首页 > 最新文献

EC Tax Review最新文献

英文 中文
Forum: Case C-368/21: A New Definition of Importation in the Sense of VAT Law? 论坛:案例C-368/21:增值税法意义上的进口新定义?
IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI: 10.54648/ecta2022027
Sven Ojak
Since the Eurogate II and DHL decision (CJEU, Judgment of 2 June 2016, EU:C:2016:405), it has been clear that importation in the VAT context means ‘the entry of goods into the economic network’ of the Union. However, it is problematic that neither the EU VAT Directive nor the CJEU provide a distinct definition of what is meant by this term. This article deals with the main existing theories on the interpretation of this indeterminate legal concept in the German-language literature and by the German fiscal courts. It is concluded that these theories unfortunately ignore the exposed consumption tax character of (import) VAT and therefore deliver inconsistent results in contradiction to the recent decisions of the CJEU.importation, import VAT, customs, economic network, economic cycle, consumption tax, EU VAT Directive
自Eurogate II和DHL决定(欧盟法院,2016年6月2日判决,欧盟:C:2016:405)以来,很明显,增值税背景下的进口意味着“货物进入欧盟经济网络”。然而,有问题的是,欧盟增值税指令和CJEU都没有对这个术语的含义提供明确的定义。本文论述了德语文献和德国财政法院对这一不确定法律概念的解释的主要现有理论。得出的结论是,不幸的是,这些理论忽视了(进口)增值税暴露的消费税特征,因此产生了不一致的结果,与欧盟委员会最近的决定相矛盾。进口、进口增值税、海关、经济网络、经济周期、消费税、欧盟增值税指令
{"title":"Forum: Case C-368/21: A New Definition of Importation in the Sense of VAT Law?","authors":"Sven Ojak","doi":"10.54648/ecta2022027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2022027","url":null,"abstract":"Since the Eurogate II and DHL decision (CJEU, Judgment of 2 June 2016, EU:C:2016:405), it has been clear that importation in the VAT context means ‘the entry of goods into the economic network’ of the Union. However, it is problematic that neither the EU VAT Directive nor the CJEU provide a distinct definition of what is meant by this term. This article deals with the main existing theories on the interpretation of this indeterminate legal concept in the German-language literature and by the German fiscal courts. It is concluded that these theories unfortunately ignore the exposed consumption tax character of (import) VAT and therefore deliver inconsistent results in contradiction to the recent decisions of the CJEU.\u0000importation, import VAT, customs, economic network, economic cycle, consumption tax, EU VAT Directive","PeriodicalId":43686,"journal":{"name":"EC Tax Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42860074","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Article: Free Movement of Persons Between the EU and Switzerland: Quo Vadis? 文章:欧盟和瑞士之间的人员自由流动:库瓦迪斯?
IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI: 10.54648/ecta2022023
E. Ros
Relations between Switzerland and the European Union (EU) have been shaped by various (bilateral) agreements. This contribution discusses one of the most important agreements between Switzerland and the EU; the agreement on the free movement of persons (AFMP). The AFMP does not have its own dispute settlement mechanism or supervisory body. Dispute resolution is now left to independent Swiss courts and the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ). On 23 November 2018, a first draft of an institutional framework agreement between Switzerland and the EU was published. The aim of this proposed framework agreement was partly to simplify the complex relations between Switzerland and the EU. In May 2021 the Swiss government pulled the plug on the institutional framework agreement because of concerns about migration, labour rights, and worries about the judicial authority the institutional agreement would give to the ECJ. The EC is however clear about what it wants. Amongst others, the dynamic alignment of Swiss law to EU law and a functioning dispute settlement mechanism are issues the EC wants to see solved. In this article the author explores, among other things, what the consequences could be for Swiss fiscal autonomy if Switzerland would follow the EC. The author also reflects in more detail on the ECJ’s case law on frontier workers and the final settlement on capital gains from shareholdings upon emigration to Switzerland.Free movement of persons, Switzerland, taxation, bilateral agreements, Wächtler judgment.
