In March 2008, the Norwegian directorate of taxes issued three interpretative statements regarding the applicability of the Norwegian tax exemption method (TEM) on foreign investments funds. According to the Norwegian directorate of taxes, Danish, Irish and German investment funds are not covered by the TEM due to the funds not being liable to general corporate income tax in their respective countries of residence. Norwegian investment funds are specifically covered by the TEM. Foreign investment funds will in principle be covered by the TEM provided they are comparable to Norwegian entities qualifying for the TEM.(...)
sábado, junho 07, 2008
Germany:Preliminary Draft of Tax Reform Plans for 2009 Published
Germany’s draft Annual Tax Act 2009 includes a number of proposals that will affect German inbound investments. The draft Annual Tax Act 2009 has not yet been formally endorsed by the government, although this is expected shortly. Once formally endorsed, the proposed law will have to be approved by the Upper and the Lower House and ultimately signed by the president. Potentially affected taxpayers should closely monitor the legislative developments to determine whether any action will be required. If enacted, most of the changes would become effective as from FY 2009.(...)
Lei n.º 25/2008, D.R. n.º 108, Série I de 2008-06-05
Assembleia da RepúblicaEstabelece medidas de natureza preventiva e repressiva de combate ao branqueamento de vantagens de proveniência ilícita e ao financiamento do terrorismo, transpondo para a ordem jurídica interna as Directivas n.os 2005/60/CE, do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 26 de Outubro, e 2006/70/CE, da Comissão, de 1 de Agosto, relativas à prevenção da utilização do sistema financeiro e das actividades e profissões especialmente designadas para efeitos de branqueamento de capitais e de financiamento do terrorismo, procede à segunda alteração à Lei n.º 52/2003, de 22 de Agosto, e revoga a Lei n.º 11/2004, de 27 de Março .
quarta-feira, junho 04, 2008
Guia Fiscal 2008 - KPMG
KPMG's Tax Guide was developed by KPMG in Potugal and provides an overview of the major Portuguese taxes in force for the 2008 tax year.
2008 budget law includes measures affecting payments to nonresident entities
The final version of the Portuguese Budget Law for 2008, published in the Official Gazette on 31 December 2007, includes changes that will affect payments to nonresident entities. The changes, which are generally welcome, include a relaxation of the rules to benefit from the EC Parent-Subsidiary Directive and measures that reduce the compliance burdens on nonresidents deriving Portuguese-source income. The Budget Law measures are effective as from 1 January 2008.
Dividends Paid to EU Companies
In response to the European Commission’s challenge to Portugal’s domestic rules, the 2008 Budget Law changes the tax regime applicable to dividends paid by a Portuguese resident company to a shareholder resident in another EU Member State.
The adopted measure aims to grant the same tax treatment to dividends paid by Portuguese subsidiaries to their Portuguese and EU parent companies. Thus, dividends paid to qualifying companies resident in an EU Member State are now exempt if:
The EU parent company holds at least 10% of the share capital (previously 15%) of the Portuguese subsidiary or the acquisition value of the shareholding is at least Euro 20 million; and the shareholding has been held for an uninterrupted period of one year (previously two years).
The new regime also covers profits distributed to a permanent establishment of an EU parent company situated in another EU Member State.
In light of the amendment, EU companies that meet the above criteria and that have been subject to withholding tax on dividend income arising from their Portuguese affiliates should consider the possibility of requesting a refund of the Portuguese tax unduly borne under the previous dividend taxation regime.
Income from Swap Transactions
Income arising from currency swaps, interest rate swaps and currency forwards will now be, for all purposes, treated as interest. This amendment may change the taxation of such income when obtained by entities resident in tax treaty partner countries.
Depending on the definition of interest in a tax treaty, in many instances, such income will be treated as interest subject to a withholding tax rather than being exempt under the business profits or other income articles of a treaty. Nonresident financial institutions deriving income from swap transactions or currency forwards in Portugal should examine their position as to whether the changes result in an additional withholding tax burden.
Proof of Eligibility for Relief under Treaties and EU Directives
The deadline for presenting proof that the requirements for application of tax treaty benefits or the EC Interest and Royalties Directive have been satisfied has been extended until the time withholding tax must be remitted to the state, i.e. the 20th of the month following the month in which the withholding is due. Previously, such proof had to be available before the tax liability arose. Proof that the EC Parent-Subsidiary Directive applies must be provided before the dividends are made available to the beneficiary.
