The verdict later became known as the lease decision of the BFH, and has made it clear that the tax assessment is crucial for leases, and not the selected civil contract form of the leasing parties. Because of the connection to the tax law in economic matters, only the economic approach should be applied. Since the commercial accounting principle in general follows the tax allocation principles because of its inverse dependency, German accounting is made in accordance with German leasing decrees. For lease agreements or lease contracts in Germany, there are neither specific commercial nor civil standards.
The HGB shall continue to contain no clear rules for lease accounting. Therefore, in practice, tax regulations issued by the Federal Ministry of Finance as well as relevant law cases are used Civil law treats lease contracts the same as rental agreements as defined in the Civil Code BGB , even when connected to a call option.
Lease contracts are generally subject to the same basic idea. They allow the lessee, for a definite or indefinite period, the use of one or more movable or immovable objects against periodic lease payments. According to the tax law decrees of the Ministry of Finance, there is, therefore a distinction between operating leases and finance leases. The starting point for this classification is the determination of the non-cancelable lease term and the usual life span of the leased property.
If the purchase price or renewed rent is below the true value of the asset and it can be assumed that the lessee will exercise his option, the leasing object is in principle attributable to the lessee. In contracts with a purchase option the financial administration expects that the lessee will exercise his option if the agreed purchase price is lower than the calculated book value after application of the linear depreciation according to the official depreciation table, or is lower than the lowest market value at the time of sale.
Hennessy J. In den Warenkorb. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Switzerland 4. Footnotes 1. Prologue Leasing is more and more understood as a modern form of financing of various assets, both in the commercial and the private sector. Aus diesem Grund habe eine Zusammenarbeit mit ihm. Das trifft es. Ich liebe es, im Studio zu sein und mit ner Bassline.
Es ist viel mehr als das. Ich glaube, ziert. Einer erscheint auf meinem Album, der zwei- talentierten Musikern Platten zu produzieren. Am, Akon, Ludacris etc. Wie noch mehr wird. Das Vo- eine gemeinsame Produktion bitten. So war es jedoch nicht Prozent anders. Ich bin gut befreundet nen. Du musst wissen, dass ich schon seinerzeit diesen Sound machten, war ich bewusst unterworfen, seien es stimmliche Gegebenheiten mein Leben lang jeden Tag Musik mache, eigentlich ganz woanders.
Ich wollte immer anders klingen. Mal kommen die von morgens bis abends. Direkt nach dem Aufste- Nach all den Jahren war es toll, an diesen Punkt Leute zu mir, mal gehe ich auf sie zu. Das war beim hen bis vor dem Zubettgehen. Mitt- immer das Gleiche machen kann, das ist doch total Man mag von David Guettas Musik halten, was man lerweile nehme ich nur das Telefon ab und sage: langweilig. Die anderen Menschen sind kann. Am, Akon, Timbaland oder Usher in jeden Prozess involviert, was ich tue.
Aber na- ben. Wenn zu betrachten. Bei Guetta stattet. Es wurde in den letzten Wochen viel da- glaublich, etwas ganz Besonderes. Zu erkennen, wer nur rascht. Ich bin DJ, und ich liebe es, genau von seinem Ruhm profitieren oder wer einem gar geschickt und danach gefragt. Ich habe die Num- diese Art von Musik zu spielen. Wer Neider und wer Arschkriecher mer schon immer gemocht. Ich nutze sehr selten minimal ist, kann das zwar auch fett klingen und ist? Die Menschen, die Richtung geben. Jeder in der HipHop- sehr interessant. Zeit, mal eine ganzen Community zwei Arten von Menschen.
Die boulevardeske Frage in den Raum zu werfen. Sie gehen aus, nehmen Drogen, drehen durch, die von ihr promoteten Events gebucht hat, als ihn tragen die coolsten Klamotten etc. Aus diesem auf den Markt bringen.
Neben eigenen Hits mehr. Al- gemeinsam an meinem Album zu arbeiten. Als DJ be- viel unterwegs ist. Wir haben Produzenten aufgenommen. Wie sind diese Kooperati- Produzenten animieren sollte. Jammen und Samplen. Manchmal finde ich auch auf diversen Labels. Mei- Ich habe in den Jahren von bis ca. Sie entstehen meist aus www. UK WWW. DE zeichnen zu lassen? Wieso gerade diese Schule? Allerdings nehmen sie es los straighte Dancetracks. Shit happens Gibt es noch andere Styles auf dem Album vertreten. Wie verbringst du deine Freizeit?
Als ich Laufe meiner Karriere durchlaufen habe. Ich bin noch keinen rikanischen Raum unterwegs bist. Wie unter- kompletten Marathon mitgelaufen. Ein kompletter Marathon amerikanischen. Ich was dort ganz normal ist? Die Musik ge- Ja, irgendwie haben die mich dort gefressen. Aber ich bin froh, dass es so ist. Was mir sehr oder beim Laufen auf meinem iPod. Allerdings aufgefallen ist beim Touren durch die Welt ist, dass kann ich nicht behaupten, nur elektronische Mu- die Leute in der Regel immer zum DJ hin tanzen.
Ich finde auch Adele, Hurts oder Was hier nicht so normal ist. Hier ist ein wenig der 30 Seconds to Mars cool. Wenn er nicht gut spielt, ist die Placebo. September auf Kling Klong. Momenten und dem Dancefloor im Club. Alter Ego. Ein Umstand, der ihm nach jahrelanger bin. Ein alter Hase, der mit fri- rends geht hier Roman zu Werke. An die Tracks selbst ist Roman Musikszene trotzt und unbeirrt seinen Weg geht. Es gab eine Art Weiter so! Dort habe meist von seiner Heimat Sao Paulo an. Entgegen dem allseits bekannten ich mit Agoria, einem meiner engsten Freunde, zusammen gespielt.
