Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Arbetsprestation eller kapitalavkastning? - En studie av Högsta förvaltningsdomstolens möjligheter att omklassificera utdelning till tjänsteinkomst med hänvisning till den skatteskyldiges arbetsinsats

Nilsson af Geijersstam, Matilda LU (2022) JURM02 20222
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Differentierad utdelning innebär att utdelning inte utgår lika till alla aktieägare av samma aktieslag, utan i stället differentieras och utgår i olika utsträckning till olika aktieägare. Carried interest är en annan slags differentiering av utdelning som särskilt förekommer i strukturer för riskkapitalfonder. Det kan beskrivas så att en särskild vinstandel av en riskkapitalfond utgår till nyckelpersoner, som både är andelsägare och anställda rådgivningskonsulter, i enlighet med ett vinstdelningsavtal. Både differentiering av utdelning och carried interest innebär att utdelningen fördelas asymmetriskt mellan andelsägarna och situationerna anses därmed jämförbara. Ersättningarna fungerar som incitament för andelsägarna att skapa en så stor... (More)
Differentierad utdelning innebär att utdelning inte utgår lika till alla aktieägare av samma aktieslag, utan i stället differentieras och utgår i olika utsträckning till olika aktieägare. Carried interest är en annan slags differentiering av utdelning som särskilt förekommer i strukturer för riskkapitalfonder. Det kan beskrivas så att en särskild vinstandel av en riskkapitalfond utgår till nyckelpersoner, som både är andelsägare och anställda rådgivningskonsulter, i enlighet med ett vinstdelningsavtal. Både differentiering av utdelning och carried interest innebär att utdelningen fördelas asymmetriskt mellan andelsägarna och situationerna anses därmed jämförbara. Ersättningarna fungerar som incitament för andelsägarna att skapa en så stor värdetillväxt sin möjligt i bolaget eller i fonden. Detta gynnar i sin tur samtliga investerare och andelsägare samt bidrar till den affärsmässiga lönsamheten.

I den svenska skatterätten saknas särskilda regler för differentierad utdelning och carried interest. Den skatterättsliga frågan som uppkommer är om dessa utdelningar ska anses utgöra avkastning, på grund av aktieinnehavet, och därmed beskattas i inkomstslaget kapital. Alternativt, att de skatterättsligt ska behandlas som prestationsbaserad ersättning och således beskattas i inkomstslaget tjänst. Eftersom de bolag som utdelningarna utgår från i regel utgör fåmansföretag aktualiseras i dessa situationer i stället frågan om andelarna är kvalificerade och beskattning således ska ske i enlighet med de särskilda fördelningsreglerna, även kallade 3:12-reglerna.

Att det föreligger ett visst samband mellan de differentierade vinstdelningarna och mottagarnas arbetsinsatser kan i många fall anses klart. Vad som däremot får anses mindre klart, är domstolens möjlighet att frångå de skattskyldigas valda form för ersättningen. Uppsatsen avser att klargöra i vilka situationer differentierad utdelning och carried interest ska beskattas som ersättning för utförda arbetsprestationer. Vidare undersöks i vilken utsträckning domstolen kan frångå den rubricering parterna valt på ersättningen. I framställningen tillämpas en rättsdogmatisk metod med utgångspunkt i de vedertagna rättskällorna: lagstiftning, rättspraxis, förarbeten och doktrin.

Av en studie av rättspraxis följer att Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen, vid den skatterättsliga bedömningen, frångår parternas rubricering av ersättningen i ett antal avgöranden. I dessa mål har domstolen anfört att den asymmetriska fördelningen berott på mottagarens utförda arbetsprestation. Domarna har kritiserats varav den starkaste kritiken har pekat på en avsaknad av lagstöd för en sådan omklassificering. Rättsläget analyseras följaktligen utifrån grundläggande skatterättsliga principer om rättssäkerhet, med utgångspunkt i legalitetsprincipen och dess föreskriftskrav, men även aspekter av en neutral och likformig beskattning lyfts in i diskussionen. Avslutningsvis konstateras att avgörandena om differentierad utdelning skapar en ökad neutralitet i beskattningen och till viss del ökad förutsebarhet. De medför emellertid även viss gränsdragningsproblematik samt avsteg från föreskriftskravet vilket är negativt ur ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv. Avgöranden om carried interest har däremot snarare medfört en icke-neutral beskattning och även här argumenteras för att föreskriftskravet frångåtts. Domstolens syn på ersättningen har emellertid tydliggjorts och bidragit till viss förutsebarhet. Ur ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv konstateras sedermera att det vore önskvärt att situationerna regleras genom lagsstiftning. (Less)
Abstract
Differentiated dividend implicates that dividend is not paid out to all shareholders, of the same class of shares, to the same extent, but is instead differentiated and paid out to different extent to different shareholders. Carried interest is another kind of differentiation of dividend that particularly occurs in private equity fund structures. It can be described as a specific profit share of a private equity fund which is paid out to certain key figures, who are both shareholders and employed as advisory consultants, in accordance with a profit-sharing agreement. Both differentiated dividend and carried interest mean that dividends are distributed asymmetrically between shareholders and the situations are therefore comparable. The... (More)
Differentiated dividend implicates that dividend is not paid out to all shareholders, of the same class of shares, to the same extent, but is instead differentiated and paid out to different extent to different shareholders. Carried interest is another kind of differentiation of dividend that particularly occurs in private equity fund structures. It can be described as a specific profit share of a private equity fund which is paid out to certain key figures, who are both shareholders and employed as advisory consultants, in accordance with a profit-sharing agreement. Both differentiated dividend and carried interest mean that dividends are distributed asymmetrically between shareholders and the situations are therefore comparable. The remunerations function as incentives for the shareholders to create as much value growth as possible within the company or the fund. This benefits all investors and shareholders and contributes to business profitability.

