plenary presentations

Global conference 2015
Fashioning future tax
Milan, 27-29 May 2015
Welcome &
introduction
Overview
Welcome & introduction
Guido Petraroli, Taxand Italy
Our conference host Guido Petraroli, Taxand Italy, welcomed delegates to the Taxand
Global Conference 2015 providing an anecdotal overview of Taxand’s development.
2
Welcome and introduction
Welcome to our 15th Taxand Global Conference
Taxand Today
Fantozzi & Associati, Taxand Italy
Milan Highlights
Event programme
Thank you
3
Welcome clients & Taxanders
Over 220 clients and over
200 Taxanders from nearly
50 countries worldwide
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Canada
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
4
India
Indonesia
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Korea
Luxembourg
Malaysia
Malta
Mauritius
Mexico
Netherlands
Norway
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
UK
Ukraine
USA
Venezuela
Welcome speakers
Paulo Nuncio, Portuguese
Secretary of State of Tax
Affairs
Raphael Coin, GE
Prof. Enzo Moavero
Milanesi, ex Minister of
European Affairs
David Busam, RenaultNissan Alliance
Pia Queirolo, Costa Crociere
Darryl Steinberg, Lehman
Brothers Holdings
Prof. Mariana Mazzucato,
University of Sussex
Alistair Armstrong,
Development Securities
& our Taxander
speakers
Bela Mao, Shell
Paul Morton, RELX Group
5
Taxand today in just 10 years
Only global
organisation
focused on tax
One common
purpose –
practical
advice,
responsively
delivered
88% Taxand
countries
recommended
in ITR World
Tax 2015
One global
brand
2,000 leading
tax advisors,
400 tax
partners
Nearly 50
independent –
do not
undertake
audit – tax
firms
One uniting
passion – tax
6
Taxand Italy
Founded in 1975 by Augusto Fantozzi
One of nine founding Taxand countries in 2005
Leading Italian tax law firm, focused on complex
areas of tax law and specialised industries
Offices in Bologna, Milan & Rome
7
Fashioning future tax
With increasing
compliance/reporting
burdens, reputational risk
and media management
requirements, Taxand
provides specific actions
to navigate these issues
in the context of our everharmonising global
economy.
We are in the midst of a
decade of tax tailoring,
with government bodies,
the general public,
economic organisations
and wider thought
leaders providing opinion
on the future of our
global tax, and financial,
landscape.
8
Conference programme: today
Special guest keynote: Paulo Nuncio, Portuguese Secretary of State of
Tax Affairs
A policy tailor’s perspective: The evolution of EU Law in front of the
global financial crisis
10:15 – 10:45 Coffee break
Fireside session: Fashioning economic & fiscal policy – rethinking the
role of government
Plenary I: Anti-abuse provisions & tax litigation – the current fashion
12:15 – 14:00 Lunch
9
Conference programme: today
Plenary II: BEPS – tailoring your approach
Plenary III: The ultimate TP business case
15:30 – 16:00 Coffee break
Plenary IV: Indirect tax – what’s on trend?
19:00 – 19:30 Transfer to Gala Dinner
10
Conference programme: tomorrow
Taxand Xborders BEPS Clinic, 09:15 – 11:30
Industry breakout sessions:
Energy – what happens when the bottom falls out?
Real estate – changing fashions in the taxation of real estate
10:15 – 10:30 Coffee break
Industry breakout sessions:
Financial services – current & emerging trends for non-bank finance
Manufacturing – fashioning a sustainable bespoke supply chain
11:30 – 12:00 Coffee break
Closing remarks
12:30 – 14:00 Lunch
11
Speaker profiles
Guido
Petraroli
Taxand Italy
T. +39 02 7260591
E. [email protected]
Guido is the host of the Taxand Global Conference 2015, and is based in Taxand Italy where
he is a partner of Fantozzi & Associati. With 20 years’ experience, Guido has earned a
reputation of providing technically led, understandable and actionable tax advice. In 2006,
Guido was appointed Special Commissioner by the Italian Ministry of Economy for the
restructuring of companies in the textile field.
12
Special Guest Keynote
Paulo Nuncio, Portuguese
Secretary of State of Tax
Affairs
Overview
Special Guest Keynote
Paulo Nuncio, Portuguese Secretary of State of Tax Affairs
Paulo Nuncio, Portuguese Minister of State for Taxes, will discuss how tax reforms
played a key role in Portugal’s resurgence from its worst recession in over 40 years.
These reforms include the creation in 2014 of a forum for large taxpayers intended to
improve the relationship between the tax authority and taxpayers by increasing tax
certainty and reduced compliance costs, but also to avoid aggressive tax planning
schemes and the use of tax havens.
14
Speaker profiles
Paulo Nuncio
Portuguese
Secretary of
State of Tax
Affairs
Paulo has served as Secretary of State of Tax Affairs in the government of Portugal since
September of 2011, in which role he has overseen a wide range of tax reforms that have
helped Portugal emerge from its worst recession in over 40 years. Previously Paulo was a
Partner in Garrigues – Taxand Portugal specialising in tax law advising national and
multinational clients.
15
A policy tailor’s
perspective: The evolution
of EU Law in front of the
global financial crisis
Professor Enzo Moavera
Milanesi, ex Minister of
European Affairs
Overview
A policy tailor’s perspective: The evolution of EU Law in front
of the global financial crisis
Professor Enzo Moavero Milanesi, Ex Minister of European Affairs
(2013)
The global financial and credit crisis of 2007 – 2009 and the events that followed have
had profound effects not only on the global economy, but on national and supranational politics and legal systems. Professor Milanesi will discuss recent
developments in EU law in the context of the global financial crisis and what these
events portend for the future of the EU and EU law.
17
Speaker profiles
Professor
Enzo
Moavero
Milanesi
Ex Minister of
European
Affairs
Professor Enzo Moavero Milanesi is Director of the School of Law at the LUISS University in
Rome. He is also Special Advisor to the First Vice President of the European Commission on
the Rule of Law. Between 2011- 2014 he was member of two Italian Governments as
Minister for European Affairs. From 2006 -2011, he was President of Chambers and Judge at
the General Court of the European Union.