瑞士和欧洲联盟(欧盟)之间的关系是由各种(双边)协议形成的。这篇文章讨论了瑞士与欧盟之间最重要的协议之一;人员自由流动协定。AFMP没有自己的争端解决机制或监督机构。争议解决现在交由独立的瑞士法院和欧洲联盟法院(ECJ)解决。2018年11月23日,瑞士与欧盟机构框架协议初稿公布。这项拟议框架协议的部分目的是简化瑞士与欧盟之间复杂的关系。2021年5月,瑞士政府终止了体制框架协议,原因是担心移民、劳工权利,以及担心体制协议将赋予欧洲法院的司法权力。然而,欧盟委员会清楚自己想要什么。除其他外,瑞士法律与欧盟法律的动态一致性和有效的争端解决机制是欧盟委员会希望解决的问题。在这篇文章中,作者探讨了如果瑞士效仿欧盟,瑞士的财政自主权会产生什么后果。作者还更详细地反思了欧洲法院关于边境工人的判例法,以及移民到瑞士后股权资本收益的最终解决方案。人员自由流动、瑞士、税收、双边协议、Wächtler判决。
{"title":"Article: Free Movement of Persons Between the EU and Switzerland: Quo Vadis?","authors":"E. Ros","doi":"10.54648/ecta2022023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2022023","url":null,"abstract":"Relations between Switzerland and the European Union (EU) have been shaped by various (bilateral) agreements. This contribution discusses one of the most important agreements between Switzerland and the EU; the agreement on the free movement of persons (AFMP). The AFMP does not have its own dispute settlement mechanism or supervisory body. Dispute resolution is now left to independent Swiss courts and the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ). On 23 November 2018, a first draft of an institutional framework agreement between Switzerland and the EU was published. The aim of this proposed framework agreement was partly to simplify the complex relations between Switzerland and the EU. In May 2021 the Swiss government pulled the plug on the institutional framework agreement because of concerns about migration, labour rights, and worries about the judicial authority the institutional agreement would give to the ECJ. The EC is however clear about what it wants. Amongst others, the dynamic alignment of Swiss law to EU law and a functioning dispute settlement mechanism are issues the EC wants to see solved. In this article the author explores, among other things, what the consequences could be for Swiss fiscal autonomy if Switzerland would follow the EC. The author also reflects in more detail on the ECJ’s case law on frontier workers and the final settlement on capital gains from shareholdings upon emigration to Switzerland.\u0000Free movement of persons, Switzerland, taxation, bilateral agreements, Wächtler judgment.","PeriodicalId":43686,"journal":{"name":"EC Tax Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49291359","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Editorial: VAT Goes Virtual: Security Tokens 社论:增值税走向虚拟:证券代币
IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI: 10.54648/ecta2022022
J. Englisch
In recent years, many have mused on whether substantive EU VAT rules are sufficiently versatile to adapt to technological innovations that disrupt traditional business models. Some national courts applying those rules are apparently not: For instance, the German Federal Tax Court recently decided that the rental of virtual land cannot, in itself, attract VAT, because such transactions do not happen in the ‘real’ economy and therefore allegedly cannot imply a supply of any consumable benefit. The wisdom (and the correctness) of such a decision may be questioned – considering the efforts currently made to develop a ‘metaverse’, such reasoning might well become the new Watson anecdote of future generations of VAT practitioners. But admittedly, in some respects the current EU VAT system clearly was or still is in need of modernization, not only regarding the tax collection procedures, but indeed also with respect to substantive law issues. Examples are the recent reform on the place of supply rules for a virtual provision of certain services, the late and piecemeal inclusion of electronically supplied services in the list of supplies eligible for reduced rates, or the need to clarify and, possibly, amend the treatment of crowdfunding in the light of its increasing tokenization. Notwithstanding the above, it should be acknowledged that in many cases, the harmonized VAT rules are future-proof enough to ‘go virtual’ and produce consistent and reasonable results. Arguably, one such area are blockchain-based innovations in the field of financial instruments, i.e., so-called security tokens or investment tokens. This editorial discusses how they fit into established concepts of EU VAT and how to adequately address some peculiarities in line with established VAT doctrine.
