The right for the taxable to make sure that certain information is exempt from the audit is not satisfactory since this right is only available to the taxable once the audit has already been carried out. The lack of information to the taxable being examined that a third party audit has taken place could in my opinion violate the right to an affective remedy under article 13 ECHR. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Engvall, Gustav LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Legal certainty during third party tax audits - a review of SOU 2013:62 and whether the suggested changes in legislation are in accordance with the ECHR.
course
JURM02 20141
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
skatterätt, europakonventionen, tredjemansrevision, EKMR
language
Swedish
id
4250779
date added to LUP
2014-04-23 14:57:32
date last changed
2014-04-23 14:57:32
@misc{4250779,
  abstract     = {Summary
The Swedish Tax Agency is authorized to carry out audits, mainly with accountable taxable’s, normally corporations, in order to scrutinize the accuracy of the information that has been submitted to the Swedish Tax Agency through income tax returns and statements of earnings. In such audits the taxable’s accounting and other materials are compared against the information that has been submitted to the Swedish Tax Agency.

The Swedish Tax Agency is also authorized to carry out so called ”third party audits” in order to examine another taxable than the one whom against the audit is carried out. In such cases information is gathered from a third party and subsequently compared with the information that has been submitted to the Swedish Tax Agency by the taxable that is being examined.

There are two types of “third party audits” available to the Swedih Tax Agency. “Selective audits”, where the Swedish Tax Agency carries out an audit with a third party in order to gather information regarding a certain taxable. The other type is a “general third party audit”, where the Swedish Tax Agency gathers a greater deal of information from a third party in order to examine taxable´s that are deemed to be of interest for further examination. 

The use of “third party audits”, and in particular general third party audits has been criticised for lacking in legal certainty for the third party as well as the taxable that is being examined. In the spring of 2012 the Swedish government decided to appoint a committee instructed to conduct a study regarding how the legal certainty in the taxation process could be strengthened. The appointed committee was called the “Utredningen om rättssäkerhet i skatteförfarandet”. One of the matters that was looked at by the committee was the legal certainty aspect of third party audits. The committee delivered its final report in the fall of 2013. The report is called SOU 2013:62 ”Förbudet mot dubbla förfaranden och andra rättssäkerhetsfrågor i skatteförfarandet” and it contains suggestions by the committee to change some legislation regarding third party audits in order to strengthen the legal certainty for the taxables. 

The final report suggests various changes to legislation. According to the committee, the conditions of when a third party audit is to be allowed needed an overhaul. The committee furthermore proposed that a general third party audit should only be an option when if the information gathered from the third party is supposed to be of use when examining the taxable. Moreover the committee proposed that it should be made easier for the taxable to make sure that certain information is exempt from the audit. The committee did not however consider that the decision-making process needed to be changed, nor did the committee consider that the taxable being examined needed to be informed that a third party audit had taken place.

The changes that were proposed by the committee do in certain regard strengthen legal certainty in the taxation process. Many of the suggestions are aimed at emphasizing weighing various interests while taking into account principle of proportionality. In my view, however, even if the changes proposed by the committee were to be implemented, the legislation would still not meet the requirements of article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, ECHR, regarding the right to a fair trial and article 8 ECHR regarding the right to respect of one´s private and family life. The right for the taxable to make sure that certain information is exempt from the audit is not satisfactory since this right is only available to the taxable once the audit has already been carried out. The lack of information to the taxable being examined that a third party audit has taken place could in my opinion violate the right to an affective remedy under article 13 ECHR.},
  author       = {Engvall, Gustav},
  keyword      = {skatterätt,europakonventionen,tredjemansrevision,EKMR},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Rättssäkerheten vid tredjemansrevisioner - en granskning av SOU 2013:62 och de i betänkandet föreslagna lagändringarnas förenlighet med Europakonventionen},
  year         = {2014},
}