18
Coffee break
Fireside session: Fashioning
economic & fiscal policy
Rethinking the role
of government
Professor Marianna
Mazzucato, RM Philips
Chair in Economics &
Innovation at SPRU
Tim Wach, Taxand Global
Managing Director
Overview
Fireside session: Fashioning economic & fiscal policy - rethinking the
role of government
Mariana Mazzucato, RM Phillips Chair in Economics & Innnovation at
SPRU, University of Sussex & Tim Wach, Taxand Managing Director
It is popular in many circles to view government as an impediment to commercial and
economic success, and that government should “just get out of the way”. However, in
her book The Entrepreneurial State, Professor Mariana Mazzucato argues that such
views overlook the important role that government can play, and has played, in
spurring innovation, including in respect of the development of many of the
technologies on which many companies’ successes are built, such as Apple. Professor
Mazzucato will discuss with Taxand Managing Director Tim Wach her views on the role
that the state, in both economic and fiscal policy, can play in developing an innovation
based economy.
21
Speaker profiles
Professor
Mariana
Mazzucato
(PhD)
University of
Sussex
Tim Wach
Taxand Global
Mariana holds the RM Phillips chair in the Economics of Innovation at SPRU, University of
Sussex. She advises public policy makers around the world on innovation-led growth. Her
book The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Private vs. Public Sector Myths challenges
conventionally held views of the role and importance of the state in economic development,
particularly the development of new technologies.
T: +1 905 916 1911
E: [email protected]
Tim is Managing Director of Taxand. He works across all of Taxand ensuring enhanced and
seamless cross-border services for our multinational clients. Tim assumed his position after
over 30 years at Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP, which is Taxand Canada, and government
tax policy work at the highest levels at Canada’s Department of Finance. Tim is recognised
as a leading Canadian lawyer in taxation and frequently publishes papers on tax and tax
policy subjects.
22
Taxand’s Take
1
2
3
There are roles in
society for both
government and the
private sector –
however, those roles
are not as simple as
many would like to
believe
Governments need to
think deeply about
their fiscal policies for
innovation to
maximise efficiency
and investment
returns
Care needs to be
taken in drawing the
lines between the
two, which is not
simple and the lines
are often not precise
23
Plenary I: Anti-abuse
provisions & tax litigation
The current fashion
Alistair Armstrong,
Development Securities
Bela Mao, Shell
Mukesh Butani, Taxand India
Prof. Augusto Fantozzi, Taxand
Italy
Kevin Hindley, Taxand UK
Overview
Plenary I: Anti-abuse provisions & tax litigation, the
current fashion
Alistair Armstrong, Development Securities; Bela Mao, Shell; Mukesh Butani, Taxand
India; Prof. Augusto Fantozzi, Taxand Italy; Kevin Hindley, Taxand UK
International tax disputes have assumed significance post the 2008 financial crisis, as governments
are jostling for their share of tax revenues. Economic double taxation is increasingly a threat as
alternative dispute resolution processes under MAP have slowed down. MNCs are debating options
for settling tax disputes. Post implementation of the BEPS actions, transfer pricing and tax disputes
may rise in the short to medium term until the dust settles on the implementation of double nontaxation principles. MNCs will need to strategise to mitigate the risk of long term litigation. Joined by
clients, Taxand advisors investigated real experiences of litigation and alternative dispute resolution
with local tax authorities and cross-border tax disputes, drawing out practical issues to benefit those
engaged in disputes with fiscal authorities worldwide.
25
Overview
Professor Augusto Fantozzi – Taxand Italy
Bela Mao – Shell
Mukesh Butani – Taxand India
Kevin Hindley – Taxand UK
Alistair Armstrong – Development Securities
26
Perspectives from Italy
Contents
Introduction
OECD, EU and EU Member States
anti-abuse provisions
Italian anti-abuse provision
Tax litigation related to anti-abuse provisions
28
Introduction
Introduction
Increasing international focus on the abuse of law
Main solution – to deny the application of the law in
absence of valid commercial reasons. Examples:
OECD BEPS
Action 6
EU
amendment
to the ParentSubsidiary
Directive
EU Member
States
General AntiAvoidance
Rule (GAAR)
Italian antiabuse
provision
Recommendation to MNEs – adequate documentation
for tax audit/litigation
30
OECD, EU and EU
Member States antiabuse provisions
OECD anti-abuse provision
Problem – Tax Treaty abuse
Solution – OECD recommends (soft law) to add a GAAR to
Tax Treaties
A benefit under this Convention shall not be granted in
respect of an item of income or capital if it is reasonable to
conclude […] that obtaining that benefit was one of the
principal purposes of any arrangement or transaction that
resulted directly or indirectly in that benefit.
BEPS Action 6 – 2014 Deliverable, 16 September 2014
32
EU anti-abuse provision
Problem – Parent-Subsidiary Directive abuse
Solution – Council of the EU agreed to add a GAAR to the
Parent-Sub Directive (hard law)
Member States shall not grant the benefits of this Directive
to an arrangement or a series of arrangements that […] are
not genuine. […] an arrangement or a series of
arrangements shall be regarded as not genuine to the extent
that they are not put into place for valid commercial reasons
which reflect economic reality.
Parent-Subsidiary Directive art. 1, para 2 and 3
33
EU Member States anti-abuse provision
Problem – Abuse of law
Solution – EU Commission recommended (soft law) to Member
States to introduce a GAAR in their national legislation (hard law)
An artificial arrangement […] which has been put into place
for the essential purpose of avoiding taxation and leads to
a tax benefit shall be ignored.
[…] an arrangement […] is artificial where it lacks
commercial substance.