近年来,许多人都在思考,欧盟实质性的增值税规则是否足够通用,以适应颠覆传统商业模式的技术创新。一些适用这些规则的国家法院显然没有:例如,德国联邦税务法院最近裁定,虚拟土地的租赁本身不能吸引增值税,因为此类交易不在“实体”经济中发生,因此据称不意味着提供任何可消费的利益。这种决定的智慧(和正确性)可能会受到质疑——考虑到目前为开发“元宇宙”所做的努力,这种推理很可能成为未来几代增值税从业者的新沃森轶事。但不可否认,在某些方面,现行的欧盟增值税制度显然需要或仍然需要现代化,不仅是在税收征收程序方面,而且在实体法问题方面。例如,最近对虚拟提供某些服务的供应规则进行了改革,将电子提供的服务迟且零星地纳入了有资格降低费率的供应清单,或者需要根据众筹日益增加的代币化来澄清并可能修改众筹的处理方式。尽管如此,应该承认,在许多情况下,统一的增值税规则是面向未来的,足以“走向虚拟”,并产生一致和合理的结果。可以说,其中一个领域是金融工具领域基于区块链的创新,即所谓的证券代币或投资代币。这篇社论讨论了它们如何适应欧盟增值税的既定概念,以及如何充分解决符合既定增值税原则的一些特点。
{"title":"Editorial: VAT Goes Virtual: Security Tokens","authors":"J. Englisch","doi":"10.54648/ecta2022022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2022022","url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, many have mused on whether substantive EU VAT rules are sufficiently versatile to adapt to technological innovations that disrupt traditional business models. Some national courts applying those rules are apparently not: For instance, the German Federal Tax Court recently decided that the rental of virtual land cannot, in itself, attract VAT, because such transactions do not happen in the ‘real’ economy and therefore allegedly cannot imply a supply of any consumable benefit. The wisdom (and the correctness) of such a decision may be questioned – considering the efforts currently made to develop a ‘metaverse’, such reasoning might well become the new Watson anecdote of future generations of VAT practitioners. But admittedly, in some respects the current EU VAT system clearly was or still is in need of modernization, not only regarding the tax collection procedures, but indeed also with respect to substantive law issues. Examples are the recent reform on the place of supply rules for a virtual provision of certain services, the late and piecemeal inclusion of electronically supplied services in the list of supplies eligible for reduced rates, or the need to clarify and, possibly, amend the treatment of crowdfunding in the light of its increasing tokenization. Notwithstanding the above, it should be acknowledged that in many cases, the harmonized VAT rules are future-proof enough to ‘go virtual’ and produce consistent and reasonable results. Arguably, one such area are blockchain-based innovations in the field of financial instruments, i.e., so-called security tokens or investment tokens. This editorial discusses how they fit into established concepts of EU VAT and how to adequately address some peculiarities in line with established VAT doctrine.","PeriodicalId":43686,"journal":{"name":"EC Tax Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41419354","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Article: Fictitious Interest and Dividends Under Tax Treaties and the EU Directives 文章:税收条约和欧盟指令下的虚拟利息和股息
IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI: 10.54648/ecta2022024
Savvas Kostikidis, Florian Striefler
On 24 February 2022 the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled in the case Viva Telecom Bulgaria EOOD v. Direktor na Direktsia Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika – Sofia (Case C-257/20) (ECJ, 24 February 2022, Case C-257/20, Viva Telecom Bulgaria EOOD v. Direktor na Direktsia Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika – Sofia, ECLI:EU: C:2022:125), inter alia, that fictitious interest payments do not enjoy withholding tax (WHT) exemption neither under the Interest and Royalties Directive (2003/49) (Council Directive 2003/49/EC of 3 June 2003 on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments made between associated companies of different Member States, OJ L 157, 26 June 2003) (IRD) nor under the Parent-Subsidiary Directive (2011/96) (Council Directive 2011/96/EU of 30 November 2011 on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States, OJ L 345, 29 December 2011) (PSD) (together referred to as the directives). This article questions this finding and argues that fictitious interest and dividends should fall under the IRD and PSD respectively.IRD, PSD, EU corporate taxation, fictitious interest, fictitious dividends, CFC, tax avoidance, transfer pricing adjustment
