A/S Bevola Applies Marks & Spencer to the Losses of a Foreign Permanent Establishment
In A/S Bevola and Jens W. Trock ApS v Skatteministeriet (C-650/16) the CJEU applied its findings in Marks & Spencer (C-446/03) to the losses of a foreign permanent establishment, and confirmed that such losses can be deducted from the profits of a parent company based in a different Member State.
A/S Bevola, a Danish incorporated company, had incurred losses in its Finnish establishment which it wanted to deduct from its taxable income in Denmark, but this was refused by the Danish tax authorities. The question before the CJEU was whether Danish law breached freedom of establishment by not allowing the deduction of losses of a non-Danish permanent establishment.
The CJEU held that there was a difference in treatment between a Danish company with a foreign permanent establishment and one with a Danish permanent establishment. This difference in treatment amounted to a restriction on the freedom of establishment as the two situations were objectively comparable. The court observed that the decision in Marks & Spencer on the losses of foreign subsidiaries was also applicable to the definitive losses of permanent establishments. It was contrary to EU law to exclude the possibility for a resident parent company of deducting losses incurred by its non-resident subsidiary, where the subsidiary had exhausted the possibilities of having those losses taken into account in its state of establishment.
This article appears in the JHA June 2018 Tax Newsletter, which also features:
- Fidelity Funds: Danish Withholding Tax on Dividends Breaches EU Law
- Hornbach-Baumarkt v Finanzamt Landau: German Transfer Pricing Legislation Is Compatible with Freedom of Establishment
Return to Listings
Our Insights
The End is Nigh for the Non-Dom Regime
Published in ThoughtLeaders4 Private Client Magazine, Helen McGhee expert analysis of the current state of non-dom tax regime and it's future.
Increased Investment in Personal Tax Compliance in the UK (Published in Thought Leaders 4 Private Client)
Advances in technology and increased international fiscal co-operation have made global personal tax compliance initiatives pop up in abundance in recent years. To compound the issue, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the corresponding economic fallout prompted domestic governments to increase transparency in relation to investments held by wealthy foreign individuals (with a focus on oligarchs).
In the UK, in the context of the cost-of-living crisis, public opinion certainly seems to be in favour of increased accountability for high-net-worth individuals (eg, on 9 October 2022, 63% of Britons surveyed thought that “the rich are not paying enough and their taxes should be increased”).1
HMRC is one of the most sophisticated tax collection authorities in the world and the department is making significant investments in technology in the field of compliance work; they are well placed to take advantage of new international efforts to increase tax compliance, particularly considering the already extensive network of 130 bilateral tax treaties in the UK (the largest in the world).2 The UK was also a founding member of the OECD’s Joint International Taskforce on Shared Intelligence and Collaboration (JITSIC) forum.
This article discusses the main developments in support of the increased focus on international transparency and personal tax compliance in the UK. There are other international fiscal initiatives, particularly in the field of corporate taxation, but such initiatives are beyond the scope of this article.
It should be noted that a somewhat piecemeal approach, with constant tinkering makes compliance difficult for the taxpayer and is often criticised for lacking the certainty that a stable tax system needs to thrive.
This article was first published with ThoughtLeaders4 Private Client Magazine
