Oct 1

 

Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent BEPS (MLI) to enter into force with respect to:

·   New Zealand

·   Serbia

·   Sweden

·   United Kingdom

 

 

 

 

Oct 2

 

Meeting of the Economic and Financial Affairs (ECOFIN) Council

 

According to Agenda highlights published on the Council’s website:

·   The Council is expected to make adjustments to the EU's list of non-cooperative jurisdictions in taxation matters;

·   The Council is expected to endorse a political agreement on the VAT regime for e-publications and adopt a regulation aimed at improving administrative cooperation to fight VAT fraud; and

·   The ministers may be called to agree the so-called "VAT reverse charge mechanism" proposal, as well as the set of adjustments ("quick-fixes") to the EU's VAT rules aimed at fixing specific issues pending the introduction of a new VAT system.

 

 

 

 

Oct 3

 

Opinion of the Advocate General expected to be delivered in Case C-165/17, Morgan Stanley & Co International (VAT – What portion of input tax is deductible at branch level?)

 

Questions referred for a preliminary ruling:

1. In circumstances where expenditure of a branch established in one Member State is exclusively used for the transactions of its principal establishment established in another Member State, must the provisions of Article 17(2), (3) and (5) and Article 19(1) of the Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC, incorporated in Articles 168, 169 and 173 to 175 of Directive 2006/112/EC, be interpreted to the effect that the Member State in which the branch is registered is to apply to that expenditure the branch’s deductible proportion, determined according to the transactions carried out in the Member State in which it is registered and according to the rules applicable in that State, or to apply the proportion applicable to the principal establishment, or to deduct a specific proportion combining the rules applicable in the Member States in which the branch and the principal establishment are registered, with regard in particular to a possible option mechanism for imposing value added tax on transactions?

2. What rules should be applied in the specific case where expenditure borne by the branch is used both for transactions in the Member State where it is registered and for transactions of the principal establishment, particularly as regards the concept of general costs and the proportion of tax deductible?

 

 

 

 

Oct 3

 

Opinion of the Advocate General expected to be delivered in Case C-449/17, A & G Fahrschul-Akademie (VAT – The concept of school or university education in Article 132(1)(i) and (j) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC)

 

Questions referred for a preliminary ruling:

1. Does the concept of school or university education in Article 132(1)(i) and (j) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax cover driving school tuition to acquire category B and category C1 driving licences?

2. If the answer to question 1 is in the affirmative:

Can the applicant be recognised as an organisation with similar objects for the purposes of Article 132(1)(i) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax on the basis of the provisions on the driving instructor examination and the issue of a driving instruction and driving school licence in the Law on driving instructors (Gesetz über das Fahrlehrerwesen) of 25 August 1969 (Bundesgesetzblatt I 1969, 1336), last amended by the Law of 28 November 2016 (Bundesgesetzblatt I 2016, 2722, Fahrlehrergesetz, Law on driving instructors), and of the public interest in the training of learner drivers to be safe, responsible and environmentally aware road users?

3. If the answer to question 2 is in the negative:

Does the term ‘tuition given privately by teachers’ contained in Article 132(1)(j) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax require that the taxable person be an individual trader?

4. If the answers to questions 2 and 3 are in the negative:

Is an instructor always providing tuition privately within the meaning of Article 132(1)(j) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax if he acts on his own account and at his own risk, or must further requirements be met to qualify as a private teacher?

 

 

 

 

Oct 4

 

CJEU expected to deliver judgment in Case C-416/17, Commission v France (Précompte mobilier) (Freedom of establishment  – Deduction of taxable profits – Different treatment of dividends from subsidiaries having their management and registered office in a third country)

 

Form of order sought:

The applicant claims that the Court should:

declare that, in maintaining the effects of the provisions aimed at eliminating double economic taxation of the dividends that allow a parent company to set off against the advance payment, for which it is liable when it redistributes to its shareholders dividends paid by its subsidiaries, the tax credit applied to the distribution of those dividends if they come from a subsidiary established in France, but not to offer that option if those dividends originate from a subsidiary established in another Member State, since, in that case, that legislation does not give entitlement to a tax credit applied to the distribution of those dividends by that subsidiary in so far as, according to the case-law of the Conseil d’État, applications are granted for reimbursement of advance payments made in breach of EU law within the meaning of the judgment of the Court in Case C-310/09 Accor, 1 subject to the following three restrictions:

-   the right to reimbursement of the advance payment illegally made is restricted by the refusal to take into account taxation suffered by sub-subsidiaries established outside France;

-   the right to reimbursement of the advance payment illegally made is restricted by disproportionate evidentiary requirements;

-   the right to reimbursement of the advance payment illegally made is restricted by limiting the tax credit to the amount of the dividend redistributed in France which comes from a subsidiary established outside France, and whereas the Conseil d’État, administrative court adjudicating at last instance, established those restrictions without asking the Court of Justice for the purposes of determining the compatibility of those restrictions with EU law,

the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the principles of equivalence and effectiveness and in accordance with Articles 49, 63 and the third paragraph of Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

 

The opinion in this case as delivered on July 25, 2018 by Advocate General Wathelet can be found here

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The schedule above merely contains a selection of events/important dates taking place during the week and should in no way be considered to be complete. It is very well possible that other important events take place during the week that were not included in the schedule above. It is your own responsibility to research other sources to review whether other important events take place that are not included in the schedule above.

 

Furthermore the schedule above is solely based on the information provided as by the respective authorities when the schedule above was drafted. It is your own responsibility to check whether the information included in the schedule above is complete, accurate and correct. International Tax Plaza and/or its owners do not accept any liability if the information provided in the schedule above is incomplete, not accurate and/or incorrect.

 

Copyright – Internationaltaxplaza.info

 

 

Are you looking for a highly motivated new member for your tax team? Then place your Job Ad on International Tax Plaza!

 

and

 

Stay informed: Subscribe to International Tax Plaza’s Newsletter! It’s completely FREE OF CHARGE!

 

 

 

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to StumbleuponSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
INTERESTING ARTICLES