2022年2月24日,欧洲法院(ECJ)就Viva Telecom Bulgaria EOOD诉direcrektsia Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika - Sofia一案(案件C-257/20)作出裁决(欧洲法院,2022年2月24日,案件C-257/20,保加利亚Viva Telecom EOOD诉direcrektsia Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika - Sofia, ECLI:EU):C:2022:125),除其他外,根据利息和特许权使用费指令(2003/49)(2003年6月3日关于适用于不同成员国关联公司之间支付的利息和特许权使用费的共同税收制度的理事会指令2003/49/EC, OJ L 157),虚构的利息支付不享受预扣税豁免。2003年6月26日)(IRD)或根据母子指令(2011/96)(2011年11月30日理事会指令2011/96/EU, OJ L 345, 2011年12月29日)(PSD)(统称为指令)。本文对这一发现提出质疑,并认为虚拟利息和股息应分别属于IRD和PSD。IRD, PSD,欧盟公司税,虚构利息,虚构股息,CFC,避税,转让定价调整
{"title":"Article: Fictitious Interest and Dividends Under Tax Treaties and the EU Directives","authors":"Savvas Kostikidis, Florian Striefler","doi":"10.54648/ecta2022024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2022024","url":null,"abstract":"On 24 February 2022 the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled in the case Viva Telecom Bulgaria EOOD v. Direktor na Direktsia Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika – Sofia (Case C-257/20) (ECJ, 24 February 2022, Case C-257/20, Viva Telecom Bulgaria EOOD v. Direktor na Direktsia Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika – Sofia, ECLI:EU: C:2022:125), inter alia, that fictitious interest payments do not enjoy withholding tax (WHT) exemption neither under the Interest and Royalties Directive (2003/49) (Council Directive 2003/49/EC of 3 June 2003 on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments made between associated companies of different Member States, OJ L 157, 26 June 2003) (IRD) nor under the Parent-Subsidiary Directive (2011/96) (Council Directive 2011/96/EU of 30 November 2011 on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States, OJ L 345, 29 December 2011) (PSD) (together referred to as the directives). This article questions this finding and argues that fictitious interest and dividends should fall under the IRD and PSD respectively.\u0000IRD, PSD, EU corporate taxation, fictitious interest, fictitious dividends, CFC, tax avoidance, transfer pricing adjustment","PeriodicalId":43686,"journal":{"name":"EC Tax Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43371041","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Article: Abuse of Law by a Member State When Designing a Tax Measure 条款:成员国在制定税收措施时滥用法律
IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI: 10.54648/ecta2022025
S. Stevens
When Member States design tax measures, they have to comply with EU law. In this article the question is discussed whether a Member State has the liberty to intentionally design a domestic rule so that it falls outside the scope of the freedom of capital and prevent scrutiny in respect of third states by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). This question is investigated by using two Dutch rules as a case study. The author argues that the legislature walks a thin line. On the one hand there is a risk that the legislature is circumventing the application of the fundamental freedoms in an abusive way while on the other hand using an arbitrary criterion in a rule to distinguish between comparable cases could lead to the conclusion that a Member State has implemented a selective tax measure and thus granted state aid. The author concludes that the Dutch liquidation loss rule infringes EU law.Abuse of law, Liquidation loss, Withholding tax, State aid, Sincere cooperation, Freedom of capital
当成员国设计税收措施时,他们必须遵守欧盟法律。本文讨论的问题是,一个成员国是否有自由故意设计一项国内规则,使其不属于资本自由的范围,并防止欧盟法院(CJEU)对第三国的审查。这个问题是通过使用两个荷兰规则作为案例研究来调查的。作者认为,立法机关走钢丝。一方面,有一种危险,即立法机关以滥用的方式规避基本自由的适用,而另一方面,在一项规则中使用武断的标准来区分可比较的情况,可能导致会员国执行了一项有选择的税收措施,从而给予国家援助的结论。笔者认为,荷兰的清算损失规则违反了欧盟法律。滥用法律,清算损失,代扣代缴税款,国家援助,真诚合作,资金自由
