Verklig innebörd och genomsyn - en studie av praxis
(2020) LAGF03 20202Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- In this essay, I have researched if the Supreme Administrative Court has used the economic consequences of a civil act to reinterpret the civil actit in terms of taxation. I have chosen three cases where the issue has been tried. In conclusion, I can reasonably inferdetermine that there is no such method in swedish law. Rather, the court is making an interpretation of the act which is consistent with the traditional judiciary method which includes thoroughly examining the facts of the case, and then applying relevant civil and tax regulations to those facts.
Around the turn of the millennium, the Swedish Supreme Administrative Court set precedence in a number of cases which dealt with the issue of how a civil act, or action, performed... (More) - In this essay, I have researched if the Supreme Administrative Court has used the economic consequences of a civil act to reinterpret the civil actit in terms of taxation. I have chosen three cases where the issue has been tried. In conclusion, I can reasonably inferdetermine that there is no such method in swedish law. Rather, the court is making an interpretation of the act which is consistent with the traditional judiciary method which includes thoroughly examining the facts of the case, and then applying relevant civil and tax regulations to those facts.
Around the turn of the millennium, the Swedish Supreme Administrative Court set precedence in a number of cases which dealt with the issue of how a civil act, or action, performed by a taxpayer would be assessed in terms of taxation. In some of the cases, the court would reinterpret the civil act into something other than the title that the parties had given it, and in some cases no reinterpretation was made. What caused the debate was how the court had reached their conclusion. Different opinions were voiced in the discussion regarding the method that the court had used. Some thought that it was reinterpreted due to the civil acts' economic consequences, while others stated that the court merely had used a traditional judiciary approach which meant they had researched the facts of the case and then applied relevant civil and tax law. Moreover, I have investigated if a new ruling from the court, HFD 2019 ref 52, has changed the view on the matter at hand. The ruling is relatively recent, and it has not been reviewed in regards to a legal act's true meaning. The case does not change neither mine nor the academic community's view on the court’s method of interpretation of civil acts in regards to taxation in swedish law, but is rather a development of the court’s previous precedence concerning differentiated dividend.
Lastly, the possible method of using an act’s economic consequences to reinterpret the act has been criticized, particularly regarding how it relates to the rule of law. There is a considerable amount of uncertainty surrounding the method, what exactly it means, and how an examination should be executed. This makes it hard for the taxpayer to be able to foresee if there would be an examination and what the result would be. Hence, it can be argued that it is difficult to see how such a method would be compatible with the rule of law. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Kring millennieskiftet dömde HFD ett antal mål som väckte stor diskussion inom den skatterättsliga doktrinen. Målen rörde frågan om hur en civilrättslig rättshandling eller rättshandlingar den skatteskyldige hade vidtagit skulle bedömas. Det som väckte debatt var hur HFD hade kommit fram till att avtalen skulle tolkas på ett annat sätt vilket kom att kallas rättshandlingens verkliga innebörd. Olika röster i debatten framförde olika tolkningar av metoden för att fastställa en rättshandlings verkliga innebörd. Vissa framförde att HFD hade lagt rättshandlingens ekonomiska innebörd till grund för beskattningen, så kallad särskild skatterättslig genomsyn medan andra hävdade att det rörde sig om traditionell juridisk metod där HFD hade gjort en... (More)
- Kring millennieskiftet dömde HFD ett antal mål som väckte stor diskussion inom den skatterättsliga doktrinen. Målen rörde frågan om hur en civilrättslig rättshandling eller rättshandlingar den skatteskyldige hade vidtagit skulle bedömas. Det som väckte debatt var hur HFD hade kommit fram till att avtalen skulle tolkas på ett annat sätt vilket kom att kallas rättshandlingens verkliga innebörd. Olika röster i debatten framförde olika tolkningar av metoden för att fastställa en rättshandlings verkliga innebörd. Vissa framförde att HFD hade lagt rättshandlingens ekonomiska innebörd till grund för beskattningen, så kallad särskild skatterättslig genomsyn medan andra hävdade att det rörde sig om traditionell juridisk metod där HFD hade gjort en grundlig undersökning av de faktiska omständigheterna och sedan applicerat relevanta lagrum på de omständigheterna. Efter HFD dömde i de så kallade kapitalförsäkringsmålen har det funnits en relativ konsensus kring att HFD inte använder sig av någon särskild skatterättslig genomsynsmetod, trots detta så dyker diskussionen fortfarande upp med jämna mellanrum när frågan om en rättshandlings verkliga innebörd prövas av HFD.