Ich freue mich sehr auf das, was mich in der Zukunft erwartet. September auf Kompakt. Einfach die Lyrics an. Sie hatten alle eine bestimmte Stim- Rob Birch, der mit Nick Hallam die erfolgreiche zusammen mit anderen spielen und dadurch eine mung. Statt einen perfekten Backing- Andersen vor. Doch der Vogel zusammenzubringen. Etwa die von Fleetwood Mac sehr erfrischend.
Wir wollten wieder er freigelassen wurde, war er dazu wieder in der etwas machen, das Original ist. Selbst wenn sie nicht noch mehr Live-Instrumente verwenden. Auf jedes Konzert ist dadurch ein wenig anders. Wir Songwriter im ganz traditionellen Sinn. Und darum geht es nehmen. Normalerweise haben wir ja immer erst auf der Platte.
Ich kann kaum in Worte fassen, wie viel schreiben. August auf! K7 erschienen. Nach dem Auf die neugewonnene Freiheit beim Musizieren Motto: Lass uns einfach losjammen und schauen, und ihre Notwendigkeit spielt auch der Titel der www. Ein Zustrom und kein Ende. Die Stadt siehe unten. Einer der aktuellen etwas vollkommen Neues. Ich bist bei 50 Weapons gelandet? Aber nun bin auch froh, dass es fertig ist Tracks von mir geschickt. Trends etc. Ich lebe jetzt seit ein paar Monaten hier.
- The Twelve Days of Christmas?
- Raveline 09/ by Stefan Gubatz - Issuu.
- Sinbad Was in Bad / My Rose Of Waikiki medley (Fox Trot).
- The Borough Treasurer (Annotated).
- Lady Sarahs Redemption.
- Cancel Cable: Seriously Free TV/Movies and More!!.
- Practical Tarot’s Quick Start Guide to Learning the Cards (Practical Tarots Quick Start Guides Book 1);
Berlin habe techno und Techo aus Berlin, Detroit oder Chicago es war immer sehr hilfreich, wenn sie mit der Stu- ich ausgesucht, weil es ein total entspannter Platz gezogen, ganz klassisch. Wann und warum bist du gerade nach Berlin gezogen? Wie kam das? Das war ein Prozess, der schrittweise lief. Das Viele Inspirationen waren gar nicht musikalischer war nicht freiwillig und ich bin nicht einfach mor- Natur.
September — der Tag, ab dem der vor unbeschreiblich. Noch viel mehr, wenn es die eigene Musik ist. Dass es so lange gedauert hat, liegt mute und Tom Novy geremixt werden. Peters- zum letzten Beat dahinter stehen wollte. Doch solange lich auch vorbei. Es wird mehr und mehr internationaler.
Und meiner Meinung nach kann man das Album auch zuhause in den Player www. Liegt der Grund kustik moderner Studioeffekte. Ende der Neunziger er- kennen. Neelix hatte zu Tage verschoben werden. Die Tat- men sollte. Wie dem auch sei: www. In der Anfangssequenz dieses gar das T-Shirt vom Leibe riss.
Trance Zitate. Ich sitze im Studio und bastle einfach drauf funktionieren wir wunderbar miteinander. Wir ha- auf Mantra Vibes vor ziemlich genau elf Jah- los. Und das ist in der Tat der schwierigste Part ben kurioserweise immer die selben Ansichten und ren. Ich folge immer meinem Instinkt und Visionen. Mysteries of life. So ist stets eine Kopf. Ich stelle mir die wirrsten Dinge vor, und da- Rotation gegeben. Gemeinsam launchten sie im Jahre das der Albumtitel entstanden ist. Da ist das genau so.
Ich war eine Zeitlang ziemlich eine Schublade zu stecken. Hauptattraktionen Ibizas. Zu Tausen- haben schon so manche tolle Party zelebriert. Sie alle treffen sich im Space wieder getrennt voneinander befragt, und im Grunde ich mit dieser Compilation wiedergeben. Aber ich denke, es gibt Milli- Ibiza. Es ist einfach ein onen Clubber auf der ganzen Welt, die das Gleiche wundervoller Ort.
In sik wichtig, einmal hier gewesen zu sein. Auf zu bieten hat. Dazu die lange Musikgeschichte, die diesem Club geht es wirklich ums Tanzen, und ich Ibiza, im Space Es ist eine ganz ande- siehst, ist es ein verdammt winziges Fleckchen falls sehr wichtig. Es gibt nur wenige Festivals, auf re Erfahrung als das Amnesia. Die Betreiber sehe Erde. Und das sagt eigentlich schon alles. Und sie machen einen super Job. Besonders faszinierte ihn der da- fentlichte ich meine erste Platte.
Das lief sehr gut. Es machte mich malige Dance Sound. Nur einen Ro- len Remix-Anfragen. Das war ein komplett neuer und Ideen und Demos aufzunehmen. Es war lustig, Pete Tong von House bis Rap. Ein weiterer Grund war, dass ich men: Marco Lys. Und das funktionierte. Mit dem musste. Der Werdegang war viele Leute mich wiedererkannten. Und di- Fitch war dann sehr lustig. Chris und ich spielten auch etwas anderes. Eine Vorstellung von etwas, ese mochten sie dann sehr! Chris Lake war einer vor zwei Jahren in Leeds und stellten fest, dass das cool, groovy und intim ist. Mit Chris Lake seiner Partner.