{"title":"Article: Abuse of Law by a Member State When Designing a Tax Measure","authors":"S. Stevens","doi":"10.54648/ecta2022025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2022025","url":null,"abstract":"When Member States design tax measures, they have to comply with EU law. In this article the question is discussed whether a Member State has the liberty to intentionally design a domestic rule so that it falls outside the scope of the freedom of capital and prevent scrutiny in respect of third states by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). This question is investigated by using two Dutch rules as a case study. The author argues that the legislature walks a thin line. On the one hand there is a risk that the legislature is circumventing the application of the fundamental freedoms in an abusive way while on the other hand using an arbitrary criterion in a rule to distinguish between comparable cases could lead to the conclusion that a Member State has implemented a selective tax measure and thus granted state aid. The author concludes that the Dutch liquidation loss rule infringes EU law.\u0000Abuse of law, Liquidation loss, Withholding tax, State aid, Sincere cooperation, Freedom of capital","PeriodicalId":43686,"journal":{"name":"EC Tax Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45856117","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Article: Split Payment Mechanism as a VAT Collection Method: Evidence from Poland 文章:作为增值税征收方式的分割支付机制:来自波兰的证据
IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI: 10.54648/ecta2022021
Rafał Lipniewicz
In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the activity of states and international organizations (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), EU) when it comes to solutions that prevent tax frauds and limit tax evasion. The split payment is one of the mechanisms in the field of value added tax. In the European Union, this solution is still used to an extremely limited extent, in only a few Member States. This article analyses the effects of a big-scale implementation of the Split Payment Mechanism in Poland from the perspective of application of tax principles (primarily in the form of reducing the Value Added Tax (VAT) gap) as well as the compliance costs to this model of settling the value added tax. The aim of this article is to ascertain whether the split payment (SP) Mechanism is an effective tool to counteract VAT fraud and whether it can be recommended as a systemic tax solution in the European Union.EU VAT system, split payment, VAT Collection, Tax gap, VAT fraud, Poland, European Commission, bank transfers, VAT account, financial liquidity.
近年来,各国和国际组织(经济合作与发展组织、欧盟)在防止税务欺诈和限制逃税的解决方案方面的活动显著增加。分散支付是增值税领域的一种机制。在欧洲联盟,这一解决方案的使用范围仍然极为有限,只有少数成员国使用。本文从税收原则的应用(主要是以减少增值税缺口的形式)以及这种增值税结算模式的合规成本的角度分析了波兰大规模实施分割支付机制的效果。本文的目的是确定分割支付(SP)机制是否是对抗增值税欺诈的有效工具,以及它是否可以被推荐为欧盟的系统性税收解决方案。欧盟增值税系统、分割支付、增值税征收、税收缺口、增值税欺诈、波兰、欧盟委员会、银行转账、增值税账户、金融流动性。
{"title":"Article: Split Payment Mechanism as a VAT Collection Method: Evidence from Poland","authors":"Rafał Lipniewicz","doi":"10.54648/ecta2022021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2022021","url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the activity of states and international organizations (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), EU) when it comes to solutions that prevent tax frauds and limit tax evasion. The split payment is one of the mechanisms in the field of value added tax. In the European Union, this solution is still used to an extremely limited extent, in only a few Member States. This article analyses the effects of a big-scale implementation of the Split Payment Mechanism in Poland from the perspective of application of tax principles (primarily in the form of reducing the Value Added Tax (VAT) gap) as well as the compliance costs to this model of settling the value added tax. The aim of this article is to ascertain whether the split payment (SP) Mechanism is an effective tool to counteract VAT fraud and whether it can be recommended as a systemic tax solution in the European Union.\u0000EU VAT system, split payment, VAT Collection, Tax gap, VAT fraud, Poland, European Commission, bank transfers, VAT account, financial liquidity.","PeriodicalId":43686,"journal":{"name":"EC Tax Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42098897","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Peer Reviewed Articles: ‘Behind the One-Way Mirror: Reviewing the Legality of EU Tax Algorithmic Governance’ 同行评议文章:“单向镜子背后:回顾欧盟税收算法治理的合法性”
IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI: 10.54648/ecta2022019
David Hadwick
Tax algorithmic governance has surged from a handful of Member States a decade ago, to a majority of tax administrations in the European Union (EU) integrating artificial intelligence (AI) systems. In light of the ever-increasing volume of tax returns and tax documentation to be processed, the digital transformation of the administration has become an imperative. Yet, cases such as system risico indicatie (SyRI), the toeslagenaffaire and eKasa show that automation poses risks to taxpayers. These cases cast doubts on the secretive nature of the tax administration’s prerogatives and the information and communications technology (ICT) tools used to perform its missions, begging the question of what lies behind the administrations’ one-way mirror. Section 2 presents the current state of use of AI tax systems on the basis of a synthesized literature review of publicly available data, mapping how many and what EU States have integrated AI systems. Section 3 examines compliance of the AI systems identified with the principle of legality. This research finds that while EU Member States have heavily invested into the integration of AI tax systems, very few have adopted specific norms to mitigate the risks to taxpayers’ fundamental rights. As a result, tax algorithmic governance is creating a noticeable gap in the protection of taxpayers’ rights.Fiscal algorithmic governance, taxpayers’ rights, artificial intelligence, tax secrecy, digital constitutionalism
税收算法治理已经从十年前的少数几个成员国激增到欧盟(EU)的大多数税务管理机构集成了人工智能(AI)系统。鉴于需要处理的纳税申报单和税务文件数量不断增加,行政部门的数字化转型势在必行。然而,系统风险指标(SyRI)、toeslagenafaire和eKasa等案例表明,自动化给纳税人带来了风险。这些案件使人们对税务局特权的秘密性质以及用于执行其任务的信息和通信技术工具产生了怀疑,从而引出了税务局单向镜背后的问题。第2节在对公开数据进行综合文献综述的基础上,介绍了人工智能税收系统的使用现状,绘制了有多少欧盟国家和哪些欧盟国家集成了人工智能系统。第3节审查了符合合法性原则的人工智能系统的合规性。这项研究发现,尽管欧盟成员国在人工智能税收系统的整合方面投入了大量资金,但很少有国家采取具体规范来减轻纳税人基本权利的风险。因此,税收算法治理在保护纳税人权利方面造成了明显的差距。财政算法治理、纳税人权利、人工智能、税务保密、数字宪政
{"title":"Peer Reviewed Articles: ‘Behind the One-Way Mirror: Reviewing the Legality of EU Tax Algorithmic Governance’","authors":"David Hadwick","doi":"10.54648/ecta2022019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2022019","url":null,"abstract":"Tax algorithmic governance has surged from a handful of Member States a decade ago, to a majority of tax administrations in the European Union (EU) integrating artificial intelligence (AI) systems. In light of the ever-increasing volume of tax returns and tax documentation to be processed, the digital transformation of the administration has become an imperative. Yet, cases such as system risico indicatie (SyRI), the toeslagenaffaire and eKasa show that automation poses risks to taxpayers. These cases cast doubts on the secretive nature of the tax administration’s prerogatives and the information and communications technology (ICT) tools used to perform its missions, begging the question of what lies behind the administrations’ one-way mirror. Section 2 presents the current state of use of AI tax systems on the basis of a synthesized literature review of publicly available data, mapping how many and what EU States have integrated AI systems. Section 3 examines compliance of the AI systems identified with the principle of legality. This research finds that while EU Member States have heavily invested into the integration of AI tax systems, very few have adopted specific norms to mitigate the risks to taxpayers’ fundamental rights. As a result, tax algorithmic governance is creating a noticeable gap in the protection of taxpayers’ rights.\u0000Fiscal algorithmic governance, taxpayers’ rights, artificial intelligence, tax secrecy, digital constitutionalism","PeriodicalId":43686,"journal":{"name":"EC Tax Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48884965","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Editorial: A Zebra or a Donkey? the European Commission’s Proposal for a Debt-Equity Bias Reduction Allowance (DEBRA) 社论:斑马还是驴子?欧盟委员会关于减少债务权益偏差津贴(DEBRA)的提案
IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI: 10.54648/ecta2022017
R. Ismer
Allowance on corporate equity, ACE, notional interest deduction, debt-equity bias, DEBRA, ATAD, interest deductibility, CBIT, Comprehensive Business Income Tax
公司股本备抵、ACE、名义利息扣除、债务权益偏差、DEBRA、ATAD、利息扣除、CBIT、综合企业所得税
{"title":"Editorial: A Zebra or a Donkey? the European Commission’s Proposal for a Debt-Equity Bias Reduction Allowance (DEBRA)","authors":"R. Ismer","doi":"10.54648/ecta2022017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2022017","url":null,"abstract":"Allowance on corporate equity, ACE, notional interest deduction, debt-equity bias, DEBRA, ATAD, interest deductibility, CBIT, Comprehensive Business Income Tax","PeriodicalId":43686,"journal":{"name":"EC Tax Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42688130","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Peer Reviewed Articles: Understanding VAT in Three-Party, Platform-Based Business Models: Which Party Is Supplying Which Service? 同行评议文章:在三方平台商业模式下理解增值税:哪一方提供哪一种服务?
IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI: 10.54648/ecta2022018
L. Zechner
Three-party business models in which a platform operator intermediates between a supplier providing a service and a customer buying a service have become an important part of our daily lives. For purposes of European Value Added Tax (VAT), each transaction occurring as part of a three-party business model must be attributed to a ‘taxable’ person responsible for the VAT. Generally, suppliers may provide their services for VAT purposes as proprietary traders, undisclosed agents or disclosed agents, with varying VAT consequences. While there is little explicit case law specifying how to identify the two forms of agency, this article provides a framework for a distinction by building upon the case law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ), taking into consideration the economic and commercial reality of each case and placing particular emphasis on the view of the average consumer. To contribute to a more uniform approach in attributing supplies in three-party, platform-based business models, specifically, this article develops indicators for assessing the relevant facts and ascertaining the economic reality of a case. Lastly, this article provides a method for differentiating agents from providers of electronically supplied services under current EU VAT law.EU VAT law, Attribution of services, Platform economy, Three-party business models, Disclosed agency, Undisclosed agency, Electronically supplied services, ECJ’s ‘economic approach, View of the average consumer, Uniform interpretation of VAT law
平台运营商在供应商提供服务和客户购买服务之间充当中介的三方商业模式已经成为我们日常生活的重要组成部分。就欧洲增值税(VAT)而言,作为三方商业模式一部分的每笔交易都必须归属于负责增值税的“应税”人员。一般来说,供应商可能以自营商、未披露代理人或披露代理人的身份为增值税目的提供服务,从而产生不同的增值税后果。虽然很少有明确的判例法规定如何识别这两种形式的代理,但本文以欧洲法院(ECJ)的判例法为基础,考虑到每个案例的经济和商业现实,并特别强调普通消费者的观点,为区分提供了一个框架。具体来说,为了在三方、基于平台的商业模式中提供更统一的供应商归属方法,本文开发了评估相关事实和确定案例经济现实的指标。最后,本文提供了一种在现行欧盟增值税法律下区分电子供应服务的代理商和供应商的方法。欧盟增值税法,服务属性,平台经济,三方商业模式,披露代理,未披露代理,电子提供的服务,欧洲法院的经济方法,普通消费者的视角,增值税法的统一解释