EU Commission Recommendation, 6 December 2012
34
Italian anti-abuse
provision
Italian anti-abuse provision
Actual situation: the Italian anti-avoidance rule provides
a close list of transactions that may be challenged by the
Tax Authority in absence of valid commercial reasons
(art. 37-bis of Presidential Decree n. 600/1973)
Problem: Plenary Session of
the Supreme Court stated that a
general anti-abuse principle
derives directly from Italian
Constitution. This caused
uncertainty for the tax payers
Solution: in accordance with
the EU Commission
recommendations, to introduce
a GAAR in the national
legislation (hard law). A Bill in
Parliament is under discussion
36
Italian anti-abuse provision
Taxpayer’s Code new article 10-bis
Introduces an abuse of law’s definition
Repeals the article 37-bis of Presidential Decree n. 600/1973
Enables the taxpayer to request an advance ruling (through which the
taxpayer requests to the Tax Authority whether the transactions at issue
are to be considered as abusive)
Imposes a stand-alone deed of assessment for any abusive practice
37
Italian anti-abuse provision
Obliges the Tax Authority to preliminary notify a specific request to the
taxpayer for further clarifications on the concerned transactions. The
taxpayer has 60 days to answer to such questionnaire. Once such term
has elapsed, the Tax Authority is entitled to issue a deed of assessment
States that the deed of assessment must be reasoned referring to the
taxpayer’s clarifications and to the abusive elements of the transaction
Asserts that it is burden of the Tax Authority to demonstrate the
evidence of the abuse of law while it is burden of the taxpayer to
demonstrate the valid commercial reasons
Specifies that abusive transactions are not subject to criminal
punishments while administrative penalties may apply
38
Tax litigation related to
anti-abuse provisions
Tax litigation related to anti-abuse provisions
Problems :
Increased possibility that tax
authorities challenge a
taxpayer’s transaction on the
basis of an anti-abuse provision
Audit and tax litigation may start
after years from the challenged
transaction
40
Tax litigation related to anti-abuse
provisions (continued)
Recommendation to MNEs:
Independently of who
(tax authorities or taxpayer)
bears the burden of proof
To prepare documentation
related to the valid commercial
reasons of the transaction
undertaken when the transaction
takes place
41
Dispute resolution –
India
Tax litigation in India – some statistics
Estimated USD67 billion (approximately) of tax revenue
locked up in litigation before Courts and Appellate
Authorities (Finance Minister in budget speech 2014-15)
Cases pending at various levels*
Direct Tax
Commissioner (A)
Up to FY 2013-14
Indirect Tax
215,174
Up to FY 2013-14
Commissioner (A)
35,432
Tribunal (as on Nov 1, 2014)
98,422
Tribunal (as on Nov 1, 2014)
67,575
High Court(s)
31,844
High Court(s)
14,515
Supreme Court
5,865
Supreme Court
*Source: Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Annual Report 2013-2014
43
3,204
Key drivers of tax litigation in India
Complex laws and
multifarious amendments
with limited
subordinate legislation
Inadequate dispute
resolution and
settlement forums
Complex, disparate
disclosure requirements
Key
drivers
Alert media reporting –
tax activism
Unchanged
administrative court
procedures
Overzealous tax
administration
Target led approach of
administration
44
Challenges of taxpayer and judiciary
Taxpayers
Retrospective amendments – heightened sense of uncertainty
Evolving tax legislations (TP, APA, etc.)
Inadequate commentary to deal with new regulations
Revenue collection driven approach
‘Benefit of doubt’ not with taxpayer
Dissenting judgments of multi-state appellate forums and courts
Inadequate and inconsistent jurisprudence on interpretation of
treaty provisions
Protracted litigation
Nonchalant approach to stay of unreasonable tax demands
45
Challenges of taxpayer and judiciary (continued)
Adjudicator/Judiciary
Inadequate infrastructure leading to administrative delays
Frequent adjournments
Increase in frivolous litigation, writs and SLP’s
Monetary threshold limits for filing appeals, lack of qualitative analysis
Judicial propriety/dissenting judicial views
46
Hierarchy of authorities – Income tax
Hierarchy
Time-frame
Order passed by
Assessing Officer
1-2 years
Appeal to Commissioner of Tax
(Appeals) within 30 days
3-24 years
(6-8 years in certain jurisdiction)
Appeal to Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal within 60 days
2-3 years
(longer in certain jurisdiction)
Appeal to High Court within
120 days
3-5years
(8-10 years in certain jurisdiction)
Supreme Court
4-7 years
(depending on the case)
47
Hierarchy of authorities – Indirect tax
Hierarchy and time-frame
Assistant Deputy/Joint/Additional
Commissioner (1-2 years)
Commissioner (Appeals)
(1-2 years)
Commissioner
(1-2 years)
CESTAT
(3-4 years)
High Court
(4-5 years)
Supreme Court
(5-8 years)
48
Direct appeal to Supreme
Court in case of disputes
relating to classification and
valuation of goods
Need for alternate dispute resolution
1.
Concerns on administrative
appeal process
2. Experience with DRP
Time consuming
Structural issues in constitution
of the panel
Multi-tiers of appellate
authorities
Only a ‘fast track’ to new level
of litigation?
Build up of cases at ITAT level
– factual nature of issues
resulting in matter being
remanded back
Appeal by department against
DRP is unexplainable
Uncertainty on
eventual outcome
49
Existing framework for alternate dispute resolution
Authority for Advance
Rulings (AAR)
Mutual Agreement
Procedure (MAP)
Alternate dispute
resolution
Advance Pricing
Agreements (APA)
Income tax Settlement
Commission (ITSC)
50
Writ remedy
Article 226 empowers High Court to issue writs
High Court can interfere under a writ jurisdiction in
following cases:
• Breach of fundamental rights
• Orders/proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction
• Vires of provision is challenged
• Violation of principles of natural justice
Is ‘alternative remedy’ under specific law a bar?
51
UK perspectives
HMRC Litigation and
Settlement Strategy.
30 new judges
recruited for First Tier
Tribunal (FTT)
Taxand UK involved in
(largest?) tax litigation
in the UK
Increased use of
information exchange
provisions in double
tax treaties
Liabilities of over
£1 billion
53
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
HMRC acknowledge ADR more effective for some
cases that litigation
Can help to reach agreement between the parties
Can help prepare the parties for litigation
54
1
2
3
4
The view from the
pilot’s seat
Tax authorities
Under resourced both
financially and personnel
On matters of serious
investigation do not
expect them to take a
commercial view of the
world, they don’t think
like that
56
Tax authority investigation
At the outset of the
enquiry presume it
will end up in
litigation
Full disclosure of
fact upfront or
provide no more
than required
57
Pay attention to
what you disclose
in written
correspondence
even at the start of
an enquiry. It is on
the record for the
duration of the
enquiry and will be
used against you in
litigation
Conduct of meetings with tax Authority
Don’t let your
advisors/legal team
dictate the meeting
Prepare your strategy
and respective roles
before you enter the
room
Never underestimate the
power of your tax
authority, they will engage
fully, focus attention and
commit resources at the
appropriate time
Never think the battle is
lost, portray confidence
in your position at all
times
58
The litigation journey
Be prepared to fight your
case at all levels of your
tax judicial system
If you will not take the
battle beyond the first
round then don’t start
the journey at all
59
Taxand’s Take
1
2
3
Litigation over tax
matters has become
increasingly common
and with initiatives
like BEPS and around
treaty anti-avoidance
this trend is highly
likely to continue.
Multinationals should
help prepare for this
by obtaining certainty
of tax positions
through rulings,
clearance
applications, APAs
and engagement with
Tax Authorities where
appropriate.
The tax affairs of
multinationals are now front
page news. There will be
areas that can only be
resolved through litigation
and heads of tax should
consider the costs of
reputational damage and
whether politics would
interfere with obtaining a
fair hearing before
engaging in planning that
may proceed to Court.