Sie muss eine gute duktion bringen, an die man alleine nie gedacht musikalische Vision zu erweitern. Chris Lake traf ich vor vier Jahren ich um Beispiel gerne mal zusammenarbeiten. Mein bevorzugter Style Digital Enemy gemacht habe. Er spielte ihn oft. Eric B. Ich traf ihn letztes 4. Moby — Go Pad herauskam, habe ich es viele Male Jahr auf Facebook und konnte es kaum glauben, 5.
- BE THE FIRST TO KNOW.
- Enamorado de Cenicienta (Jazmín) (Spanish Edition).
- In sich selbst gefangen - Demenz: Psychische Situation und Kommunikationstipps (German Edition).
- Reward Yourself.
- Recipes from Mamas Kitchen;
Jaydee — Plastic Dreams gespielt. Ich liebe es! Im letzten Jahr produzierte als er mich bat, einen Remix zum Track zu ma- 6. Mir kam dann die Idee, Produzenten zu treffen. Alex Kenji und ich chat- ein Bootleg zu machen, und ich suchte einen teten dort erst miteinander, ein paar Monate 8. Sein Studio 9. Du nennst Nach dem Erfolg des ersten Releases haben wir eine Party ziellen? Worauf hast du bei der Zusammenstellung der Tracks besonderen Wert Worauf hast du bei der Zusammenstellung der Tracks besonderen Wert gelegt?
Musik, die man riechen kann. Jedes hat seine eigene Struktur, seinen eigenen es hat sich gelohnt. Der wirk- Wie nah kommt dieser Mix an ein aktuelles Lazarus-Set heran, bzw. Es ist eine zusammengefasste Version der Musik, die ich auf Partys spiele. Am Ende sind es weniger Floorfiller, sondern mehr warum? Ich setze sie vereinzelt auch in meinen Sets ein, versuche es aber zu Mitch Crown produziert habe. Ich wollte gerne etwas machen, das deeper vermeiden, einfach das Mix-Album dort live zu spielen. Diese Nummer geht in meinen Sets stets ab wie eine Rakete.
September auf Crosstown Rebels www. In den letzten Monate durfte ich zwei Top 10 gelegt? Album der Fall ist. Wie nah kommt dieser Mix an ein aktuelles Phonique-Set heran, bzw. Im die Unterschiede? Wegen den Vielzahl an Auftritten in warum? Zum anderen Vincen- warum? September bei Dessous soundcloud. Keine Brett der Extraklasse. Es war - glaube Homework ich - eine Stammheim Nacht. One, Two, Zero? Austragungsort Wann: Samstag, 1. Amnesys, wieder auf drei Floors abspielen. Die Syndicate bietet in diesem Jahr durch Catscan vs. Predator, DJ D vs. Neben dem bombastischen LineUp flashen den Besucher traditionell Verkehrsmitteln 2.
Klasse im VRR-Raum. Bei ihren gemeinsamen Sets sich einfach hinsetzen kann und schaut, was passiert. Auf dem Event das Endergebnis aber gut sein. In diesem Jahr sind sie wieder in Dortmund am Start und erst unsere Ideen zu Melodie und Lyrics auf und gingen den Weg von dort haben auch gleich die Hymne zur Feier produziert. Un- Kunstwerk werden soll. Wir beide Welche Erinnerungen verbindet ihr mit der Veranstaltung? Es ist schwer, immer am Erfolg in Deutschland. Auf der anderen Seite sind geht es bei dieser? Einfach, weil so viele Menschen setzen. Mode im September Hallo Herbst Redaktion: Nicole Ankelmann fashion.
Zu Kaufen u. Nun legt Darth Vader auch noch auf. Mit den Wildlederboots mit Keilabsatz Tristesse. Die einen lieben Chicago. Von hier stammt auch DJ Diamond. Nun wie wir sie hier kennen, stattfinden muss. Prompt schickte der hatte leider nicht den kommerziellen Erfolg, beweist er mit seinem neuen Album, dass Sol Cavalier 40 weitere Tracks. Dieses erscheint nun. Sound bestimmt. Da ist alles dabei, was das Herz Tragen. Bis jetzt. Mit der Kampagne um Groove. Ein exzellentes Werk. Der Herr von einst. Sicherlich hat tischen Studio-Album des Frankfurters ein, det. Der CD2 meine Punkte.
Da Rod, Dan und Dr. Und dies merkt man seinem Sound Science St. Daneben gibt es auch noch sierten die Berliner Jungs. Die einen liebten nichts dem Zufall. Allein schwingende denen man hier im Mix lauschen kann. Durchgeknallte Mal eindeutig beweist, dass Russland den Ton an. We do it all day, welcome to St. Kopfkino mit Kunstcharakter. Auf einmal konn- Palais Schaumburg bekam diese Platte viele te er seine Finger nicht mehr bewegen, er Fans.
Aber, seine Wunden heilten - Grundmauern ein und bauen aus dem Material unerwartet. Unter den elf Tracks Wolfgang Voigt, ist ein einziger Favorit nicht wirklich auszumachen. Es ist das alte Problem, wenn der Zombie Nation arbeitete. Schillernd, brillant, Kopf. Insgesamt bleiben Understatement. Was will man mehr? Da aber Gesicht. Zwischen weniger song-orientiert den Krautrock 2. Die Lieder sind sparsam und die alte Melancholie nie ganz abstreifen Wagram Freestyle Recordings sind wirkungsvoll instrumentiert und schaffen konnte. Ihnen ist mit ihrem Roger Shah-Fan war.
Wie gesagt, bisher. Insgsamt klin- man The Rapture wohl Torsten Kanzler Records, spannt.
