Wolters Kluwer: Tax Law’s Post

French IP Box: what are the key take aways, 5 years since the new regime has been implemented? From its application to the Software industry to its complex ramifications with Transfer Pricing when using a Cost Sharing agreement and French tax authorities tax audit positions, this article goes deep in our recent practice of these provisions! Co-authored with Louis-Guillaume Nicolas

🌎 Today the U.S. Supreme Court published their much-anticipated decision on Moore v. United States, and it is a (debatably) narrow victory for the government. Justice Brett Kavanaugh delivered the opinion of the Court (by a 7-2 majority, with Justices Jackson and Barrett having filed concurrent opinions, and Justice Thomas having filed a dissent). The court held that the Mandatory Repatriation Tax (MRT) under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), "which attributes the realized and undistributed income of an American-controlled foreign corporation to the entity’s American shareholders, and then taxes the American shareholders on their portions of that income—does not exceed Congress’s constitutional authority." (p. 2) That said, the majority opinion clarifies that the Court's holding is limited to: "(i) taxation of the shareholders of an entity, (ii) on the undistributed income realized by the entity, (iii) which has been attributed to the shareholders, (iv) when the entity itself has not been taxed on that income." (p. 22-23) The Court further states that its holding "applies when Congress treats the entity as a pass-through. [...] [N]othing in this opinion should be read to authorize any hypothetical congressional effort to tax both an entity and its shareholders or partners on the same undistributed income realized by the entity. In such a scenario, the entity would not simply be a traditional passthrough." (p. 23) You can find the full decision in PDF attached to this post. There may be some elements of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision that might be communicable to the legal systems of LatAm jurisdictions, but it is always important to check carefully whether the premises upon which the Justices built their arguments are also applicable in the context of local constitutions and prior court precedents.

Francesco Semonella has recently contributed to the article “Overturning a palindrome: can the Court of Justice reconsider the Lexel decision?” on the Kluwer International Tax Blog. The article focuses on the relation between arm’s length principle, abuse and interest limitation rules in light of the case law of the European Court of Justice. In detail, the article examines Advocate General (AG) Emiliou's opinion on the pending X BV case (C-585/22). It aims to assess whether the Court of Justice, as currently composed, has the capacity to effectively overturn Lexel (C-484/19), in which the Court appeared to suggest that arm’s length transactions should not be regarded as abusive. Also considering cases where the Court overruled its previous decisions explicitly or implicitly, the article questions if such a reversal can occur without creating significant uncertainty regarding the notion of abuse in EU law as applied on interest limitation rules. Additionally, it considers whether the Court must refer the case to the Grand Chamber to dispel any lingering doubts.   Wolters Kluwer   #maistoeassociati #taxabuse #internationaltaxation #tax   Overturning a palindrome: can the Court of Justice reconsider the Lexel decision? - Kluwer International Tax Blog (kluwertaxblog.com)  

The ATO have provided welcomed guidance on key aspects of the hybrid mismatch rules in this new draft tax determination. While this is (in my view) one of the most complex areas of Australia's tax law, we've written an article which attempts to breakdown and explore critical elements of this ruling and what it means for taxpayers. #HybridMismatchRule #ATO #OECD #InternationalTaxation #InternationalTax #International #Hybrids   https://bit.ly/4asNdOj

Almost seven years after its enactment, the #Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (#TCJA) continues to surprise. One of Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service’s latest salvos is injecting new uncertainty into Code Sec. 280C(c), a provision that should provide a #benefit to #taxpayers... Mike Tenenboym and John Zhang of McDermott Will & Emery review Code Secs. 174, 41, and 280C(c), including certain changes made to those #provisions by the TCJA and describe why it should only reasonably be read one way—in line with its #statutory text to provide a taxpayer benefit under the right set of facts and circumstances. The article is published in the International Tax Journal on Kluwer International Tax Law. 👓 Read the article: https://lnkd.in/eNHhwwi9 📜 Get more information on how to access the article: https://lnkd.in/g-gzMUrh

We are proud to announce our 75th episode! For two people just poddling along in their spare time we think we've done ok! In this episode we speak with Hans van den Hurk of the University of Maastricht about the innate problems of Pillar 2 and Pillar 1... can they survive the weight of their own complexity? Are there alternative solutions? Will they stick it for the long term? #Pillar2 #itb #taxpod #tax #internationaltaxation https://lnkd.in/dfgKuyhn

If you listen to one thing on Pillar 2 (and 1!), please listen to the wonderful Hans van den Hurk talking about some of the issues with it. Grahame Jackson and I had immense fun recording this episode with Hans van den Hurk. It's not often that people are prepared to speak plainly about how initiatives like the BEPS project have unintended consequences that may outweigh their ultimate benefit. #BEPS #Pillar2

#DidYouKnow that if changes are made to the ownership structure of a legal entity, article 27 of the Mexican Federal Tax Code (MFTC) establishes the obligation to submit a notice to the Federal Taxpayer Registry (FTR). Said article of the MFTC, in its section B, subsection VI, establishes that a notice must be submitted to the FTR, each time any modification or incorporation is made with respect to partners, shareholders, associates and other persons, regardless of their denomination, who are part of the organic structure of the company. This notice must be submitted within 30 days after the modifications or additions took place, in accordance with the general rules published by the Tax Administration Service. Do you need assistance about this topic? Contact us at: https://lnkd.in/gHaHMaBX #SolucionesContadoresFiscalistas #Contabilidad #AsesoríaFiscal

Moore v. U.S. went before the Supreme Court, questioning the constitutionality of the TCJA's section 965 transition tax on foreign earnings. Discover the potential implications: https://lnkd.in/e4BtTMNw #TaxLaw #MoorevUS #SCOTUS #WealthTax #IncomeTax #TaxReform

On Friday, October 4, 2024 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rendered a preliminary ruling on the questions posed by the Dutch Supreme Court in 2022 regarding the interpretation of the CJEU judgment in the Lexel AB case concerning the Dutch anti-profit shifting provision of Section 10a Corporate Income Tax Act 1969 (‘CITA 1969’). In essence, the CJEU ruled that Section 10a CITA 1969 is not contrary to the freedom of establishment. The CJEU also explicitly noted that a debt to an affiliated party with an arm’s length interest rate can indeed be (part of) a wholly artificial arrangement, and that in that case EU law allows the arm’s length interest to be fully excluded from deduction. #tax #updates #Meijburg #KPMG