60
Speaker profiles
Alistair
Armstrong
Development
Securities
Alistair is Head of Tax at London based Development Securities PLC. He has experience in
transactional real estate structuring in the UK, Jersey, Guernsey, The Netherlands, Ireland
and Luxembourg. Following roles at KPMG, ABN AMRO, Deutsche Bank and Marsh Inc.
Alistair moved to Development Securities in 2010 to set up and run their internal tax
department. He has extensive experience of tax litigation and alternative dispute resolution.
Bela Mao
Shell
Bela is a Chartered Accountant and an alumni of the Indian Revenue Service. She has been
actively involved on advocacy initiatives with the government on Dispute Resolution, Goods
and Service Tax and various other issues impacting business in India. Based in Mumbai,
Bela is Country Tax Lead for Shell India also a part of the Shell global transfer pricing team.
61
Speaker profiles
Mukesh
Butani
Taxand India
Augusto
Fantozzi
Taxand Italy
T: +91 124 339 5010
E: [email protected]
Mukesh is a member of the Taxand Board and Chairman of BMR Advisors which is Taxand
India. With a specialisation in international tax and transfer pricing, he has significant
experience in advising Fortune 500 multinationals and Indian business houses on a wide
range of matters across multiple sectors.
T: +39 06 4200611
E: [email protected]
Prof. Augusto Fantozzi is founder and main partner of Fantozzi & Associati, lawyer and
professor of tax law at the Universities of Rome ‘La Sapienza’ and ‘L.U.I.S.S’. He was
appointed Minister of Finance and Minister of Foreign Trade during the period from 1995 to
1998. He became Chairman of the Fifth Budget and Treasury Committee of the Chamber of
Deputies and Vice President of the Higher Council of the Minister of Finance, President of the
National Association of Tax Collectors and member of the Council of State of the Vatican City
State. He continues to hold relevant positions such as President of Sisal S.p.A. and of Sisal
Holding Finanziaria S.p.A.
62
Speaker profiles
Kevin Hindley
Taxand UK
T: +44 2077155235
E: [email protected]
Kevin is based in Taxand UK where he is a managing director with Alvarez & Marsal Taxand.
Kevin has 18 years’ experience in corporate and international tax, assisting clients across all
industries, from rapidly growing, privately held companies to businesses in the Fortune 500.
He has also worked with a number of intermediary professional tax advisory firms, providing
input and expert technical advice.
63
Plenary II: BEPS
Tailoring your approach
Raphael Coin, GE
Paul Morton, Reed Elsevier
Mukesh Butani, Taxand India
Paolo Ruggiero, Taxand Italy
Angel Calleja, Taxand Spain
Albert Liguori, Taxand USA
Overview
Plenary II: BEPS – fashioning your preparations
Raphael Coin, GE; Paul Morton, Reed Elsevier; Mukesh Butani, Taxand India; Paolo
Ruggiero, Taxand Italy; Angel Calleja, Taxand Spain & Albert Liguori, Taxand USA
Endorsed by the G-20, the OECD BEPS initiative has shattered the foundations of the international
tax arena. Ambition, wide scope, unafraid of new forms of business and a bold approach are a few
of the distinctive features of this project. While the OECD deserves recognition for such immense
effort and for the sound and timely deliveries already produced, a number of concerns have in the
meantime been put forward both by MNCs and by tax professionals. Issues such as the need of
consensus versus unilateral utilisation by States of BEPs weaponry, disruption of the existing
international status quo which took 50 years to build or, more than ever before, the need for true
automatic elimination of international double taxation have now cropped out with great strength.
OECD, MNC and Taxand standpoints about BEPS´ vast implications looking into the future were
openly debated in this session.
65
Overview
Paul Morton (Reed Elsevier)
Raphael Coin (GE)
Albert Liguori (Taxand USA)
Mukesh Butani (Taxand India)
Paolo Ruggiero (Taxand Italy)
Challenges and next steps
Chair – Angel Calleja (Taxand Spain)
66
Introduction
BEPS – G20 initiative to ensure fairness of the
international tax system and to secure countries’
revenue bases
Directly entrusted to OECD – seven major 2014
deliverables plus eight in pipeline for 2015
Profits should be taxed where economic activities are
performed and value is created
67
BEPS contents
Actions focused around three main principles:
Coherence (hybrids, interest, CFC, harmful practices)
Substance (treaty abuse, PE, intangibles, risk and
capital, high risk transactions)
Transparency (methodologies and data, disclosure,
TP documentation, dispute resolution)
Plus report on Digital Economy
Plus report on Multilateral Instrument
68
What we know
1 Strong political impetus
2 Urgent, ambitious and determined
3 It will change current rules and an international
consensus which took decades to build
69
What we know (continued)
4 It will put further ammunition in the
hand of States
5 Soft law will not be enough this time – many
measures will need local legal implementation
6 In sum, a major overhaul of the current
international tax system
70
Numerous concerns
Need for consensus including developing countries
(‘unilateral action may lead to chaos’)
Impact on tax rulings, APAs (Luxleaks, etc.)
Impact on indirect taxes and VAT
Impact on tax incentives (patent boxes, etc.)
Holding company substance?
Impact on CCCTB (EU)
Increase in tax disputes/litigation worldwide
Convergence with due corporate tax governance
71
Furthermore, states generally…
Prefer unilateral measures
Do not resolve MAPs speedily (or at all)
Do not effectively exchange information
Do not perform joint audits smoothly
Do not in effect support CCCTB (EU)
Incentivise certain investments with tax benefits
Discretionally rule on tax matters
72
Panel
What are, around BEPS so far, the main
concerns/impacts for industries and tax
professionals?
Our panel:
Paul Morton
(Reed Elsevier)
Raphael Coin
(GE)
Albert Liguori
(Taxand USA)
Mukesh Butani
(Taxand India)
Chair –
Angel Calleja
(Taxand Spain)
Paolo Ruggiero
(Taxand Italy)
73
Main discussion topics
1 Digital PE and services
abuse, CFC and
2 Treaty
Diverted Profits Tax
3
4
TP, CbC and cost sharing
arrangements
5 Multilateral instrument
74
Interest relief and hybrids
Digital publishing
Example purely
illustrative
Review board:
Various
Review board members
are third parties
Author:
Sweden
Editor: Belgium
The editor has unique
knowledge
and is responsible for
this database
Author:
Denmark
Authors are third parties
Contracts with all global customers
Contracting
entity:
Netherlands
Production:
Philippines
Sales office:
France
Sales support
Customer: Italy
Datacentre: US
Platform
development:
Netherlands
User on
secondment:
Japan
Software
coding: India
The platform cost $500 million
and was cost shared by five operating
companies – UK, US, France, Netherlands
and Japan
Actually uses publications
In Hawaii but using the
Japanese VPN but his Italian
subscription
75 agreement
User on
holiday: Hawaii
Normally uses
publications
In Japan
Digital PE and services
Significant digital
presence – the impact
of human intervention
and the concept of
preparatory or auxiliary
nature of activities
Obtaining of data with a
commercial value
deriving from the use of
digital products or
services – attribution
of profits
New business models
– sources and rules
Effective tax collection
(indirect taxes)
76
Interest relief
Excessive/inappropriate interest expenses
Inbound – deductible expenses in high-tax
countries vs. income taxable in low-tax countries
Outbound – deductible expenses versus
exempted income at lender level
What is the aim? – stop abuse/system
coherence/to assimilate interest and dividends
77
Hybrids
1.