Seine Electronica, wie sie jeder Haushalt gebrauchen treibend. Im Vergleich zu ihrer guten, aber sehr treibend ist und sich an den Vocals des Soundtracks von Bladerunner entstammen. Produzent ihre zarte, zerbrechliche Seite — klar, struktu- die uns Torsten hier serviert und definitiv am Sol zweiten Album namens riert und doch so fesselnd. Seine ruhige, oft stotternden LA-Beats. Immer im Fluss dominiert. Booom, klappert, aber eben fantastisch warm und State Kalifornien erzeugt Tridact auf sei- pen Dubstep.
Er griff unter anderem auf Easy Listening-Tracks zu einem Sound, der endete. Vorausgesetzt, man nennt noch ern. Den Glitterbug feat. Das ver- er die beiden CDs wieder in zwei Bereiche auf. Deep-House bis minimalen Techno. Fein ineinander den Bereichen kommerzieller Dance-Musik ist. Zwischen schwerelosen Drones, eigenwil- und Peggy Lee trifft. Sehr groovy. Auf den ersten beiden ligen Rhythmusexperimenten, eindringlicher und relaxte Track auf der zweiten CD. Und So lasse ich mir das gefallen. Etwas schade nochmals bewusst wie viele derzeit ange- finde ich die Tatsache, dass z.
Gorge mit sagte Acts in der Stadt an der Elbe leben. Hamburg brennt. Auch viel Freude. Recapture provisions prevent deducting the same loss in both countries. The remaining ten member states do not grant any immediate loss relief. Foreign losses, therefore, do only result in a tax saving if they can be deducted from future foreign profits. Therefore, in loss situations, foreign direct investments through permanent establishments are discriminated against domestic investments. Among these ten member states, only Denmark and France apply a strict territorial principle excluding all profits and losses from foreign permanent establishments from domestic taxation.
This might justify the denial of the relief for losses from foreign permanent establishments. Since a corporation is an own legal entity, as a consequence of the deferral principle corporate losses are not transferred to the shareholder. Therefore, a transfer of corporate losses to the shareholder can only be based on special regimes for group taxation. In all of these countries, qualifying group members are required to be aligned via ownership, which is a legal criteria. Parent companies must hold at least more than one half of the shares in the subsidiaries; in certain cases, direct and indirect participation might be added.
Most of these member states require holding quotas of more than 90 per cent. Among the group taxation regimes, there are many differences between systems and consequences in detail. With respect to the technique of combining the individual results of group members one can distinguish between a pure loss compensation which can be based on a pooling mechanism, a loss transfer or on subvention payments, and a deferred taxation of intra-group transfers based on consolidation or simpler techniques.
As the results in Figure 9 display, pure loss compensation is the prevailing instrument. A deferred taxation of intra-group transfers is only applied by seven member states. International group taxation within the EU is still in its infancy. Figure 9 shows that in most countries, the regime stops at the border. Non-resident subsidiaries can be part of a tax group only in Austria, Denmark, France and Italy. Among these four member states, only France provides a deferred taxation of intra-group transfers in addition to loss compensation. Therefore, international groups are discriminated against domestic groups in the vast majority of member states applying special group taxation regimes.
Regarding the extent of integration of the corporation 14 Christoph Spengel tax into the personal income tax of the shareholder, the classic system, double taxation reducing systems and double taxation avoiding systems can be distinguished Figure This corporation tax system results in an unrelieved double taxation of dividends.
Profits are first taxed by the corporation and then, on distribution, by the shareholder. In contrast, double taxation avoiding systems ensure that distributed profits are only taxed once. In Malta and Romania, double taxation is avoided by applying a full imputation system. The ultimate tax burden thus depends on the personal income tax of the shareholder only. Greece, Latvia and Slovakia eliminate double taxation through a system of dividend exemption for shareholders.
Thus, the tax burden of distributed profits is only determined by the corporation tax. Estonia has her own, unique system of taxing profits only once — on the corporation at the time of distribution. This clearly places a burden on the distribution of the profits as opposed to profit retention. Shareholders enjoy exemption of dividends personal income tax, as is the case in Greece, Latvia and Slovakia.
The vast majority of member states, however, grant only partial relief from double taxation of distributed profits. All of these countries provide a preferential treatment for dividend income at the shareholder level, either by a reduced tax base or a reduced rate on dividends shareholder relief. Therefore, a harmonisation of the corporation tax system and the tax rate would have an immediate impact on the personal income tax.
In the vast majority of the member states, this integration, however, does not cover the total amount of corporation tax underlying distributed profits. Therefore, part of the corporation tax always becomes a definite burden which causes distortions with respect to domestic investments. In particular, equity financing is discriminated against debt financing and corporate businesses are in the event of profit distributions discriminated against incorporated businesses sole proprietors, partnerships. The most important additional taxes are real estate tax, property tax and local business taxes Figure The tax base covers land and buildings.
The taxable value is derived from either market prices, lower standard tax values or the area of land square meters. Hence, the taxable value may be completely different in different countries even though the tax base covers the same items. Although the amount of real estate tax varies from country to country, real estate tax has no significant impact on the effective tax burden of companies, since the tax base is limited to only a few numbers of assets and tax rates are rather low.
See European Tax Handbook, Amsterdam , and own investigations. Property tax, however, can be credited against corporation tax. As a result, profitable corporations in Luxembourg do not suffer from property tax. Additional local business taxes are only levied in a few member states. They can be levied on a profit basis Hungary, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg ; on a capital basis independent of the profits France, Spain ; or on a wage-oriented basis Austria, France. The bases for these local business taxes vary from country to country but are defined uniformly within one country.
