Skatteflyktsdirektivets införlivande - En träffsäker adaption eller ett rättsosäkert steg i fel riktning?
(2022) LAGF03 20222Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- When the European Union's (EU) directive against tax avoidance was incor-porated into Swedish law in 2016, legislators merely stated that no further changes needed to be made to the Swedish tax evasion law. Within juris-prudential doctrine, however, it has been questioned whether the Swedish law against tax evasion really complies with the Union's directive. The incorporat-ion has been discussed partly in relation to the fact that the law already differs from the directive on an objective level, partly because the principle of prohibition of abuse of rights is not further mentioned in the Swedish law against tax evasion. In this essay, the question of whether the implementation of the directive has affected the legal certainty guarantees... (More)
- When the European Union's (EU) directive against tax avoidance was incor-porated into Swedish law in 2016, legislators merely stated that no further changes needed to be made to the Swedish tax evasion law. Within juris-prudential doctrine, however, it has been questioned whether the Swedish law against tax evasion really complies with the Union's directive. The incorporat-ion has been discussed partly in relation to the fact that the law already differs from the directive on an objective level, partly because the principle of prohibition of abuse of rights is not further mentioned in the Swedish law against tax evasion. In this essay, the question of whether the implementation of the directive has affected the legal certainty guarantees of the principle of legality and, by extension, the individual's possibilities for a foreseeable trial has been examined in more detail.
The investigative part of the essay has shown that it is not possible to establish with certainty that the linguistic differences between the Swedish law against tax evasion and the European Union's directive against tax avoidance alone affect the legal certainty guarantees of the principle of legality. However, the difference has negatively affected the individual's opportunities for a fore-seeable trial. With regard to the fact that Swedish legislators have not taken wider account of the principle of prohibition of abuse when incorporating the directive, this means that the legal certainty guarantees of the principle of lega-lity, as well as the predictability of the individual, have been affected in a ne-gative direction. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- När unionens skatteflyktsdirektiv införlivades i svensk rätt 2016 konstaterade lagstiftaren enbart att skatteflyktslagen inte behövde tillfogas förändringar. Inom den rättsvetenskapliga doktrinen har det emellertid ifrågasatts huruvida lagen verkligen stämmer överens med unionens direktiv. Införlivandet har diskuterats främst i förhållande till att lagen dels redan på ett begreppsmässigt plan skiljer sig från direktivet, dels i och med att den unionsrättsliga miss-bruksprincipen inte berörs i skatteflyktslagen. I uppsatsen har frågan huruvida direktivets införlivande har påverkat legalitetsprincipens rättssäkerhetsgaran-tier och i förlängning den enskildes möjligheter till en förutsebar prövning un-dersökts närmare.
Uppsatsens... (More) - När unionens skatteflyktsdirektiv införlivades i svensk rätt 2016 konstaterade lagstiftaren enbart att skatteflyktslagen inte behövde tillfogas förändringar. Inom den rättsvetenskapliga doktrinen har det emellertid ifrågasatts huruvida lagen verkligen stämmer överens med unionens direktiv. Införlivandet har diskuterats främst i förhållande till att lagen dels redan på ett begreppsmässigt plan skiljer sig från direktivet, dels i och med att den unionsrättsliga miss-bruksprincipen inte berörs i skatteflyktslagen. I uppsatsen har frågan huruvida direktivets införlivande har påverkat legalitetsprincipens rättssäkerhetsgaran-tier och i förlängning den enskildes möjligheter till en förutsebar prövning un-dersökts närmare.
Uppsatsens utredande del har visat att det inte med säkerhet går att fastställa att enbart de språkliga skillnaderna skatteflyktslagen och skatteflyktsdirektivet emellan påverkar legalitetsprincipens rättssäkerhetsgarantier. Emellertid har differensen påverkat den enskildes möjligheter till en förutsebar prövningen negativt. Vad gäller det faktum att svensk lagstiftare vid införlivandet av di-rektivet inte har tagit bredare hänsyn till missbruksprincipen innebär detta att legalitetsprincipens rättssäkerhetsgarantier, såväl som den enskildes förutse-barhet, har påverkats i en negativ riktning. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9105361
- author
- Franzén, Emanuel LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20222
- year
- 2022
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- EU-rätt (en. EU law), skatterätt, skatteflyktslagen, skatteflyktsdirektivet
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9105361
- date added to LUP
- 2023-02-03 16:10:30
- date last changed
- 2023-02-03 16:10:30
@misc{9105361, abstract = {{When the European Union's (EU) directive against tax avoidance was incor-porated into Swedish law in 2016, legislators merely stated that no further changes needed to be made to the Swedish tax evasion law. Within juris-prudential doctrine, however, it has been questioned whether the Swedish law against tax evasion really complies with the Union's directive. The incorporat-ion has been discussed partly in relation to the fact that the law already differs from the directive on an objective level, partly because the principle of prohibition of abuse of rights is not further mentioned in the Swedish law against tax evasion. In this essay, the question of whether the implementation of the directive has affected the legal certainty guarantees of the principle of legality and, by extension, the individual's possibilities for a foreseeable trial has been examined in more detail. The investigative part of the essay has shown that it is not possible to establish with certainty that the linguistic differences between the Swedish law against tax evasion and the European Union's directive against tax avoidance alone affect the legal certainty guarantees of the principle of legality. However, the difference has negatively affected the individual's opportunities for a fore-seeable trial. With regard to the fact that Swedish legislators have not taken wider account of the principle of prohibition of abuse when incorporating the directive, this means that the legal certainty guarantees of the principle of lega-lity, as well as the predictability of the individual, have been affected in a ne-gative direction.}}, author = {{Franzén, Emanuel}}, language = {{swe}}, note = {{Student Paper}}, title = {{Skatteflyktsdirektivets införlivande - En träffsäker adaption eller ett rättsosäkert steg i fel riktning?}}, year = {{2022}}, }