2.
Domestic laws:
Tax treaties:
Dividend not exempt if
expense deductible
Dual resident
companies
No more double dips
Transparent entities
How to coordinate
states (BEPS vs.
non BEPS)
Exemption (vs. credit)
model now restricted
78
TP and cost sharing agreements
Consensus required for system (APAs, MAPs)
to work
Intangibles – concept, ownership and transactions
Low value added intragroup services
Cost sharing agreements:
Content
Participation
criteria
79
Information
requirements
Country by country report
Basic content
of reporting obligation
Need for coordinated
implementation across
countries
Corporate governance
No guarantee of
double taxation
elimination/mitigation
80
CFC and Diverted Profits Tax
CFC
• Improves collection in place of
•
•
residence and potential positive
effect at source (eliminates
incentive in low tax country)
Restricted rules in case of lack of
substance and expense
generation
Liquidity issues for due
tax payment and double taxation
81
DPT
• Is this
a form
of CFC?
Multilateral instrument
Hybrid entities
Treaty abuse
Artificial PE avoidance
Dispute resolution
Exchange of information – CbC
Associated enterprised
82
Before closing …an unfair and open question:
Looking in your crystal
ball, what do you see
for the future?
83
BEPS – India update
FM statement (April 2015) – BEPS, a concern for
developing /emerging economies
GAAR – a comprehensive attempt to tackle BEPS
BEPS to prompt
• Domestic law calibration
• Capacity building (training, infrastructure)
Tax department leveraging on BEPS; courts unswayed
84
Taxand’s Take
1
2
3
Review your business
operations now and
implement changes
per BEPS
requirements
Pay attention to
your TP policy,
financing structure,
'no substance'
companies/potential
treaty shopping and
lack of business
purpose for structuring
Prepare to be
transparent –
consider appointment
of tax expert at board
level, responsible for
the managing of tax
strategy and risks
85
Closing
We will be holding a 'BEPS Clinic' tomorrow between
09:15 and 11:30 with representation of all major
Taxand countries
The clinic is ideally suited for more specific individual discussion/
consultation about local development of BEPS in each state
Feel free to drop by when you are not in a breakout session
86
Closing
A very special
thanks to our
panel members
and, thank you all!
87
Speaker profiles
Raphaël Coin
GE
Raphaël is responsible for the tax affairs for GE in France based in Paris. In his role he is
responsible for the tax profile of GE in France and is engaged on regular discussions with
public authorities to discuss the evolution of the tax system. Before GE Raphaël was a
partner of an international firm.
Paul Morton
RELX Group
Paul is Head of Group Tax at RELX Group plc (Reed Elsevier) where he leads a team of
more than 40 tax professionals, serving mainly digital businesses with customers in every
country in the world.
88
Speaker profiles
Mukesh
Butani
Taxand India
Paolo
Ruggiero
Taxand Italy
T: +91 124 339 5010
E: [email protected]
Mukesh is a member of the Taxand Board and Chairman of BMR Advisors which is Taxand
India. With a specialisation in international tax and transfer pricing, he has significant
experience in advising Fortune 500 multinationals and Indian business houses on a wide
range of matters across multiple sectors.
T: +39 02 7260591
E: [email protected]
Paolo Ruggiero is based in Taxand Italy. He was admitted to the Association of Chartered
Accountants in 2000. He joined Taxand Italy, Fantozzi & Associati, in 2012 after working for
other primary tax law firms and has become Associate since 2014. He is a member of
International Fiscal Association (IFA).
89
Speaker profiles
Angel Calleja
Taxand Spain
Albert Liguori
Taxand USA
T: +34 91 51 45 20 0
E: [email protected]
Angel is a partner of Taxand Spain, which is Garrigues. Angel specialises in international
taxation and cross-border issues with a particular focus on corporate tax planning and
transfer pricing. He has more than 25 years’ experience advising major multinationals. He
has been a member of the Business Advisory Group to the OECD joint working group on
Transfer Pricing and Business Restructurings.
T: +1 212 763 1638
E: [email protected]
Albert is based in Taxand USA where he is a managing director. With 18 years of
international tax and accounting experience, Albert assists multinationals to assess and
improve their global tax profiles and functionality. Albert leads a New York based
international tax team supporting clients on cross-border transactions to advance corporate
tax efficiencies, including accounting for income taxes.
90
Plenary III:
The ultimate TP business
case
Vincent Desoubries, Taxand France
Permana Adi Saputra, Taxand Indonesia
Marc Alms, Taxand USA
Jens Brodbeck,
Taxand South Africa
Overview
Plenary III: The ultimate TP business case
Vincent Desoubries, Taxand France; Permana Adi Saputra, Taxand Indonesia, Jens
Brodbeck, Taxand South Africa & Marc Alms, Taxand USA
As global transfer pricing requirements continue to evolve through a patchwork of
central OECD guidance and implementation via local statutes and regulations, it
becomes increasingly necessary for businesses to stitch together a process for
efficient management of transfer pricing policies. Greater scrutiny is afforded to the
transactional substance of related party dealings and taxing authorities seek to
maximise the profit attributable to its jurisdiction. With this trend comes the need to
craft the ultimate business case in support of the chosen supply chain organisation.
Taxand advisors from France, Indonesia, South Africa and the USA explored practical
means to address this dilemma and a means to finding the best fit.
92
Introduction
Evolving international tax landscape, where transfer
pricing and supply chain planning remains at the
forefront for opportunity and controversy
For fourth straight year, Taxand Global Survey 2015
shows that TP is top of mind for
senior management
• Nearly 30% of respondents say this is the most
challenging tax area to address
What does it mean to have ‘the ultimate TP business
case’?