As far as non-profit taxes are concerned, they do usually not include intangibles, financial assets or stocks. Moreover, in most cases it is obvious that liabilities connected with the financing of the assets are not deductible from the tax base. The tax rates are different and vary from country to country as well. Moreover, the tax rates differ within a country, as local authorities or municipalities are entitled to set the tax rates. In summary, the survey of the local taxes levied by the member states reveals that local taxes in general are of minor importance compared to the corporation tax.
Above all, therefore, local taxes are not an issue when harmonising business taxation in the EU. In contrast, past experience proves that member states were willing to reform their local taxes on an individual basis e. Austria abolished the trade tax on capital and on income; Germany abolished the trade tax on capital and the property tax; Luxembourg abolished the trade tax on capital; the Netherlands abolished the property tax. However, a harmonisation of the corporation tax as proposed by the European Commission would be linked indirectly with local taxes. First, most of the local taxes are deductible from the base of the corporation tax as business expenses.
Second, local business taxes on profits in some member states take as a starting point for the determination of the tax base the base of the corporation tax which is modified afterwards to certain degrees e. Moreover, the most important elements of the tax systems that determine effective company tax burdens i.
The calculation of effective tax burdens is based on the commonly accepted approach of King and Fullerton,17 which has been extended by Devereux and Griffith. Concept and Necessity of a Common Tax Base — an academic introduction apply this methodology. The model firm considered here Figure 12 takes into account five different types of investment intangibles, buildings, machinery, financial assets and inventories and three different sources of finance retained earnings, new equity capital and debt.
Investments are carried out in a subsidiary that is located in one of the member states. The sources of finance of the subsidiary are provided by a parent company that is also located in one of the member states. There is a complete repatriation of the profits of the subsidiary to the parent.
In the case of new equity financing, we assume a full distribution of profits as dividends in the same period. In the case of financing with retained earnings, we assume that profits will be distributed in subsequent periods. In the case of debt financing, we assume that the subsidiary pays interest to the parent at a fixed rate and distributes the remaining profits i. In each case, the parent needs to raise funds itself, and this is done by its own shareholders which are supposed to be natural persons. Shareholder taxation, however, is not taken into account here because personal taxation is in most cases not relevant for investment, financing and location decisions of multinationals.
Figure 13 illustrates overall average EATR for the five types of investment and the three sources of finance. The results reveal that, on average, company taxation in the member states is not neutral towards investment and financing decisions. By contrast, non-depreciable assets i. The preferential depreciation for tax purposes, therefore, leads to modest EATR for depreciable assets. Since real estate tax imposes an extra tax load on industrial buildings, the EATR for intangibles and machinery is on average approximately the same and the lowest among the five assets considered here.
Additional economic data incorporated into the model are an inflation rate set at 2 per cent, a pre tax interest rate of 7. The pre-tax financial return of the investment is set at 20 per cent. Concept and Necessity of a Common Tax Base — an academic introduction 19 From the perspective of a corporation, debt financing is always more tax efficient compared to equity-financed investments since nominal interest payments are deductible from taxable income.
In contrast to debt financing, financing through retained earnings and new equity is disadvantageous because no deduction from the taxable income is allowed for the corresponding dividend payments. Here, taxation can be deferred by profit retention at the corporate level since retained earnings are exempt from taxation see above, 2.
Therefore, on average, retained earnings are bearing a lower EATR compared to new equity. The preferential treatment of debt financing at the level of the subsidiary does not mean, however, that debt financing is more tax efficient than equity financing. Since interest received by a subsidiary is always taxable at the level of the parent company and double taxation of dividends in the case of equity financing is avoided as a rule, a multinational investor always has to compare the aggregate tax burden on interest payments and repatriated profits.
This is examined below see 2. The overall spread is The average EATR in the member states is The elements that determine the effective tax burdens cannot be explained by one single feature of the tax regime i. However, the statutory nominal tax rate on corporate profits plays an important role in determining the EATR.
The ranking of the countries based on the nominal tax rates on corporate profits is a good indicator of the ranking with respect to the EATR. Here, there would be few changes in the country ranking Figure This is because the 20 Christoph Spengel calculations of effective company tax burdens concentrate on profitable investments and only few member states levy substantial non-profit taxes.
The spread between the EATR and the nominal tax rate on corporate profits is not more than 4 percentage points except in Estonia and Italy. In order to assess the impact of taxation on location and cross-border investment and financing decisions, the EATR on cross-border investment are compared with the EATR on domestic investment presented in the chapter above see 2.
As well as taking account of the domestic tax system, it therefore also incorporates taxes charged on the payment of dividends and interest between the subsidiary and the parent, and any further taxes levied by the country of the parent company. The average EATR amounts to In both countries, the interaction of low nominal tax rates on corporate profits and a considerable real estate tax results in higher EATR compared to the nominal tax rate. This is an unweighted average taken across the 26 potential source countries for each home country.
The third bar is equivalent, but presents the average EATR for inbound investment i. For both outbound and inbound investment presented in the second and the third bar, each source of finance of the subsidiary provided by the parent company is given an equal weight. The comparison between EATR for domestic investment and for average cross-border outbound and inbound investment indicates that, on average, cross-border investment are more heavily taxed than domestic investment and, thus, discriminated against domestic investment.
tammo hoffhenke: 2 Books available | otipiciramym.tk
Moreover, the results indicate that the EU tax regimes neither support the residence nor the source principle. The perspective so far is based on EATR averaged over the three possible sources of finance of the subsidiary i. Multinational investors, however, can choose the source of finance of the subsidiary; if one particular source of finance is tax disadvantaged, then it would not be used.
