The Interplay between the State Aid Rules and other BEPS-Preventing Tools (SA.38375)

According to EU law the prevailing divergences between the national tax systems shall not be corrected by unilateral measures that grant fiscal advantages to firms, which are affected by the disparities between tax systems.

Equally, the corrections implemented unilaterally that mean to neutralise the disparities between tax systems shall be aligned with the logic of international tax treaties, EU law and basic tax principles. The CJEU held that such corrections that restrict the free movement within the internal market are allowed only when applied to wholly artificial constructions.

The State aid regime relies as well on a notion that defines the genuine nature of a transaction: the Market Economy Investor Principle, which in its turn is a corollary of the arm’s length principle. If the final aim is the prevention of BEPS, can artificiality have distinct meanings in State aid law as opposed to the framework of free movement provisions? By Emanuela Matei, Mircea and Partners Law Firm

Read further: The Interplay between the State Aid Rules and other BEPS-Preventing Tools (SA.38375) | Kluwer International Tax Blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s