93
Planning in the age of BEPS
More than 75% of respondents indicated that
Reputational Risk is a major concern in
tax planning
Planning in
the age
of BEPS
Risk/reward
balance
94
Compliance
Comparability
Do comparable companies exist?
What does it mean to be ‘comparable’?
Significant use globally of
TNMM/CPM as primary
transfer pricing method
As example, nearly 80%
of APAs completed by US
IRS that involved tangible
goods or services
transactions featured a
CPM/TNMM
95
Country by country report
57% of respondents
in the Taxand
Global survey 2015
were in favour
of country by
country reporting
Confidentiality
Administrability
Consistency
96
Taxand’s Take
1
2
3
BEPS requires
taxpayers and
advisors to evaluate
TP planning in a new
light and with careful
consideration
Transfer pricing
defence will continue
to be a source
of global controversy
– tailor the business
case
CbC reporting is
arriving now and
there is no longer
time to wait for
working out an
implementation plan
97
Speaker profiles
Vincent
Desoubries
Taxand France
Permana Adi
Saputra –
Taxand
Indonesia
T. +33 17 039 5490
E. [email protected]
Vincent Desoubries is a Partner with Arsene Taxand in Paris.
Vincent’s field of expertise is transfer pricing and business structuring though the piloting and
the execution of various transfer pricing projects. Such projects include design of
transfer pricing policies, worldwide documentation studies or tax affective business
restructurings for multinational clients in a number of industries such as energy, tourism or
spirits. Vincent also specialises in economic issues applied to taxation such as
valuation of assets.
T. + 62 21 8399 9919
E. [email protected]
Permana Adi Saputra is a Transfer Pricing Partner with PB Taxand in Jakarta.
Permana has significant experience assisting clients in the preparation of Transfer Pricing
Documentation, representing clients in tax audits, tax objections and appeals related to
Transfer Pricing cases, and assists clients in applying the Advance Pricing Agreement and
Mutual Agreement Procedure. His expertise also includes supply chain management and
price/profit structuring. Permana actively participates in discussions with Tax Officers
regarding Transfer Pricing issues in Indonesia. Currently he also serves as Secretary
General of Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia Kompartemen Akuntan Pajak for 2014-2016.
98
Speaker profiles
Jens
Brodbeck
Taxand
South Africa
T. + 27 21 410 6660
E. [email protected]
Jens Brodbeck is an Executive at ENSafrica in Cape Town.
Jens specialises in corporate international tax, with a specific focus on transfer pricing,
inbound investments and cross-border tax planning. He has been involved in transfer pricing
since the introduction of the South African transfer pricing rules in 1995,
assisting international and South African multinationals with their transfer pricing needs.
This includes transfer pricing planning advice, economic analyses including benchmarking
studies, the preparation of transfer pricing compliance documentation, as well as assisting
with transfer pricing audits and settlement agreements.
Marc Alms
T. +12 12 763 1887
E. [email protected]
Taxand USA
Marc Alms is a Managing Director with Alvarez & Marsal Taxand in New York.
Marc has more than 15 years of experience assisting both public and privately-held clients,
leading engagements in the planning and documentation of transfer pricing policies,
obtaining Advance Pricing Agreements and assisting with Competent Authority for
multinational corporations across a broad range of industries. He has worked extensively with
the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), as well as the revenue authorities of other countries,
including Canada, India, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, Ireland and the U.K.
in representing clients.
99
Coffee break
Plenary IV: Indirect tax
What’s on trend?
Pia Queirolo, Costa Crociere
David Busam, Renault-Nissan Alliance
Rajeev Dimri, Taxand India
Par Sundberg, Taxand Sweden
Overview
Plenary IV: Indirect tax - what’s on trend?
Pia Queirolo, Costa Crociere; David Busam, Renault-Nissan Alliance; Rajeev Dimri,
Taxand India & Par Sundberg, Taxand Sweden
Indirect taxes are a growing cause of confusion for many multinationals. The recent
growth of e-commerce has revolutionised the business landscape, while tax
implications on inter-company transactions provide challenges due to the varying rules
dependent on geographical location. With constant developments taking place in
indirect tax worldwide, multinationals face a new era of tax scrutiny and reporting.
Taxand advisors from India and Sweden highlight the key indirect tax developments
from across the globe & the considerations multinationals should make when tailoring
their approach.
102
Rajeev Dimri,
Taxand India
Pia Queirolo
Taxation and Corporate
Matters Director,
Costa Crociere
….. Finally on holiday …..
You can enjoy your travel on a marvelous cruise vessel
It’s summer… it’s hot
You want a drink and you may think that “a drink is a drink”
BUT
Are you sure you understand if it is a provision of goods or
of services?
Don’t worry, the EU has done the job for you and has
given an official definition
106
Art. 6 of EU Regulation 282/2011
Restaurant and catering services mean
services consisting of the supply of
prepared or unprepared food or beverages
or both, for human consumption,
accompanied by sufficient support
services allowing for the immediate
consumption thereof
107
Ok, when I get my dinner then…no problem
BUT
Are you sure you know where the place of supply is?
Don’t worry – again - the EU has simplified your job and
has given the following definition
108
Art. 37 of EU Regulation 282/2011
The place of supply of a restaurant service or
catering service carried out within the
Community partly during a section of a
passenger transport operation effected within
the Community, and partly outside such a
section but on the territory of a Member State,
shall be determined in its entirety according to
the rules for determining the place of supply
applicable at the beginning of the supply of the
restaurant or catering service.
109
Are you sure that outside Europe your life will be easier and without the
complexity that 28 member countries fighting for their VAT revenues cause?
Of course….NOT!
Let’s imagine you have to calculate and to pay Brazilian taxes, you have:
PIS/COFINS (social security contributions payable on
revenues)
II: Import tax
IPI: tax on manufactured goods
ICMS: value-added tax
ISS: tax on services
110
Or , going to another part of the world
Let’s imagine that you want to enhance your presence in
the fast developing market of China, you will certainly like
to know if your business is subject to the Business Tax or
to the, more recently introduced, VAT
You may find some difficulties since most of the regulations
and explanatory notes are not available to the public
Or you may see that the rules are different not only among
states or regions but also from one DISTRICT of the same
city to the other
111
At this point you may prefer to be back in the
Old Europe, where at least there are Directives
that are aimed at considering the difficulties for
businesses working in an international
environment, where there is a general principle
called “proportionality” which should give you
assurance that no excessive burden of
formalities will be imposed, and so you may
decide to relax and to smoke a cigarette
112
BUT
Are you sure you know how excise taxes are levied in
each single jurisdiction?