{"title":"Peer Reviewed Articles: Understanding VAT in Three-Party, Platform-Based Business Models: Which Party Is Supplying Which Service?","authors":"L. Zechner","doi":"10.54648/ecta2022018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2022018","url":null,"abstract":"Three-party business models in which a platform operator intermediates between a supplier providing a service and a customer buying a service have become an important part of our daily lives. For purposes of European Value Added Tax (VAT), each transaction occurring as part of a three-party business model must be attributed to a ‘taxable’ person responsible for the VAT. Generally, suppliers may provide their services for VAT purposes as proprietary traders, undisclosed agents or disclosed agents, with varying VAT consequences. While there is little explicit case law specifying how to identify the two forms of agency, this article provides a framework for a distinction by building upon the case law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ), taking into consideration the economic and commercial reality of each case and placing particular emphasis on the view of the average consumer. To contribute to a more uniform approach in attributing supplies in three-party, platform-based business models, specifically, this article develops indicators for assessing the relevant facts and ascertaining the economic reality of a case. Lastly, this article provides a method for differentiating agents from providers of electronically supplied services under current EU VAT law.\u0000EU VAT law, Attribution of services, Platform economy, Three-party business models, Disclosed agency, Undisclosed agency, Electronically supplied services, ECJ’s ‘economic approach, View of the average consumer, Uniform interpretation of VAT law","PeriodicalId":43686,"journal":{"name":"EC Tax Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44378877","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Articles: Platforms, a Convenient Source of Information Under DAC7 and the VAT Directive: A Proposal for More Alignment and Efficiency 文章:平台,DAC7和增值税指令下的便利信息来源:提高一致性和效率的建议
IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI: 10.54648/ecta2022020
Madeleine Merkx, A. Janssen, Maxime Leenders
From 1 July 2021, platforms must deal with VAT (Value Added Tax) reporting and record-keeping obligations under the VAT Directive. As of 1 January 2023, these platforms will also have to deal with a set of information obligations under the new DAC7 Directive. This article seeks to address the impact of this combined legislation for platforms by analysing the differences and similarities of the legislation and proposing possible improvements for the application of this combined legislation to avoid overlap and create more efficiency and effectiveness of those rules.DAC7, VAT, platform, record-keeping, reporting, obligations, exchange of information, sharing economy, e-commerce, alignment
从2021年7月1日起,平台必须根据增值税指令处理增值税(增值税)报告和记录保存义务。从2023年1月1日起,这些平台还必须根据新的DAC7指令处理一系列信息义务。本文试图通过分析立法的差异和相似之处来解决这一合并立法对平台的影响,并提出该合并立法应用的可能改进,以避免重叠,并提高这些规则的效率和有效性。DAC7,增值税,平台,记账,报告,义务,信息交换,共享经济,电子商务,对齐
{"title":"Articles: Platforms, a Convenient Source of Information Under DAC7 and the VAT Directive: A Proposal for More Alignment and Efficiency","authors":"Madeleine Merkx, A. Janssen, Maxime Leenders","doi":"10.54648/ecta2022020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2022020","url":null,"abstract":"From 1 July 2021, platforms must deal with VAT (Value Added Tax) reporting and record-keeping obligations under the VAT Directive. As of 1 January 2023, these platforms will also have to deal with a set of information obligations under the new DAC7 Directive. This article seeks to address the impact of this combined legislation for platforms by analysing the differences and similarities of the legislation and proposing possible improvements for the application of this combined legislation to avoid overlap and create more efficiency and effectiveness of those rules.\u0000DAC7, VAT, platform, record-keeping, reporting, obligations, exchange of information, sharing economy, e-commerce, alignment","PeriodicalId":43686,"journal":{"name":"EC Tax Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47183599","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
EC Tax Review
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1