I denna uppsats analyseras HFDs praxis i frågan om rättshandlingars verkliga innebörd med fokus på om de har använt sig av en särskild skatterättslig genomsynsmetod. Sammantaget blir slutsatsen att HFD inte har använt sig av en särskild skatterättslig genomsynsmetod där de har lagt de ekonomiska konsekvenserna till grund för beskattningen, uppsatsens slutsats är att har gjort en tolkning av rättshandlingen utifrån de faktiska omständigheterna där de tillämpat relevanta rättsregler. Uppsatsen behandlar också om HFD 2019 ref 52, ett relativt nytt rättsfall har förändrat synen på om det finns en särskild skatterättslig genomsynsmetod. Rättsfallet har inte behandlats i detta sammanhang tidigare och ingenting tyder på att det har påverkat synen på om det finns en särskild skatterättslig genomsyn utan bygger vidare på den praxis som HFD tidigare har utvecklat kring differentierad utdelning.
Kritik har framförts mot en eventuell särskild skatterättslig genomsynsmetod och har främst rört huruvida en sådan metod skulle vara godtagbar ur ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv. Det råder stora oklarheter kring metoden, vad exakt den innebär och hur en prövning går till. Denna oklarhet innebär svårigheter för den skatteskyldige att förutse dels om en prövning är aktuell, dels hur en prövning skulle gå till och vad den skulle leda till. En sådan särskild skatterättslig genomsynsmetod kan därför inte anses vara acceptabel ur ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9034559
- author
- Lindau, Embla LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20202
- year
- 2020
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Skatterätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9034559
- date added to LUP
- 2021-02-09 11:47:29
- date last changed
- 2021-02-09 11:47:29
@misc{9034559,
abstract = {{In this essay, I have researched if the Supreme Administrative Court has used the economic consequences of a civil act to reinterpret the civil actit in terms of taxation. I have chosen three cases where the issue has been tried. In conclusion, I can reasonably inferdetermine that there is no such method in swedish law. Rather, the court is making an interpretation of the act which is consistent with the traditional judiciary method which includes thoroughly examining the facts of the case, and then applying relevant civil and tax regulations to those facts.
Around the turn of the millennium, the Swedish Supreme Administrative Court set precedence in a number of cases which dealt with the issue of how a civil act, or action, performed by a taxpayer would be assessed in terms of taxation. In some of the cases, the court would reinterpret the civil act into something other than the title that the parties had given it, and in some cases no reinterpretation was made. What caused the debate was how the court had reached their conclusion. Different opinions were voiced in the discussion regarding the method that the court had used. Some thought that it was reinterpreted due to the civil acts' economic consequences, while others stated that the court merely had used a traditional judiciary approach which meant they had researched the facts of the case and then applied relevant civil and tax law. Moreover, I have investigated if a new ruling from the court, HFD 2019 ref 52, has changed the view on the matter at hand. The ruling is relatively recent, and it has not been reviewed in regards to a legal act's true meaning. The case does not change neither mine nor the academic community's view on the court’s method of interpretation of civil acts in regards to taxation in swedish law, but is rather a development of the court’s previous precedence concerning differentiated dividend.
Lastly, the possible method of using an act’s economic consequences to reinterpret the act has been criticized, particularly regarding how it relates to the rule of law. There is a considerable amount of uncertainty surrounding the method, what exactly it means, and how an examination should be executed. This makes it hard for the taxpayer to be able to foresee if there would be an examination and what the result would be. Hence, it can be argued that it is difficult to see how such a method would be compatible with the rule of law.}},
author = {{Lindau, Embla}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Verklig innebörd och genomsyn - en studie av praxis}},
year = {{2020}},
}