(November 12, 2014)

On October 29, 2014 the OECD Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes published 7 new phase 2 (Implementation of the Standard in Practice) peer review reports. These peer review reports concern: Israel, Russia, Belize, Ghana, Gibraltar, Grenada and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.

(November 11, 2014)

On November 11, 2014 both the German Ministry of Finance as well as the UK Government issued press releases stating that both countries agree joint proposal for rules on preferential IP regimes.

According to both Governments the proposal is based on the Modified Nexus Approach proposed by the OECD, which requires tax benefits to be connected directly to R&D expenditures, but amends these rules to address concerns expressed by some countries and seeks to address outstanding issues in relation to qualification of expenditures, grandfathering and tracking qualifying R&D expenditure.

(November 11, 2014)

During the annual meeting of the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes that was held in Berlin on October 28 and 29, 2014, 51 jurisdictions signed the Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement on Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information (click here to be forwarded to the text of the agreement as published on the website of the OECD, which will open in a new window). Based on the information as provided by the OECD Israel was not one of these 51 jurisdictions (click here to be forwarded to the list of signatories of the Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement and Intended First Information Exchange Date as published on the website of the OECD, which will open in a new window).

(November 7, 2014)

On November 6, 2014 the Luxembourg Ministry of Finance issued a press release in which it comments on the Luxembourg practice of advance tax decisions. In the press release the Luxembourg Ministry of Finance states that following the publication of the ICIJ consortium of over 500 advance tax decisions (“tax rulings”) issued by the Luxembourg tax administration between 2002 and 2010 it would like to provide further clarifications.

(November 6, 2014)

On November 6, 2014 the European Court of Justice (CJEU) ruled in Case C-4/13, Agentur für Arbeit Krefeld - Familienkasse versus Susanne Fassbender-Firman (ECLI:EU:C:2014:2344). 

The following questions were referred to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling:

  1. Must Article 76(2) of Regulation No 1408/71 be interpreted to the effect that the competent institution of the Member State of employment enjoys discretion in applying Article 76(1) of Regulation No 1408/71 if no application for benefits has been made in the Member State of residence of the members of the family?

Submit to FacebookSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
INTERESTING ARTICLES