References of "Haslehner, Werner 50001948"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailCross-border Exchange of Tax Information and Fundamental Rights
Chaouche, Fatima UL; Haslehner, Werner UL

in Haslehner, Werner; Kofler, Georg; Rust, Alexander (Eds.) EU Tax Law and Policy in the 21st Century (2017)

Very few areas of law have been subject to as much scrutiny and political pressure as tax law over the past years. In a very short period of time, we went from almost no exchange to the implementation of ... [more ▼]

Very few areas of law have been subject to as much scrutiny and political pressure as tax law over the past years. In a very short period of time, we went from almost no exchange to the implementation of automatic exchange of information for specific categories of income. Since 2009, an unprecedented interventionism has been best illustrated by the amendments and enlargements of various mutual assistance instruments, both at OECD and EU levels. This widening of scope undoubtedly involves implications for taxpayers who are directly or indirectly concerned by the exchange of information. The unremitting efforts to achieve efficient exchanges among national tax authorities has, so far, resided in the promptness with which the information gathered is transferred and thereby encouraging requested States to limit taxpayers’ notification and participation rights. Addressing fundamental rights implications in cross-border exchanges of information entails, first, an overview of the recent developments in exchange of information procedures and an overview of the scope of fundamental rights at both EU and national levels . Along the same lines, a review of the CJEU decision in Sabou appears relevant in this context as it features in concreto implications of mutual assistance mechanisms on taxpayers’ procedural rights. Considering that the request for preliminary ruling addressed to the CJEU in Sabou mainly raised concerns with respect to the application of the right of the defence, it is appropriate to identify further taxpayers’ rights that may come into play in mutual assistance proceedings. This ‘inventory’ exercise is a prerequisite for a just assessment of the current exchange of information legal framework and allows the formulation of open questions for identified unresolved issues. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 397 (37 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailOpinion Statement ECJ-TF 2/2017 on the ECJ Decision of 21 December in World Duty Free Group and Others (Joined Cases C-20/15 P and C-21/15 P), Concerning the Requirements of Selective Aid in the Sense of Article 107 of the TFEU
Haslehner, Werner UL; García Prats, Alfredo; Heydt, Volker et al

in European Taxation (2017)

The Confédération Fiscale Européenne welcomes the clarification of the notion of selectivity in the World Duty Free Group decision. It is now clear that a tax measure that derogates from the normal tax ... [more ▼]

The Confédération Fiscale Européenne welcomes the clarification of the notion of selectivity in the World Duty Free Group decision. It is now clear that a tax measure that derogates from the normal tax scheme can constitute State aid even if the tax measure appears to be general in nature and does not lead to a benefit for a specific predefined group of undertakings. Given the variety of tax rules in each Member State, however, further clarification on the determination of the reference framework, the comparability test and the scope of potential justifications will be necessary. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 36 (4 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailOpinion Statement ECJ-TF 1/2017 on the Decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in SECIL (Case C-464/14) Concerning the Free Movement of Capital in Third Countries
Haslehner, Werner UL; García Prats, Alfredo; Heydt, Volker et al

in European Taxation (2017)

The Confédération Fiscale Européenne welcomes the precise and instructive decision in SECIL. The decision clarifies the application of article 63 of the TFEU on the free movement of capital to tax ... [more ▼]

The Confédération Fiscale Européenne welcomes the precise and instructive decision in SECIL. The decision clarifies the application of article 63 of the TFEU on the free movement of capital to tax legislation that denies tax benefits to dividends originating in non-EU Member States and demonstrates that Member States may not rely on article 64(1) of the TFEU, i.e. the “grandfathering clause”, if the logic of their tax legislation changed after 31 December 1993, which change can also be brought about through the conclusion of directly applicable international agreements (for example, Euro-Mediterranean Agreements). The Confédération Fiscale Européenne appreciates the further clarification that provisions with direct effect in EU international agreements with third countries, such as the Euro-Mediterranean Agreements, can create economic rights that can be relied upon by taxpayers. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 29 (1 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailLuxembourg: Profit Adjustments for Interest-Free Loans in Accordance with Article 9
Haslehner, Werner UL

in Kemmeren, Eric; Smit, Daniel; Essers, Peter (Eds.) et al Tax Treaty Case Law around the Globe 2016 (2017)

This case comment analyzes the interaction of Article 9 of the Italy-Luxembourg tax treaty with Luxembourg's domestic rules to adjust taxable profits in case of a interest-free loan.