Italy uses tax stamps physically enclosed in the package
so that a package purchased in Italy can be sold
exclusively in Italy (and Italy gets its revenues …)
113
HOW do we survive in such a difficult environment?
No magic wand, only some basic guidelines
Having a continuous relationship with local advisors
to keep you up to date in your understanding of the
rules and interpretation of the rules
Keeping a watchful eye also on other countries to
ensure consistency of approach
Having a continuous relationship with our colleagues
to support decisions related to new initiatives
Designing administrative processes straightforward
enough to be manageable
114
Having a continuous relationship with local advisors to keep
you up to date in your understanding of the rules and
interpretation of the rules
Light internal structures
Compare the company perspective with others
Relationship with tax authorities
Support during audits and litigation
115
Keeping a watchful eye also on other countries to ensure
consistency of approach
Possibility of filing ruling request to clarify general concepts
Ex: Services necessary for the direct needs of a ship,
engaged in high seas voyages, zero rated transactions
Possible benefits deriving from an appropriate definition of
the concept
Ex: Definition of Ship
116
Having a continuous relationship with our
colleagues to support decisions related to
new initiatives
117
Designing administrative processes straightforward
enough to be manageable
Agreements
Documents to be issued: any simplification available?
VAT reports: IT support
VAT filing: one European model
118
Around the world we find thousands of different rules
We know that for each single transaction a fiscal
document is required
We struggle to understand which is the right one in each
single case
BUT
This evening do not ask for the Italian “Ricevuta fiscale” ,
you are only required to enjoy your dinner (as an Italian
provision of service…….)
119
David Busam
Alliance Global Director
Customs & Trade,
Renault-Nissan
Par Sundberg
Taxand Sweden
Indirect tax – ”Hot topics´” inside the EU
As always there are developments within the EU (from the CJEU, the European Commission
as well as the Tax Authorities in different Member States) that in one way or another will
affect the business environment within the European Union. The following items are currently
subject to increased interest by the Tax Authorities in different Member States.
1
Holding companies (HoldCo) – VAT recovery restrictions
2
Combatting VAT fraud/VAT planning schemes – positive and/or
negative VAT consequences for the taxpayers
3 The Skandia America case (C-7/13)
122
Holding companies
HoldCos have traditionally been divided into two different categories
Passive HoldCo having the effect of being;
• A non-taxable person (falling in under the B2C set of rules)
• No entitlement of input VAT recovery
The revenues for the passive HoldCo could consist of dividends or similar
not being considered as remuneration for rendering services (or goods)
towards its subsidiaries
Active HoldCo having the effect of being;
• A taxable person (falling in under the B2B set of rules)
• Entitled to VAT recovery unless VAT exempt business activities
The revenues for the active HoldCo could consist of management fees or
similar fees for the management services rendered by the HoldCo towards
its subsidiaries
123
Holding companies
Recent developments from the different Tax Authorities within the European
Union seems to strive for further input VAT restrictions for active HoldCos,
especially in cases where the HoldCos are in an excess input VAT recovery
position for an extended period of time
The arguments behind this standpoint taken by the Tax Authorities are as follows:
Being in an excess input VAT recovery position indicates that HoldCo is not getting
remunerated in full for the management services rendered towards its subsidiaries
The fact that HoldCo is not getting remunerated in full for the services rendered
should in one way or another be subject to an adjustment by the Tax Authorities
The method of adjustment could be:
Pricing adjustments (in line with the Principles laid down in Article 80 of the
VAT Directive)
Input VAT restrictions
124
Holding companies
The possibility of using the pricing adjustment rule in Article 80 of the VAT
Directive is rather limited due to the content in the Article. Thus the traditional
way to adjust the VAT situation for the HoldCos is to ”go for” an input VAT
recovery limitation
The argument used by the Tax authorities is that, to the extent that HoldCo is in a
negative VAT position, this negative VAT position is connected with the passive
shareholding/ownership in the subsidiaries and as such considered as a non
economic activity
Another reason for the Tax Authorities to apply the input VAT recovery limitation rather
than Article 80 is that, especially in cross border situations, the services rendered by
HoldCo normally will fall in under Article 44 of the VAT Directive and thus deemed
supplied in the country where the recipient of the services is located. This being the
situation, no output VAT will be due in the Member State where HoldCo is established
125
Holding companies
Pending case (C-108/14 Larentia+Minerva mbH & Co.KG) in the CJEU will hopefully
clarify the current situation. On March 26th, the Italian Advocate General Paolo
Mengozzi delivered his opinion in this case
One of the requests for a preliminary ruling is:
The method to be used ”to calculate two holding companies’ input value added tax (VAT) deduction
in respect of the acquisition of shareholdings in other companies in the management of which those
holding companies involve themselves…”
According to the opinion of AG Mengozzi, the answer to this question should be:
”Expenditure connected with capital transactions incurred by a holding company which involves
itself directly or indirectly in the management of its subsidiaries has a direct and immediate link with
that holding company´s economic activity as a whole. Input value added tax on that expenditure
should not therefore be apportioned between the economic and non-economic activities of the
holding company. If the holding company effects transactions which are subject to value added tax
and transactions which are exempt, the proportion method …will be used to calculate the right to
deduct input value added tax”
126
Combatting VAT fraud/VAT planning schemes
VAT fraud and (to a certain extent) aggressive VAT planning
schemes are always a ”Hot Topic” to deal with by the Member States.
There are some traditional ways for the Tax Authorities to deal with
these matters and two of the most common methods are as follows
Introduce simplification
schemes in cross border
transactions, e.g. avoid VAT
registration formalities for
foreign entrepreneurs (through
which VAT deductions can be
claimed etc.)
Introduce an increased use of
”reverse charge” on domestic
transactions between taxable
persons (no VAT payments
due on domestic taxable
transactions)
127
Combatting VAT fraud/VAT planning schemes
The introduction of a measurement in order to combat fraud and/or
aggressive VAT planning also will have an impact on all taxable persons
dealing with similar or identical transactions. Depending on the
circumstances, these measurements could create either a VAT advantage or
a VAT risk
VAT advantages
VAT risks
Less VAT compliance costs
Less VAT cash flow (no liability to pay
the VAT amount)
A VAT simplification scheme in one
Member State could create a VAT
problem in another Member State
(intra community transactions)
Wrongfully charged VAT is not
considered as being VAT and thus not
deductible as input VAT (should a
domestic reverse charge system be in
place for a particular transaction)
128
The Skandia America case
The Skandia America case (C-7/13) is a Swedish case which deals with the
VAT treatment of the supply of services between the head office of a US
based corporation and its Swedish branch when the Swedish branch was
also a member of a Swedish VAT group
The structure was mainly created in order to create substantial VAT savings
on a number of services supplied by external suppliers. The services were
acquired by the head office Skandia America in the US but to a large extent
used/consumed by the Skandia Group in Sweden
The services acquired by the head office of Skandia America were in turn
rendered by Skandia America to the members of the Swedish VAT group of
Skandia through its Swedish branch without applying any reverse charge in
Sweden since transactions between a head office and its branch were
treated as ”no supply” since the transactions was made within the same legal
entity
129
The Skandia America case
The question referred to the CJEU was whether the fact that the Swedish branch was
a member of a Swedish VAT group created a situation where the transaction between
the head office and its Swedish branch in fact becomes a supply of services from a
VAT perspective and thus subject to VAT in Sweden
The CJEU came to the conclusion that this in fact should be considered as a taxable supply.