The Portuguese taxpayer liable to withhold tax will be relieved of the joint obligation to pay tax if the proof to benefit from an exemption or a reduction of tax is presented after the above deadlines, via an official form duly certified by the tax authorities of the beneficiary’s country of residence. The Portuguese withholding agent, however, still will be subject to an administrative penalty. The 2008 Budget Law provides for a penalty ranging from Euro 250 to Euro 2,500 for failure to withhold tax if the formal requirements to benefit from an exemption or a reduction of withholding tax are satisfied but the proof of eligibility is not made available by the prescribed deadlines.
The final version of the 2008 Budget Law contains a significant modification not included in the draft budget. Proof of fiscal residence may be presented in situations before the law’s 1 January 2008 effective date even if the tax has been withheld unless the tax was paid and such payment is not subject to objection or appeal to administrative bodies or courts.
The 2008 Budget Law also confirms that, if the beneficiary of income is a central bank or government agency domiciled in a country that has signed a tax treaty with Portugal, the periodic resubmission of the forms necessary to apply the treaty no longer is mandatory. However, a central bank or an agency still must inform the Portuguese entity paying the income of any changes with respect to its compliance with conditions for the application of the exemption or reduction of tax under the treaty.
Finally, the number of Portuguese official forms to be certified by the nonresident’s tax authorities has been reduced from 12 (separate forms for various types of income) to four.
(...)
DELOITTE - Carlos Loureiro e Susana Barahona Ferreira
Contribuintes ganham poderes contra o Fisco
O Governo está a alterar os códigos tributários. Vai ser possível suspender decisões do fisco com providências cautelares.Paula Cravina de SousaOs contribuintes vão poder instaurar providências cautelares para suspender algumas operações do Fisco que considerem irregulares. Por exemplo, se o contribuinte receber uma notificação para pagar um determinado imposto e não concordar com o montante indicado, poderá instaurar uma providência cautelar para suspender o pagamento desse imposto, embora tenha de prestar uma garantia e levar o caso a tribunal.Esta é uma das alterações que o Governo está a discutir na Lei Geral Tributária e no Código do Processo e Procedimento Tributário e que vem reforçar as garantias dos contribuintes. O objectivo desta reformulação é simplificar as leis em vigor, harmonizando a parte de processo tributário com a de contencioso administrativo. A proposta de lei do Governo de Sócrates está em fase de discussão pública.(...)
terça-feira, junho 03, 2008
Luxembourg - Capital Duty on its way out!
In his traditional annual speech at Parliament, the Prime Minister, Mr. Jean-Claude Juncker, announced recently various tax measures aimed at maintaining and improving the tax attractiveness of Luxembourg.
The tax measures for companies include:
• The abolition of the 0,5% capital duty as from 2009
This is probably the most expected tax measure. It follows the reduction of the capital duty from 1% to 0,5% in 2008. The complete abolition of the capital duty in Luxembourg had been announced by the Government at the time of the reduction to 0,5% but had become uncertain following Council Directive 2008/7/EC of February 12 2008 as the Directive does no longer oblige EU Member States to abolish capital duty within a certain timeframe.
• Decrease in corporate tax rates
A decrease of the global income taxation of companies (Corporate Income Tax and Municipal Business Tax) from 29,63% to 25,5%. This will however occur in 2 steps and will probably, where appropriate and possible, says Juncker, be accompanied by some measures that will aim at enlarging the taxable basis of companies.
Regarding the taxation of individuals, the main measures are as follows:
• Tax brackets adapted to inflation
It is the intention to further adapt the tax brackets to inflation. The tax brackets will be increased by 6%, which implies a reduction of the overall tax burden.
• Limits of deduction will be increased
Several tax deductions will be increased, including tax deductions for insurance costs
• New tax bonus for wage earners
The tax deduction available to wage earners of 600 Euro (compensatory abatement for wage earners) will be replaced by a 300 Euro tax bonus. This is a special benefit to those paying no or little income tax and therefore could not in the past benefit from tax reductions.(...)
The tax measures for companies include:
• The abolition of the 0,5% capital duty as from 2009
This is probably the most expected tax measure. It follows the reduction of the capital duty from 1% to 0,5% in 2008. The complete abolition of the capital duty in Luxembourg had been announced by the Government at the time of the reduction to 0,5% but had become uncertain following Council Directive 2008/7/EC of February 12 2008 as the Directive does no longer oblige EU Member States to abolish capital duty within a certain timeframe.
• Decrease in corporate tax rates
A decrease of the global income taxation of companies (Corporate Income Tax and Municipal Business Tax) from 29,63% to 25,5%. This will however occur in 2 steps and will probably, where appropriate and possible, says Juncker, be accompanied by some measures that will aim at enlarging the taxable basis of companies.
