- Details
Earlier today we have already reported on the consultation that the HM Treasury and the HMRC have opened with respect to the UK Patent Box regime. Next to that the HM Treasury has also opened a public consultation on the Tax deductibility of corporate interest expense. The deadline for responses for this consultation is January 14, 2016.
- Details
On October 22, 2015 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled in Case C‑277/14 PPUH Stehcemp sp. j. Florian Stefanek, Janina Stefanek, Jarosław Stefanek versus Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Łodzi (ECLI:EU:C:2015:719).
· Must Articles 2(1), 4(1) and (2), 5(1) and 10(1) and (2) of the Sixth … Directive … be interpreted as meaning that a transaction conducted in circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, in which neither the taxable person nor the tax authorities are in a position to establish the identity of the actual supplier of the goods, constitutes a supply of goods?
· If the reply to Question 1 is in the affirmative, must Articles 17(2)(a), 18(1)(a) and 22(3) of the Sixth Directive be interpreted as precluding provisions of national law under which, in circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, tax cannot be deducted by the taxable person since the invoice was issued by a person who was not the actual supplier of the goods and it is not possible to establish the identity of the actual supplier of the goods and to require that supplier to pay the tax, or to identify the person required to pay the tax pursuant to Article 21(1)(c) of the Sixth Directive by reason of the issue of the invoice?
- Details
On October 22, 2015 the HMRC and the HM Treasury opened a Public Consultation titled: “Patent Box: substantial activities”. The consultation regards intended changes to the design of the UK Patent Box to comply with a new international framework for preferential tax regimes for intellectual property (IP) set out by the OECD in its BEPS project (Action 5). The consultation will run from October 22, 2015 to December 4, 2015.
- Details
On October 22, 2015 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled in Case C‑126/14 ‘Sveda’ UAB versus Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos (third party: Klaipėdos apskrities valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija) (ECLI:EU:C:2015:712).
Can Article 168 of the VAT Directive be interpreted as granting a taxable person the right to deduct the input VAT paid in producing or acquiring non-current assets intended for business purposes, which, as in the case in the main proceedings, are directly intended for use by members of the public free of charge, but may be recognised as a means of attracting visitors to a location where the taxable person, in carrying out his economic activities, plans to supply goods and/or services?
- Details
On October 22, 2015 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled in Case C‑264/14 Skatteverket versus David Hedqvist (ECLI:EU:C:2015:718).
· Is Article 2(1) of the VAT Directive to be interpreted as meaning that transactions in the form of what has been described as the exchange of virtual currency for traditional currency and vice versa, which is effected for consideration added by the supplier when the exchange rates are determined, constitute the supply of a service effected for consideration?
· If so, must Article 135(1) [of that directive] be interpreted as meaning that the abovementioned exchange transactions are tax exempt?
Page 3 of 8