This being the situation, the VAT planning scheme become less attractive. Instead of a
substantial VAT saving, a potential VAT cash flow effect would be in place
The Skandia America case started, in addition to VAT litigations in some Member
States, a lot of different activities at different levels, for instance
The use of the VAT grouping provisions is optional for the Member States a questions arises
around cross border transactions similar to the Skandia case where one Member State has
introduced the VAT grouping provision and the other Member state has not
Within the European Commission a working paper (No 845) was published in February
2015 in which the case (together with the VAT committee) is carefully analysed with the
aim to ”reach a common and consistent position on the consequences derived from
the judgement of the CJEU in this case”
130
Hot topics – concluding remarks
Although there will always be ”Hot Topics” dealing with pure technical matters such as
the input VAT recovery position for Holding companies it is likely that the ”Hot Topics”
for the future within the field of European VAT will be more of being compliant with all
aspects of the European VAT system rather than creating complicated VAT
savings schemes
Being compliant with all aspects of the current European VAT system will, however, in many cases
be a challenge in itself since many Member States have introduced unilateral simplification
schemes in order to avoid potential VAT frauds or similar
Since the European VAT system is constantly changing it is unfortunately the case that
even if we are compliant with the system today there is a risk that e.g. a judgement
from the CJEU will change this position from one day to another
131
Taxand’s Take
1
2
3
Increased awareness
towards indirect tax
compliance will be
essential
The increased
demand for tax
revenues for the
countries will lead to
increased activity by
the tax administrations
and thus indirect tax
planning will be even
more complicated
In order to reduce
compliance costs
outsourcing/
centralising
compliance functions
may be considered
132
Speaker profiles
Pia Queirolo
Costa Crociere
Pia is the Taxation and Corporate Matters Director for Italian cruise line Costa Crociere.
David Busam
Renault-Nissan
Alliance
David is the Global Director of Customs and Trade for the Renault-Nissan Alliance. He has
over 25 years of experience in international trade and customs and he is responsible for all
global customs planning and trade operations for both Renault and Nissan. In particular, he is
responsible for identifying and implementing synergies within each company that increase
compliance, reduce cost and/or improve fluidity of the supply chain.
133
Speaker profiles
Rajeev Dimri
Taxand India
Par Sundberg
Taxand
Sweden
T: +91 98110 60585
E: [email protected]
Rajeev is based in Taxand India where he is a partner and leader of BMR Advisors’ indirect
tax practice. Rajeev’s area of focus is structuring cross-border transactions for goods and
services, covering a range of indirect tax issues. He is an active member of various trade
associations, providing input on legislative and policy issues pertaining to the entire gamut of
indirect taxes in India.
T: +46 73 640 91 58
E: [email protected]
Par is the key Swedish member of Taxand’s global indirect tax team. He is based in Taxand
Sweden where he is a VAT partner of Skeppsbron Skatt. Par has provided advice on
Swedish and international VAT, across a variety of sectors, for almost 25 years. He is also
often engaged to speak on VAT issues.
134
Gala dinner
Closing remarks
Guido Petraroli,
Taxand Italy
Taxand’s Take
Anti-abuse rules and litigation
1
Increased prevalence of legislated anti-abuse rules and substance
over form challenges by tax authorities, increased litigation
BEPS – tailoring your approach
Risks - of inconsistency amongst BEPS proposals, of inconsistent
national laws and administrative positions, and more
Ultimate transfer pricing
Tax authorities becoming emboldened, comparables being
challenged
Indirect tax – what’s on trend
The only constant is change, the only defence is staying up with
the change
137
Taxand’s Take – key actions for multinationals
11
2
3
4
Litigation
BEPS
TP
Indirect
Litigation is
increasing – in
number of
cases, amounts
in controversy,
time to resolve.
Look for
alternatives and
be prepared.
Potential for
inconsistent rules
and inconsistent
national rules or
admin positions –
with risks of
double (or more)
tax – can’t be
understated
Authorities are
becoming
emboldened –
translating into
increasing
challenges,
particularly on
comparables – is
BEPS the way
out?
It’s never simple,
it’s not intuitive,
and it’s constantly
changing – stay
on top of the
change, assume
nothing, and get
good local advice!
138
Thank you, and we hope
you can join us next
year in Dublin!
139
Speaker profiles
Guido
Petraroli
Taxand Italy
T. +39 02 7260591
E. [email protected]
Guido is the host of the Taxand Global Conference 2015, and is based in Taxand Italy where
he is a partner of Fantozzi & Associati. With 20 years’ experience, Guido has earned a
reputation of providing technically led, understandable and actionable tax advice. In 2006,
Guido was appointed Special Commissioner by the Italian Ministry of Economy for the
restructuring of companies in the textile field.
140
Bespoke Client Meetings
& Taxand Lounge
ABOUT TAXAND
Taxand provides high quality, integrated tax advice worldwide. Our tax professionals,
nearly 400 tax partners and over 2,000 tax advisors in nearly 50 countries – grasp both
the fine points of tax and the broader strategic implications, helping you mitigate risk,
manage your tax burden and drive the performance of your business.
We're passionate about tax. We collaborate and share knowledge, capitalising on our
collective expertise to provide you with high quality, tailored advice that helps relieve
the pressures associated with making complex tax decisions.
We're also independent – ensuring that you adhere both to best practice and to tax law
and that we remain free from time-consuming audit-based conflict checks. This
enables us to deliver practical advice responsively.
Taxand is a global organisation of tax advisory firms. Each firm in each country is a separate
and independent legal entity responsible for delivering client services.
© Copyright Taxand Economic Interest Grouping 2014
Registered office: 1B Heienhaff, L-1736 Senningerberg – RCS Luxembourg C68
www.taxand.com