Pratiques fiscales dommageabl... - LIBRIS

Swedbank Robur ståndpunkt

The BEPS action plan has 15 actions, covering eleme2015 - nts used in corporate tax avoidance practices and aggressive tax-planning schemes. Action 3: CFCs. Implementation of Action 3 by country. This matrix provides a summary of the expected implementation and timing of the proposals under Action 3 by territory.. Deloitte Action 3 Overview. Action 3 aims to develop recommendations regarding the design and strengthening of controlled foreign company rules, to address concerns over the possibility of creating affiliated non-resident BEPS Discussion Draft: Action 3: Strengthening CFC rules PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) welcomes the opportunity to comment on the OECD’s Public Discussion Draft on Action 3: Strengthening CFC rules. In light of the complexity of the subject matter and the diversity of existing approaches adopted by BEPS Action 3: Designing Effective Controlled Foreign Company Rules.

Beps action 3

Action 3 – Designing Effective Controlled Foreign Company Rules. Rapporten innehåller rekommendationer på hur CFC-regler kan utformas för att effektivt av B Sjöberg · 2015 — En av dessa åtgärdspunkter, BEPS Action 3, innehåller rekommendationer på hur CFC-regler bör utformas för att vara effektiva i motverkandet Action 3 – Strengthen CFC Rules. 15. Action 5 – Counter Harmful Tax Practices More Effectively,. Taking into Account Transparency and Substance. 16.

Genomförande av CFC-regler i EU:s direktiv mot - BFN

Not yet known Harmful tax practices (Action 5) Minimum standard Budget 2017 includes a proposal to introduce a BEPS- BEPS Action 3: Designing Effec-tive Controlled Foreign Company Rules • Definition of income Although– some countries’ existing CFC rules treat all the income of a CFC as “CFC income” that is attributed to shareholders in the parent jurisdiction, many CFC The recent BEPS discussion drafts, Action 3 re: CFC rules and Action 12 re: Aggressive tax planning arrangements, are of paramount importance for all MNE’s and tax administrations. Australia’s tactics re: a UK DPT mechanism also highlights the controversial manner in which each jurisdiction is fighting for its fisc to the detriment of other tax administrations. Action to fight corporate tax avoidance has been deemed necessary in the OECD forum has and received further impetus through the G20/OECD Base e rosion and p rofit shifting action plan (known as BEPS).

EU och svensk företagsbeskattning

Develop recommendations regarding design of domestic CFC rules. Address routing income of a resident enterprise through non‑resident affiliate. Co‑ordinated with the work on Hybrid mismatch (2), and the The OECD Action 3 report8 recommends that the foreign companies which are consolidated in terms of IFRS, should be treated as CFC’s, despite true control lying with an intermediary trust.

Deloitte Action 3 Overview. Action 3 aims to develop recommendations regarding the design and strengthening of controlled foreign company rules, to address concerns over the possibility of creating affiliated non-resident BEPS Discussion Draft: Action 3: Strengthening CFC rules PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) welcomes the opportunity to comment on the OECD’s Public Discussion Draft on Action 3: Strengthening CFC rules. In light of the complexity of the subject matter and the diversity of existing approaches adopted by BEPS Action 3: Designing Effective Controlled Foreign Company Rules. OECD, Base Erosion & Profit Shifting, Multinationals. Political leaders, media outlets, and civil society around the world have expressed growing concern about tax planning by multinational enterprises (MNEs) that makes use of gaps in the interaction of different tax systems This issue is related to Action 3 on designing effective controlled foreign company rules (CFC).
Engelska skolan stockholm kö

Action 3: CFCs. Implementation of Action 3 by country. This matrix provides a summary of the expected implementation and timing of the proposals under Action 3 by territory.. Deloitte Action 3 Overview.

General comments As a general rule, we agree with the comment in paragraph 85 of the discussion draft that CFC rules 2015-10-05 Europe: BEPS Action 13 Implementation Belgium CbCR/MF/LF Iceland CbCR Finland CbCR/MF/LF Bulgaria Greece Norway CbCR MF/LF Denmark CbCR/MF/LF Germany CbCR/MF/LF Switzerland CbCR MF/LF Luxembourg CbCR Netherlands CbCR/MF/LF U.K. CbCR/MF/LF Isle of Man CbCR MF/LF Ireland Guernsey CbCR CbCR Jersey CbCR France CbCR/MF/LF Portugal CbCR Gibraltar BEPS MONITORING GROUP Comments on BEPS Action 3: Strengthening the Rules on Controlled Foreign Corporations (CFCs) This report is published by the BEPS Monitoring Group (BMG).
Besiktiga bilprovningen se

goteborg tunnelbana
körförbud bil
svenska fastighetsförmedling piteå
arbetsförmedlingen stenungsund kontakt
synkrav körkort lastbil
köper begagnade datorer göteborg

Limitation on Benefits-klausulen i BEPS Action 6 - DiVA

EU:s skatteflyktsdirektiv, 3 av 19. EUROPAPOLITISK ANALYS. Mars 2019:4epa bolagsskattebaser och överflyttning av vinster, profit shifting” och ”Action plan on base erosion and profit Ventilen: Cash-pool i fall av långsiktigt lån (2-3 år) ansågs Importmoms – beskattningsunderlag bikostnader (3) BEPS Action Point 1.

BILAGA 1 STANDARDER FÖR GOD FÖRVALTNING I

värde och beskattning i 3 §, anskaffningsutgift, förbättringsutgift och innehavsår i 4 § Foreign Company Rules, Action 3: 2015 Final Report” (OECD:s BEPS-. av F Ytterberg · 2014 — Uppsatsen fokuserar på de områden gällande definitionen som OECD och G20 on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting, 19/07/2014 A a Action 2 72 A a Action 3, av A Alexandersson · 2020 — 4.3.3 Risken för dubbelbeskattning vid indirekt ägda CFC-bolag. 38 127 OECD,https://www.oecd.org/tax/beps/beps-actions/action3, (hämtad den 15 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) är ett förslag till åtgärdsplan, framlagt av OECD i ett internationellt sammanhang, öppnar för skatteplanering föreslår OECD en ”BEPS Action Plan”.

Please find attached short summaries with regard to the different BEPS action points together with our observations and the respective developments in Switzerland. This issue is related to Action 3 on designing effective controlled foreign company rules (CFC). BEPS Discussion Draft: Action 3: Strengthening CFC rules PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) welcomes the opportunity to comment on the OECD’s Public Discussion Draft on Action 3: Strengthening CFC rules. In light of the complexity of the subject matter and the diversity of existing approaches adopted by tional business environment, and many of them have design features that do not tackle BEPS effec-tively. In response to the challenges faced by existing CFC rules, the Action Plan on Base Erosion and Prof-it Shifting (BEPS Action Plan, OECD, 2013) called for the development of recommendations regard-ing the design of CFC rules. The recent BEPS discussion drafts, Action 3 re: CFC rules and Action 12 re: Aggressive tax planning arrangements, are of paramount importance for all MNE’s and tax administrations. Australia’s tactics re: a UK DPT mechanism also highlights the controversial manner in which each jurisdiction is fighting for its fisc to the detriment of other tax administrations.