Therefore, rather than take an average of the sources of finance, the results presented in the fourth and the fifth bar simply take the most tax efficient means of financing the subsidiary. That is, the form of finance which generates the lowest EATR was chosen. On average, member states now have lower EATR on both outbound and inbound investment than for domestic investment. This suggests that if companies do indeed choose the most tax-favoured source of finance and thus taking advantage of the considerable variation of effective company tax burdens among member states, then — other thing being equal — the international tax system works such that foreign multinationals operating in a source country are likely to face a lower EATR than domestic companies.
Therefore, one cannot conclude that cross-border investment is discriminated against domestic investment. Again, however, this is also inconsistent with both the residence and the source principle. The average results presented in Figure 15 hide considerable variations between different home and source countries with respect to advantages or discriminations of cross-border investment compared to domestic investment. Therefore, Figure 16 presents results for outbound and inbound investment from the perspective of a low tax country and a high tax country respectively.
Among member states, Cyprus is considered as a low tax country and Spain is considered as a high tax country. The opposite i. See above Figure 14, 2. Subsidiaries outbound investment and parent companies inbound investment are located in the remaining 26 member states. Irrespective of the source of finance of a foreign subsidiary, outbound investments are bearing a higher EATR compared with domestic investment.
However, outbound investment should be financed preferentially with debt capital because then foreign profits shifted via interest payment are subject to the lower domestic tax burden. Equivalently, inbound investments to low tax countries are suffering a low EATR. In order to benefit from the lower local taxes, the parent company should finance subsidiaries rather with equity than with debt capital. The perspective of high tax countries here: Spain is the opposite. Parent companies located therein have incentives to invest abroad from a tax point of view.
Irrespective of the source of finance of a foreign subsidiary, outbound investments are bearing a lower EATR compared with domestic investments. However, outbound investment should be financed preferentially with equity capital and profits should be retained at the level of the foreign subsidiary because then foreign profits are subject to the lower foreign tax burden only.
Equivalently, inbound investments to high tax countries are suffering a lower EATR than local investments. In order to benefit from the lower taxes in the home country, the parent company should finance subsidiaries rather with debt than with equity capital. As a result, multinational investors have an incentive to shift their mobile tax bases from international investments to low tax countries increasing the tax revenues of these countries in favour of the tax revenues of high tax countries. High tax countries, therefore, are seeking for measures restricting international profit shifting to protect their tax revenues.
One of the major reasons for this unbalanced distribution A. Concept and Necessity of a Common Tax Base — an academic introduction 23 of taxable profits of multinational investors to different locations for investment can be seen in the coexistence of the residence and the source principle when taxing foreign income.
This principle is also inherent to the EC Treaty. According to Articles 2 and 98 EC Treaty, the promotion of an efficient allocation of resources is a fundamental economic goal of the Common Market. Efficiency takes a macro-economic perspective and demands for a pareto-optimal allocation of resources which should not be changed by the presence of taxation.
In this sense neutral taxation does not interfere with the decision-making of businesses. It has been shown elsewhere that a neutral system of company taxation i. With regard to the wide range of effective tax burdens, company taxation affects decisions of investors with respect to the location of an investment, the type of investment and its source of finance see above, 2. Thus, an efficient allocation of resources cannot be achieved; the competitiveness of EU-based companies is restricted, and the Community as a whole suffers welfare losses.
See Homburg, Allgemeine Steuerlehre, 5th Ed. First, the need to comply with different rules concerning the tax rates, the tax bases, the corporation tax systems, the local taxes and the taxation of foreign income see above, 2. According to a recent survey of the Commission, compliance costs amount to 1. Since separate taxation in each member state and the coexistence of the residence and the source principle for taxing foreign income prevail, double taxation may occur as a result of conflicting taxing rights.
Table of contents
Many member states, therefore, have introduced measures to prevent the transfer of profits abroad and to protect national tax revenue from burgeoning tax planning. These measures include, for instance, restrictions on cross-border loss compensation. In addition, in the area of company finance, measures comprise thin capitalisation rules, CFC-legislation, and limitations for the allocation of expenses and the deductibility of headquarter costs.
Moreover, reorganisations cause considerable exit taxes preventing companies from the relocation of business units and their head offices to other member states. Therefore, European businesses are not at all in a position to take full advantage of the economic benefits of the Single Market. Finally, there are intensified controls, corrections and documentation requirements relating to intragroup transfer prices, but only to the extent that the contracting unit is a foreign subsidiary or a permanent establishment. Substantial elements of these tax provisions contravene the ban on discrimination and may violate the fundamental freedoms laid down in the EC Treaty, in particular the freedom of establishment Article 43 EC Treaty and the free movement of capital Article 56 EC Treaty.
Concept and Necessity of a Common Tax Base — an academic introduction 25 has overturned defensive tax measures aimed at protecting high-tax member states from profits being transferred to low-tax countries by means of external financing. Also, the change in the ownership of a corporation may not give rise to an immediate taxation of capital gains, even if the member state where the corporation is resident loses its right to tax such capital gains X and Y ECJ case law is making it increasingly difficult for member states to place restrictions on international tax planning.
The only choice left to member states is either to extend to domestic cases a restrictive regulation that is actually aimed at international cases, or to abolish restrictions for international cases if they do not also apply to domestic cases. Both options are bearing a conflict of objectives. In the first case, additional burdens are placed on domestic companies for which there is otherwise no justification.
Moreover, this destroys the coherence of domestic company taxation at the same time. In the second case, more scope is given to international tax planning than is justified from a national perspective.