Detailed reference viewed: 434 (9 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailOpinion Statement ECJ-TF 2/2016 on the Decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 13 July 2016 in Brisal and KBC Finance Ireland (Case C-18/15), on the Admissibility of Gross Withholding Tax of Interest
Haslehner, Werner UL; García Prats, Alfredo; Heydt, Volker et al

in European Taxation (2017)

The CFE welcomes the clarification made by the Court regarding the operation of withholding tax on interest paid to non-residents. It is now unambiguous that, despite authorizing the application of such a ... [more ▼]

The CFE welcomes the clarification made by the Court regarding the operation of withholding tax on interest paid to non-residents. It is now unambiguous that, despite authorizing the application of such a method (if justified and proportional), the Court considers that resident and non-resident service providers are comparable and that a deduction for expenses granted to residents should be made available to non-residents. The CFE stresses that Member States wishing to keep (or to introduce) withholding tax systems need to take into account not only the substantive tax result of allowing a deduction but also need to ensure that non-residents are not discriminated against with regard to proving the expenses. The CFE also welcomes the fact that the taxpayer is being given the option of whether or not to apply such a system because this allows it to take into account compliance costs in making this decision. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 37 (1 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailLuxembourg: Applying Article 16 to a “Collège des Commissaires”
Haslehner, Werner UL

in Kemmeren, Eric; Smit, Daniel; Essers, Peter (Eds.) et al Tax Treaty Case Law around the Globe 2016 (2017)

This case note examines a decision by the Cour administrative of Luxembourg concerning the qualification of the fees earned by a commissaire of a partnership limited by shares under the Luxembourg-South ... [more ▼]

This case note examines a decision by the Cour administrative of Luxembourg concerning the qualification of the fees earned by a commissaire of a partnership limited by shares under the Luxembourg-South Africa tax treaty. It concludes that, while the result of the judgment is unobjectionable, it failed to explore the boundaries of the meaning of the term "director" in ways that could give clearer indications for other cases. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 93 (6 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailLuxembourg: Exchange of Information and EU Fundamental Rights (C-682/15, Berlioz Investment Fund S.A.)
Haslehner, Werner UL

in Lang, Michael; Pistone, Pasquale; Rust, Alexander (Eds.) et al CJEU – Recent Developments in Direct Taxation 2016 (2017)

The present case concerns the question of whether the right to an effective remedy — as guaranteed in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — means that a Member State must ... [more ▼]

The present case concerns the question of whether the right to an effective remedy — as guaranteed in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — means that a Member State must allow a company to challenge an order requesting information for the purposes of the tax assessment of another party in a court that would have unlimited authority to review the legitimacy of that order, including the “foreseeable relevance” of the original request made by another Member State. The case has the potential to provide a crucial piece in the legal puzzle that surrounds exchange of information in tax matters in the triangle of domestic law, tax treaty law and EU law, with particular emphasis on the protection of taxpayer (and related party) rights. However, due to the actual circumstances of the case, it does not appear likely that the CJEU will address all of the questions asked by Luxembourg’s Cour administrative. In particular, the meaning of “foreseeable relevance” under Directive 2011/16 may be seen as having little relevance for the outcome of the case in light of the broad meaning given to it by Luxembourg’s statute so that the CJEU may leave it unresolved even if it agrees with the domestic court on the application of Article 47 of the Charter. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 190 (13 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detail"LuxLeaks IV": Das Belgische Excess Profit Exemption Regime als steuerliche Beihilfe
Haslehner, Werner UL; Schwarz, Paloma

in Jaeger, Thomas; Haslinger, Birgit (Eds.) Beihilferecht Jahrbuch 2017 (2017)

The case under consideration in this contribution concerns the Belgian Excess Profit Exemption Regime, ruled to be illegal state aid by the Commission in 2016. Two questions arise from the case: First ... [more ▼]

