Generationsskiften i fåmansföretag - Likformigt med ett högre beskattningsutfall än vid en extern försäljning?
(2017) LAGF03 20172Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Fåmansföretagarreglerna syftar till att förhindra att högbeskattad förvärvsinkomst omvandlas till lägre beskattad kapitalinkomst. Inkomst som inte ryms inom årets gränsbelopp ska därför beskattas i inkomstslaget tjänst.
För att undvika att en stor del av vinsten från en försäljning av ett fåmansföretag beskattas i inkomstslaget tjänst kan överlåtaren nyttja ett trädabolag. Förfarandet innebär att överlåtaren överlåter sina direktägda andelar i verksamhetsföretaget till ett aktiebolag, trädabolaget. Trädabolaget kan sedan sälja andelarna i verksamhetsbolaget. Kapitalvinsten som uppstår i trädabolaget blir skattefri enligt bestämmelserna om näringsbetingade andelar. Efter en femårig karensperiod avkvalificeras andelarna i trädabolaget.... (More) - Fåmansföretagarreglerna syftar till att förhindra att högbeskattad förvärvsinkomst omvandlas till lägre beskattad kapitalinkomst. Inkomst som inte ryms inom årets gränsbelopp ska därför beskattas i inkomstslaget tjänst.
För att undvika att en stor del av vinsten från en försäljning av ett fåmansföretag beskattas i inkomstslaget tjänst kan överlåtaren nyttja ett trädabolag. Förfarandet innebär att överlåtaren överlåter sina direktägda andelar i verksamhetsföretaget till ett aktiebolag, trädabolaget. Trädabolaget kan sedan sälja andelarna i verksamhetsbolaget. Kapitalvinsten som uppstår i trädabolaget blir skattefri enligt bestämmelserna om näringsbetingade andelar. Efter en femårig karensperiod avkvalificeras andelarna i trädabolaget. Överlåtaren kan då tillgodogöra sig vinstmedlen i trädabolaget och enbart beskattas i inkomstslaget kapital för detta.
Detta tillvägagångssätt var tidigare möjligt att använda sig av oberoende av vem förvärvaren var. Rättsläget kom dock att ändras efter HFD:s tolkning av vad som ska anses utgöra samma eller likartad verksamhet i de s.k. trädadomarna. Det kapital som förvaltas i trädabolaget härstammar från genererade vinster i verksamhetsföretaget, det innebär att företagen ska anses bedriva samma eller likartad verksamhet. Den femåriga karensperioden börjar därmed inte att löpa medan en närstående är verksam i betydande omfattning i det överlåtna verksamhetsföretaget. Effekten utav detta blir att beskattningsutfallet ofta blir högre när överlåtaren väljer att avyttra sitt fåmansföretag till en närstående istället för till en extern intressent.
En utredning tillsattes i mars 2014 av den dåvarande regeringen för att eventuellt åtgärda missgynnandet av generationsskiften. Utredningen fann att handlingsalternativen mellan att avyttra inom närståendekretsen respektive utom närståendekretsen utgör två likvärdiga handlingsalternativ. Utredningen fann således att det nuvarande rättsläget står i strid med neutralitets- och likformighetsprincipen. Därför föreslogs att en villkorad undantagsbestämmelse skulle införas för att återigen få neutrala regler mellan de två handlingsalternativen. Utredningen ledde dock aldrig till ett lagförslag. (Less) - Abstract
- The purpose behind the special tax rules for active shareholders in closely held corporations is to prevent that highly taxed salary income is converted into lower taxed capital income. Income that derive from qualified shares and does not accommodate within the yearly threshold is therefore taxed as salary.
To avoid that a large portion of the profit originating from the sale of a closely held company is taxed as salary income the seller can use a sleeping company. The seller transfers his directly owned shares in the closely held company to the sleeping company. This company can then sell the shares of the closely held company to the acquirer. The profit from the sale of the shares in the closely held company is tax-free for the... (More) - The purpose behind the special tax rules for active shareholders in closely held corporations is to prevent that highly taxed salary income is converted into lower taxed capital income. Income that derive from qualified shares and does not accommodate within the yearly threshold is therefore taxed as salary.
To avoid that a large portion of the profit originating from the sale of a closely held company is taxed as salary income the seller can use a sleeping company. The seller transfers his directly owned shares in the closely held company to the sleeping company. This company can then sell the shares of the closely held company to the acquirer. The profit from the sale of the shares in the closely held company is tax-free for the sleeping company according to the rules regarding commercially motivated shares. After a deferred period of five years, the shares in the sleeping company is no longer qualified. The seller can therefore obtain the profit and solely be taxed for it as capital income.
This procedure was earlier a possible approach no matter who the acquirer was. However, the legal position was changed due to the ruling of the Supreme Administrative Court. The legal position after their ruling is that capital that derive from profits in a closely held company makes the two businesses same or similar. The consequense of this is that the deferred period for the shares in the sleeping company does not start whilst a relative is active in the closely held company. This means that the tax situation is less advantageous when a closely held company is sold to a relative compared to an external acquirer.
In March 2014 a special commission was tasked to investigate a potential change in legislation to remediate the legal position. The commission found that the option between selling to a relative and selling to an external part constitutes two equal courses of action. The commission therefore found that the current legal position fails to comply with the principle of neutrality and the principle of uniformity. Therefore the commission suggested a special derogation subject to certain conditions in order to once again achieve neutral tax rules between the two courses of action. The suggested solution never led to a change in legislation. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8930128
- author
- Melander, Jakob LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20172
- year
- 2017
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- skatterätt, fåmansföretag, 3:12-reglerna, generationsskifte, trädabolag
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8930128
- date added to LUP
- 2018-02-06 11:56:00
- date last changed
- 2018-02-06 11:56:00
@misc{8930128,
abstract = {{The purpose behind the special tax rules for active shareholders in closely held corporations is to prevent that highly taxed salary income is converted into lower taxed capital income. Income that derive from qualified shares and does not accommodate within the yearly threshold is therefore taxed as salary.
To avoid that a large portion of the profit originating from the sale of a closely held company is taxed as salary income the seller can use a sleeping company. The seller transfers his directly owned shares in the closely held company to the sleeping company. This company can then sell the shares of the closely held company to the acquirer. The profit from the sale of the shares in the closely held company is tax-free for the sleeping company according to the rules regarding commercially motivated shares. After a deferred period of five years, the shares in the sleeping company is no longer qualified. The seller can therefore obtain the profit and solely be taxed for it as capital income.
This procedure was earlier a possible approach no matter who the acquirer was. However, the legal position was changed due to the ruling of the Supreme Administrative Court. The legal position after their ruling is that capital that derive from profits in a closely held company makes the two businesses same or similar. The consequense of this is that the deferred period for the shares in the sleeping company does not start whilst a relative is active in the closely held company. This means that the tax situation is less advantageous when a closely held company is sold to a relative compared to an external acquirer.
In March 2014 a special commission was tasked to investigate a potential change in legislation to remediate the legal position. The commission found that the option between selling to a relative and selling to an external part constitutes two equal courses of action. The commission therefore found that the current legal position fails to comply with the principle of neutrality and the principle of uniformity. Therefore the commission suggested a special derogation subject to certain conditions in order to once again achieve neutral tax rules between the two courses of action. The suggested solution never led to a change in legislation.}},
author = {{Melander, Jakob}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Generationsskiften i fåmansföretag - Likformigt med ett högre beskattningsutfall än vid en extern försäljning?}},
year = {{2017}},
}