This includes a considerable fiscal risk. Moreover, a continued existence of potential conflicts against the fundamental freedoms remains. One can therefore conclude that without further tax coordination member states presumably are not able to reform their tax systems so that they respect the fundamental freedoms of the EC Treaty for cross-border activities and do not destroy the coherence of domestic company taxation at the same time. The causes of the variations between the effective average company tax burdens EATR among the EU member states are complex.
They lie in the many differences between the different elements of the national tax systems. It has, however, been shown that the statutory nominal tax rate on corporate profits plays a significant role in determining the EATR see above, 2. A harmonisation of the corporation tax rate in itself would therefore go a long way towards reducing distortions in the decisions made by companies with respect to location, investments and financing. However, this would mean giving up a key element of national tax sovereignty. See ECJ of Isolating national tax bases also causes major obstacles to cross-border business activities in the Single Market thanks to the coexistence of the residence principle and the source principle.
After all, this coexistence is also a decisive factor in the increasing disputes over the distribution of tax revenues between member states and in the related conflicts with EU law caused by the domestic measures to combat profit transfers to low-tax countries. Common Tax Base 3. A proposal for a directive should be released till the end of Finally, each member state preserves its right to tax the allocated portion of the consolidated tax base applying its own tax rate.
Instead, consolidating the individual results requires an indirect division of the profits of the consolidated overall result using a formula, i. Formula apportionment has a long tradition in North America concerning group taxation at the level of the States USA and the level of the Provinces Canada.
Concerning economically integrated groups of companies, the transactional approach seems theoretically questionable. By setting up an integrated group of companies, coordination of transactions via markets is abandoned in favour of coordination using intra-organisational hierarchies. The aim is to generate economies of integration, for example, by means of lower transaction costs, improvement of information flow or managerial efficiency. Since the excess profits accrue at group level, it seems difficult to determine the source of these profits as they cannot be attributed to specific transactions either.
If the other jurisdiction does not make a corresponding adjustment, there is a risk of double taxation.
It is incapable of fairly allocating profits to the countries involved according to their source and thus, is inconsistent with the principle of inter-nation equity. Formula apportionment does not seek to allocate income to its source perfectly. The rationale behind formula apportionment rather is to provide a pragmatic solution for profit allocation among jurisdictions in order to better cope with the issues of simplicity and enforceability.
Depending on the choice of apportionment factors, this approach intends to allocate the consolidated tax base to the profit generating activities.
Factors which are deemed to represent profit generating activities are typically property, payroll and sales. In this context it has to be kept in mind that in an economically integrated entity consisting out of separate legal entities it is not possible to determine the source of profits on an economic rationale. Three different interpretations of a harmonised tax base exist, each of which involves a different degree of mutual cooperation and each of which eliminates tax obstacles to cross-border EU-wide activities to a different extent Table 2.
See Li, Canadian Tax Journal , p. See contribution of Walter Hellerstein in this volume. The Commission distinguishes between 1 no-change, 2 common base without consolidation and 3 common consolidated base. This is similar to the scenarios presented here. Clearly, such a model would reduce compliance costs.
However, all other tax obstacles on cross-border activities identified above would remain see above, 2. A harmonised corporate tax base is a prerequisite for cross-border loss relief. Otherwise, there would have to be separate accounting rules for the determination of foreign losses with all the attendant difficulties associated with the recapture of loss relief if the foreign subsidiary claims its own loss relief later. Some mechanism is necessary to prevent that loss relief is claimed more than once, as was emphasised in an earlier proposal for foreign loss relief by the European Commission.
Further advantages lie in the consolidated determination of taxable profits: consolidating the individual results of the group members leads to cross-border loss compensation at the level of the taxable entity. Furthermore, supplies and services can generally be invoiced at the respective tax book value because profits realized from transactions with third parties are distributed among the group companies by the division of profits. This leads to an elimination of inter-company profits, which takes the single economic unit aspect of the group into account.
Also, costs for refinancing are deducted from the consolidated group income and they are therefore apportioned to all member states in which group members are resident. Finally, hidden reserves upon cross-border reorganisations or the transfer of assets do not have to be taxed immediately; they are divided among the group members according to the allocation formula upon realisation, irrespective of where the profits are generated.
The indirect division of profits Formula Apportionment thus abolishes the incentives to transfer book profits from one group member to another. They cover the determination of taxable income at the level of each group member, the determination of group income consolidation , the apportionment of group income, and some related issues. First, based on their factual importance, there could be a strict dependency of International Financial Reporting Standards IFRS for the determination of taxable income. However, there is no support to accept full dependency of IFRS.
Concept and Necessity of a Common Tax Base — an academic introduction 31 tic GAAP — do not provide solutions for a considerable number of provisions for determining the tax base see above, 2. Second, tax accounting therefore could be based on a separate and autonomous set of rules distinct from financial accounting. This second solution, however, does not receive strong support either, since it ignores the existing linkage of tax accounting and financial accounting in all member states and, therefore, would rather introduce a 28th system for tax accounting than reaching a mutual recognition of common standards for a harmonised tax base.
Based on the existing linkage of financial and tax accounting there is a strong support to accept IFRS as a starting point for the common tax base. The analysis above shows that IFRS could provide elements of a common tax base in certain areas see 2. Following more comprehensive studies, these areas could cover the recognition of assets and liabilities, the determination of cost values, amortisation, impairment and treatment of onerous contracts.
Second, since member states address these issues in different manners, the introduction of common and uniform standards in the field of accounting for reserves and in the field of depreciation are necessary. Since the latter are likely to eliminate tax incentives from the tax base such incentives could be substituted by tax credits or grants. This includes criteria for the identification of the taxable unit, the nexus of group members to different countries, and the personal scope of a CCCTB.