The case under consideration in this contribution concerns the Belgian Excess Profit Exemption Regime, ruled to be illegal state aid by the Commission in 2016. Two questions arise from the case: First, what relevance the arm's length principle has under EU state aid law; second, whether the existence of "double non-taxation" (or so-called "white income") has any implications for a finding of state aid. The Commission takes the position that the arm's length principle is a necessary element of any Member State's corporate tax system as a consequence of the general equality principle underlying Article 107 TFEU. On the second question, the Commission's analysis is somewhat less unambiguous, but seems to clearly assign some relevance to the existence of double non-taxation. Both positions are reviewed critically in this contribution. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 129 (6 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailLohnsteuervollzug im Europäischen Rechtsvergleich
Haslehner, Werner UL

in Drüen, Klaus-Dieter (Ed.) Besteuerung von Arbeitnehmern (2017)

The form and method of taxation of employees follows a distincitve pattern with many similarities across Europe. However, a number of significant differences and exceptions remain. This contribution uses ... [more ▼]

The form and method of taxation of employees follows a distincitve pattern with many similarities across Europe. However, a number of significant differences and exceptions remain. This contribution uses a functional comparative law perspective to highlight and analyse some of those differences and how they relate to the main objectives of the strucure of employee taxation: individualisation, synchronisation, complexity, and security. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 67 (2 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailArtikel 24. Gleichbehandlung
Haslehner, Werner UL

in Aigner, Dietmar; Kofler, Georg; Tumpel, Michael (Eds.) DBA – Doppelbesteuerungsabkommen Kommentar (2016)

This contribution consists of a comprehensive commentary on the non-discrimination rule enshrined in the OECD Model Tax Convention, with a particular view on its implementation in Austrian tax treaties ... [more ▼]

This contribution consists of a comprehensive commentary on the non-discrimination rule enshrined in the OECD Model Tax Convention, with a particular view on its implementation in Austrian tax treaties and its effects in Austrian tax law. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 105 (2 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailNationality Non-Discrimination and Article 24 OECD - Perennial Issues, Recent Trends and New Approaches
Haslehner, Werner UL

in Pistone, Pasquale; Weber, Dennis (Eds.) Non-Discrimination in Tax Treaties: SElected Issues from a Global Perspective (2016)

Article 24 OECD Model Tax Convention consists of four separate clauses with different wording, structure and apparent purpose, each concerned with preventing a particular form of discrimination. This ... [more ▼]

Article 24 OECD Model Tax Convention consists of four separate clauses with different wording, structure and apparent purpose, each concerned with preventing a particular form of discrimination. This contribution attempts to shed some light at principles that underlie and inform the interpretation of article 24 in its entirety and to comment on the clarifications made in this respect by the OECD. It then explores the scope of application of the nationality non-discrimination provision, with a particular focus on two questions: Whether companies can rely on the nationality non-discrimination provision and how article 24(1) interacts with other non-discrimination norms, both in tax treaties and in other legal sources. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 208 (4 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailDouble Taxation Relief, Transfer Pricing Adjustments and State Aid Law
Haslehner, Werner UL

in Richelle, Isabelle; Schön, Wolfgang; Traversa, Edoardo (Eds.) State Aid Law and Business Taxation (2016)

This contribution explores the influence of state aid law on tax measures for the provision of relief from double taxation and the consequences of its application to transfer pricing adjustments. In ... [more ▼]

This contribution explores the influence of state aid law on tax measures for the provision of relief from double taxation and the consequences of its application to transfer pricing adjustments. In particular, it analyses the compatibility of measures that prevent merely virtual double taxation and transfer pricing adjustments that might result in “white income”. It also reviews the merits of the Commission’s claim that Member States have to apply the arm’s length standard to transfer pricing adjustments as a matter of State aid law. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 207 (17 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailOpinion Statement ECJ-TF 1/2016 on the Decision of the European Court of Justice in Joined Cases Miljoen (Case C-10/14), X (Case C-14/14) and Société Générale (Case C-17/14) on the Netherlands Dividend Withholding Tax
Haslehner, Werner UL; García Prats, Alfredo; Heydt, Volker et al

in European Taxation (2016)

The Confédération Fiscale Européenne welcomes the ECJ’s decision in the case, which strongly affirms the right of non-resident taxpayers not to be taxed at a higher overall level than resident ... [more ▼]