There are no special legal rules in the Swedish tax law regarding differentiated dividend or carried interest. The arising issue, from a tax law perspective, is whether these dividends are to be considered as revenue, due to the shareholding, which would imply taxation as income of capital. Alternatively, that the dividends should be treated as performance-based remuneration which would instead imply taxation as income from employment. Since the companies, from which the dividends emanate, in most cases are close companies, these situations actualize the issue whether the shares are qualified. If this is the case, taxation should take place in accordance with the special distribution rules, also known as the 3:12-provisions.

The fact that there is a certain connection between the differentiated allocation of profit and the output of the work of the recipients, can be established in many of the cases. What may be considered less clear, however, is the court´s ability to deviate from the tax subject´s chosen form of compensation. The essay intends to clarify in which situations differentiated dividend and carried interest shall be assessed as compensation for work performed. Furthermore, the extent to which the court can depart from the classification of the compensation, chosen by the parties, is examined. In the thesis, a legal dogmatic method is applied, which is based on the well-recognized sources of law: legislation, case law, preparatory works, and doctrine.

From a study of case law, it follows that the Supreme Administrative Court, in the tax assessment, departs from the parties' categorization of compensation in several rulings. In these cases, the court found the asymmetric distribution to be depended on the recipient's work performance. The rulings have been criticized, of which the strongest criticism has indicated a lack of legal support for such reclassification. The legal position is thus analyzed in the light of fundamental tax law principles of legal certainty, with reference to the principle of legality and its regulatory requirements, but also aspects of neutral and uniform taxation are brought into the discussion. In conclusion, it is stated that the rulings on differentiated dividends create increased neutrality in taxation and to some extent increased predictability. However, they also entail certain demarcation problems and deviations from the regulatory requirement, which is negative from a legal certainty perspective. Rulings on carried interest, on the other hand, rather entail a non-neutral taxation and here, too, it is argued that the regulatory requirement has been waived. Yet, the court's view of compensations has been made clear and contributed to predictability somewhat. However, from a legal security perspective, it would be desirable for the situations to be regulated through legislation. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Nilsson af Geijersstam, Matilda LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Work performance or return on capital? - A study of the Supreme Administrative Court's possibilities to reclassify dividend as performance-based remuneration with reference to the taxpayer's work performance
course
JURM02 20222
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
skatterätt, carried interest, differentierad utdelning, arbetsprestation, omklassificering
language
Swedish
id
9104770
date added to LUP
2023-01-23 11:34:41
date last changed
2023-01-23 11:34:41
@misc{9104770,
  abstract     = {{Differentiated dividend implicates that dividend is not paid out to all shareholders, of the same class of shares, to the same extent, but is instead differentiated and paid out to different extent to different shareholders. Carried interest is another kind of differentiation of dividend that particularly occurs in private equity fund structures. It can be described as a specific profit share of a private equity fund which is paid out to certain key figures, who are both shareholders and employed as advisory consultants, in accordance with a profit-sharing agreement. Both differentiated dividend and carried interest mean that dividends are distributed asymmetrically between shareholders and the situations are therefore comparable. The remunerations function as incentives for the shareholders to create as much value growth as possible within the company or the fund. This benefits all investors and shareholders and contributes to business profitability. 

There are no special legal rules in the Swedish tax law regarding differentiated dividend or carried interest. The arising issue, from a tax law perspective, is whether these dividends are to be considered as revenue, due to the shareholding, which would imply taxation as income of capital. Alternatively, that the dividends should be treated as performance-based remuneration which would instead imply taxation as income from employment. Since the companies, from which the dividends emanate, in most cases are close companies, these situations actualize the issue whether the shares are qualified. If this is the case, taxation should take place in accordance with the special distribution rules, also known as the 3:12-provisions.

The fact that there is a certain connection between the differentiated allocation of profit and the output of the work of the recipients, can be established in many of the cases. What may be considered less clear, however, is the court´s ability to deviate from the tax subject´s chosen form of compensation. The essay intends to clarify in which situations differentiated dividend and carried interest shall be assessed as compensation for work performed. Furthermore, the extent to which the court can depart from the classification of the compensation, chosen by the parties, is examined. In the thesis, a legal dogmatic method is applied, which is based on the well-recognized sources of law: legislation, case law, preparatory works, and doctrine. 

From a study of case law, it follows that the Supreme Administrative Court, in the tax assessment, departs from the parties' categorization of compensation in several rulings. In these cases, the court found the asymmetric distribution to be depended on the recipient's work performance. The rulings have been criticized, of which the strongest criticism has indicated a lack of legal support for such reclassification. The legal position is thus analyzed in the light of fundamental tax law principles of legal certainty, with reference to the principle of legality and its regulatory requirements, but also aspects of neutral and uniform taxation are brought into the discussion. In conclusion, it is stated that the rulings on differentiated dividends create increased neutrality in taxation and to some extent increased predictability. However, they also entail certain demarcation problems and deviations from the regulatory requirement, which is negative from a legal certainty perspective. Rulings on carried interest, on the other hand, rather entail a non-neutral taxation and here, too, it is argued that the regulatory requirement has been waived. Yet, the court's view of compensations has been made clear and contributed to predictability somewhat. However, from a legal security perspective, it would be desirable for the situations to be regulated through legislation.}},
  author       = {{Nilsson af Geijersstam, Matilda}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Arbetsprestation eller kapitalavkastning? - En studie av Högsta förvaltningsdomstolens möjligheter att omklassificera utdelning till tjänsteinkomst med hänvisning till den skatteskyldiges arbetsinsats}},
  year         = {{2022}},
}