The fundamental question is whether to delineate the group in terms of legal criteria, economic criteria or a combination of both. Legal ownership can be defined either with reference to voting stock or equity. As control requires voting power, ownership of voting rights seems more appropriate than ownership of equity. A reasonable compromise could be to set the ownership threshold sufficiently low as to ensure that a further reduction would be associated with a substantial loss of control.
It provides a clear cut solution and certainty regarding the entities to be included. If this is the case and the CCCTB is applied, the consolidated tax base of these entities would be sourced using apportionment factors that would not have contributed to the production of the income in question. Experience from the US state corporate income taxation has shown that problems exist in attempting to define a unitary business.
See Martens Weiner, European Taxation , p. Concept and Necessity of a Common Tax Base — an academic introduction 33 tary business, but tests are applied which are mainly based on economic criteria. Reference can be made to those bright-line tests developed by McLure and Hellerstein. Whether economic interdependencies or a flow of values between affiliated companies exist should be determined based on objective and easily administrable criteria. For example, the percentage of turnover realised on intra-group transfers of goods or provisions of services might serve as an indicator.
In this respect, the concept of residence based on OECD principles is well established and should be maintained. Therefore, the nexus of a corporation could be either its seat or the effective place of management. The difficulties caused by separate accounting if applied to an economically integrated group of companies are not only relevant for distinct legal entities but also for permanent establishments. In contrast, differentiating between subsidiaries and permanent establishments would entail scope for tax planning by not including relevant activities within the CCCTB and thus violate against the principle of neutrality.
Moreover, an exclusion of permanent establishments could violate the freedom of establishment laid down in Article 42 of the EC Treaty. For a summary of test used to define a unitary business see Martens Weiner, Using the Experience in the U. This issue was already addressed by the Working Group of the European Commission. Although the principle of neutrality would call for an equal tax treatment of transparent entities and corporations, there are good reasons to exclude transparent entities from the application of the CCCTB.
As outlined above, corporations are distinct legal entities which are taxed separately from their shareholders. In most countries the corporate income tax is not fully integrated into the personal income tax of the shareholders see above, 2. By contrast, partnerships are not regarded as distinct legal entities. Not the partnership itself but, according to the transparency principle, each partner is subject to tax with his share in the total profits.
If transparent entities would qualify as a parent of a tax group for CCCTB purposes, the share of the CCCTB apportioned to the transparent entity would be allocated directly to the partners and would be subject to personal income tax. This would contravene the distinction between corporate income tax and personal income tax drawn by corporate tax systems. Therefore, transparent entities should be excluded from the personal scope of the CCCTB in order to prevent national corporate tax systems from being evaded in the context of the CCCTB.
However, member states could be granted an option whether to extend the personal scope of the CCCTB to transparent entities. An inclusion of transparent entities would also affect revenues from personal income tax. The fiscal effects of consolidation and formula apportionment could not be limited to corporate income tax. These effects are not intended by the European Commission, as the proposals for a consolidated tax base focus on corporate income tax rather than on personal income tax. According to the Commission, the personal income tax should remain in the sole responsibility of the member states.
Accordingly, the relevant percentage of the factors of such transparent entities should be considered with respect to formula apportionment. Concept and Necessity of a Common Tax Base — an academic introduction 35 4. Consolidation raises questions with regard to the starting point of the consolidated tax base, intra-group loss relief, taxation of intra-group transactions, scope of income qualifying for consolidation, and treatment of EU outbound and inbound investment. The following addresses this questions consecutively. This possibility was also considered by the European Commission in an earlier Communication.
Both the definition and the territorial scope of the consolidated group are not satisfactory for tax purposes. Adjusting IFRS-group statements would be complex and is unlikely to reduce compliance costs, as intended by this approach. By contrast, a tax-specific method of consolidation using the individual accounts as a starting point is preferable. Adding together the individual tax bases of each group entity, losses incurred by one group entity are automatically offset against profits of other group entities. If the consolidated tax base is negative, the loss should be carried back to be offset against profits of prior years or carried forward to be offset against future profits.
This is necessary to ensure the taxation of net income. See European Commission, An Internal Market without company tax obstacles — achievements, ongoing initiatives and remaining challenges, Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the European Economic and Social Committee, Brussels The second approach would be to carry back or forward such losses at the group level.
The first approach seems to be more consistent with the concept of consolidation and formula apportionment. Although the approach of consolidation is based on the notion that a group of companies forms an economic unit, under the concept of the CCCTB each of the group members remains liable to tax for its apportioned share of the consolidated tax base on an individual basis. The first approach leads to a symmetric treatment of profits and losses.
Not only a positive but also a negative consolidated tax base is apportioned to each group member. By contrast, the second approach results in an asymmetric treatment of profits and losses. Whereas a positive group income is subject to formula apportionment in the period it is earned, a negative consolidated tax base is carried forward at the group level and reduces future profits. As a consequence, losses are apportioned according to the allocation of apportionment factors in the period in which they are offset at the group level.
If a negative CCCTB is — according to the preferred first approach — to be apportioned to the involved group entities and offset against shares of a positive consolidated tax base in prior or future years, common rules for loss carry back or loss carry forward in the EU are necessary in order to reduce incentives for tax planning. At present, the vast majority of member states do not provide for a loss carry back see above, 2. It seems therefore more realistic, to allow only for a loss carry forward. In order to prevent that losses cannot be offset, there should be no time restrictions to the loss carry forward.
Moreover, special rules are required in order to prevent companies from utilizing losses more than once.