The Confédération Fiscale Européenne welcomes the ECJ’s decision in the case, which strongly affirms the right of non-resident taxpayers not to be taxed at a higher overall level than resident taxpayers, even where the systems of taxation differ between both types of taxpayers in other respects. This will lead to significant improvement of the situation for cross-border portfolio investors, who continue to suffer from withholding taxes imposed by several Member States. The Confédération Fiscale Européenne further welcomes the various clarifications in this respect, particularly concerning the meaning of the Truck Center decision, the definition of personal allowances within the scope of the Schumacker decision and its case law on the possible neu- tralization of disadvantages by way of bilateral tax treaties. The Confédération Fiscale Européenne notes that, despite these clarifications, uncertainty continues to persist with regard to the significance of a credit carry-forward granted by a residence state for a possible neutralization of disadvantages, which the ECJ did not directly address, and with respect to the need for reimbursement of withhold- ing taxes where (only) a partial offset in the residence state is available. The Confédération Fiscale Européenne wishes to take the opportunity to urge the Member States and the European Institutions to continue to work on improving procedures with regard to relief from withholding taxation in the source state under tax treaties and EU law. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 31 (0 UL)
Full Text
See detail'Avoir Fiscal' and Its Legacy in Thirty Years of Direct Tax Jurisprudence of the Court of Justice
Haslehner, Werner UL

in Intertax, International Tax Review (2016), 44(5), 374-391

On occasion of the thirty-year anniversary of the Court of Justice of the European Unions (CJEU’s) landmark judgment Commission v. France, 270/83 (‘Avoir Fiscal’), this article reviews the decision of the ... [more ▼]

On occasion of the thirty-year anniversary of the Court of Justice of the European Unions (CJEU’s) landmark judgment Commission v. France, 270/83 (‘Avoir Fiscal’), this article reviews the decision of the Court and its lasting impact on EU tax law. It finds that most of the principles developed in that case remain relevant in current doctrine. At the same time, several questions that were left open in 1986 are still unresolved today. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 186 (5 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailOpinion Statement ECJ-TF 4/2015 on the Decision of the European Court of Justice in Groupe Steria SCA (Case C-386/14) on the French Intégration Fiscale
Haslehner, Werner UL; García Prats, Alfredo; Gutmann, Daniel et al

in European Taxation (2016)

The Confédération Fiscale Européenne welcomes the Court’s clarification that cross-border company structures may not automatically be excluded from all the benefits of group taxation regimes but that ... [more ▼]

The Confédération Fiscale Européenne welcomes the Court’s clarification that cross-border company structures may not automatically be excluded from all the benefits of group taxation regimes but that rather, in general, a case-by-case assessment has to be made. This resolves concerns arising from the X Holding case, which, it is now clear, only addresses cross-border loss relief and perhaps tax-neutral intra-group transactions. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 32 (0 UL)
Full Text
See detailVerrechnungspreiskorrekturen bei Verbundenen Unternehmen: Art. 9 und 12(6) – Die Deutsche Perspektive
Haslehner, Werner UL

in Ates, Leyla; Englisch, Joachim (Eds.) Auslegung, Anwendungspraxis und zukünftige Entwicklung des deutsch-türkischen Doppelbesteuerungsabkommens (2016)

Detailed reference viewed: 74 (2 UL)
Full Text
See detailLuxembourg: Tax Credit Denied to Residents with Exclusively Foreign Income (C-300/15, Kohll and Kohll-Schlesser)
Haslehner, Werner UL

in Lang, Michael; Pistone, Pasquale; Rust, Alexander (Eds.) et al CJEU – Recent Developments in Direct Taxation 2015 (2016)

Luxembourg’s tax credit for pensioners is not grandet to pensioners receiving exclusively foreign pension income. This creates a disadvantage liable to impede the exercise of the free movement of workers ... [more ▼]

Luxembourg’s tax credit for pensioners is not grandet to pensioners receiving exclusively foreign pension income. This creates a disadvantage liable to impede the exercise of the free movement of workers to the extent that it makes it less desirable for a citizen of Luxembourg to move to another Member State to take up work if she intends to return to Luxembourg after retirement. This contribution argues that there is no justification for that disadvantage, rendering Luxembourg's law incompatible with EU law. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 122 (4 UL)
Full Text
See detailThe Effect of a Tax Treaty Tie-breaker for Dual Residents
Haslehner, Werner UL

in Lang, Michael; Owens, Jeffrey; Pistone, Pasquale (Eds.) et al Tax Treaty Case Law around the Globe 2015 (2016)

Case 33872C, which was decided by Luxembourg’s Cour administrative on 18 December 2014, concerned two questions of tax treaty law: first, whether the taxpayer in question was a resident of Luxembourg or ... [more ▼]

Case 33872C, which was decided by Luxembourg’s Cour administrative on 18 December 2014, concerned two questions of tax treaty law: first, whether the taxpayer in question was a resident of Luxembourg or Germany during the tax period concerned in accordance with the tie-breaker rule of the applicable double taxation convention (DTC); and second, what was the effect of that qualification for the application of domestic tax law provisions in Luxembourg that do not affect Germany’s taxing right as guaranteed in the DTC. Does the tie-breaker rule in Article 4(1) of the OECD Model determine how a dual-resident taxpayer is to be treated under domestic law or does it merely serve to allocate the role of residence country and source country, respectively? The court answered this question in the negative, holding that the taxpayer was a resident of Germany under the tax treaty tie-breaker rule, but that the tax treaty did not prevent Luxembourg from treating him (a non-resident under the terms of the tax treaty) as a resident to the extent that doing so did not violate Germany’s primary taxing right, which resulted in (progressive) joint taxation with his spouse in Luxembourg. The court's reasoning is sound based on general principles of the relationship between domestic law and tax treaties, but did not address more intricate arguments that arise from the concrete wording of the treaty. This contribution explores these in addition to analysing the court's decision. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 352 (9 UL)
Full Text
See detailLandmark Decisions of the ECJ in Direct Taxation
Haslehner, Werner UL; Kofler, Georg; Rust, Alexander

Book published by Kluwer Law International (2015)

This book is the result of a conference held at the University of Luxembourg on 23 January 2014, which aimed to analyse the Court of Justice’s most important decisions on direct taxation and their ... [more ▼]

This book is the result of a conference held at the University of Luxembourg on 23 January 2014, which aimed to analyse the Court of Justice’s most important decisions on direct taxation and their transformative impact on direct taxation in the EU over the last three decades. Each chapter in this book is based on the authors’ presentations at the conference, in which they focused on a particular landmark decision of the Court of Justice as a starting point for the development of a specific doctrine and followed its development through decisions in later years, critically assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the Luxembourg Court’s reasoning and its path through the complex field of cross-border income taxation. Due to the nature of this project, the individual chapters’ topics, such as the Schumacker doctrine, the Marks & Spencer exception, or the impact of Cadbury Schweppes, will seem familiar to readers who are well versed in EU tax law. Yet, the depth of the analysis of each landmark case, which is explored from its historic roots and original reasoning, allows the reader to gain an unparalleled understanding of the development and minute changes in the relevant subsequent jurisprudence as the authors chart a way through the nuances of the Court’s arguments. Necessarily a snapshot of the current state of the law, it allows this book to remain relevant as the jurisprudence develops further over the years to come. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 320 (23 UL)
Full Text
See detailThe Taxation of Permanent Establishments in the EU – Avoir Fiscal and Its Legacy
Haslehner, Werner UL

in Haslehner, Werner; Kofler, Georg; Rust, Alexander (Eds.) Landmark Decisions of the ECJ in Direct Taxation (2015)

This contribution analyses the evolution of the case law of the European Court of Justice concerning the taxation of permanent establishments, from its very beginning with the famous "Avoir Fiscal ... [more ▼]

This contribution analyses the evolution of the case law of the European Court of Justice concerning the taxation of permanent establishments, from its very beginning with the famous "Avoir Fiscal" judgement of 1986. Taking that decision as a starting point, it traces its influence on the Court's direct tax jurisprudence over the subsequent three decades. It shows that, while most principles established by the Court back then are still alive in current doctrine, several elements of its reasoning have still not been resolved in a satisfactory manner, despite the explosion of cases on similar issues over the years. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 116 (1 UL)