Regarding the taxation of individuals, the main measures are as follows:
• Tax brackets adapted to inflation
It is the intention to further adapt the tax brackets to inflation. The tax brackets will be increased by 6%, which implies a reduction of the overall tax burden.
• Limits of deduction will be increased
Several tax deductions will be increased, including tax deductions for insurance costs
• New tax bonus for wage earners
The tax deduction available to wage earners of 600 Euro (compensatory abatement for wage earners) will be replaced by a 300 Euro tax bonus. This is a special benefit to those paying no or little income tax and therefore could not in the past benefit from tax reductions.(...)
Belgium: Belgian participation exemption incompatible with parent subsidiary directive
On May 8 2008 Advocate General (AG) Sharpston issued her opinion in the Cobelfret case. This is one of the three pending cases regarding the compatibility of the Belgian participation exemption regime with the EU parent subsidiary directive (90/435/CEE). The present case only concerns dividends received from subsidiaries established in other EU member states, while the other cases also concern dividends received from Belgian subsidiaries and non-EU subsidiaries and the question whether the Belgian regime is compliant with respectively the directive and the free movement of capital.
According to Belgian legislation, dividends received in a given year which qualify for participation exemption are first included in the company's taxable basis of that year. In a subsequent step, 95 % of their amount is deductible. This means that no deduction is made when this company has no or insufficient taxable profits in that year, because it has suffered losses in this or in previous years. Such (forwarded) losses are offset against the dividends. The dividends are therefore de facto taxed.
In the present case, the ECJ will have to examine whether this regime is compatible with article 4, par. 1 of the parent subsidiary directive. According to that provision, the residence state of a dividend-receiving parent company or permanent establishment shall either refrain from taxing the dividends or subject them to taxation while providing a credit for the foreign underlying corporate income tax.
The AG considers that the Belgian regime is not compliant with the directive as none of the methods provided by article 4, par. 1 have been correctly implemented. On the one hand, the Belgian regime does not entail a systematic exemption. Dividends are only exempt if other taxable profits are available. The exemption is therefore subject to a condition which is not provided by the directive. On the other hand, the Belgian regime is not an imputation regime either. The Belgian government's argument that the regime would at least lead to the same result as an imputation regime is not convincing to the AG.
The AG also considers as not relevant the other arguments submitted by the Belgian government, based on the fact that dividends from Belgian and from EU sources are treated in the same way, and on the fact that the OECD model treaty does not include precise rules on how to exercise the exemption method.
Furthermore, according to the AG, in case the ECJ considers the Belgian regime incompatible with the directive, the ruling should not be subject to a temporal limitation as requested by the Belgian government.(...)
According to Belgian legislation, dividends received in a given year which qualify for participation exemption are first included in the company's taxable basis of that year. In a subsequent step, 95 % of their amount is deductible. This means that no deduction is made when this company has no or insufficient taxable profits in that year, because it has suffered losses in this or in previous years. Such (forwarded) losses are offset against the dividends. The dividends are therefore de facto taxed.
In the present case, the ECJ will have to examine whether this regime is compatible with article 4, par. 1 of the parent subsidiary directive. According to that provision, the residence state of a dividend-receiving parent company or permanent establishment shall either refrain from taxing the dividends or subject them to taxation while providing a credit for the foreign underlying corporate income tax.
The AG considers that the Belgian regime is not compliant with the directive as none of the methods provided by article 4, par. 1 have been correctly implemented. On the one hand, the Belgian regime does not entail a systematic exemption. Dividends are only exempt if other taxable profits are available. The exemption is therefore subject to a condition which is not provided by the directive. On the other hand, the Belgian regime is not an imputation regime either. The Belgian government's argument that the regime would at least lead to the same result as an imputation regime is not convincing to the AG.
The AG also considers as not relevant the other arguments submitted by the Belgian government, based on the fact that dividends from Belgian and from EU sources are treated in the same way, and on the fact that the OECD model treaty does not include precise rules on how to exercise the exemption method.
Furthermore, according to the AG, in case the ECJ considers the Belgian regime incompatible with the directive, the ruling should not be subject to a temporal limitation as requested by the Belgian government.(...)
Tax Newsletter - Vieira de Almeida
Foi publicada a recente newsletter do departamento fiscal da Vieira de Almeida, com destaque para a análise de algumas situações de aplicação no tempo da descida da taxa de IVA para 20%, agendada para o dia 1 de Julho do corrente ano.(...)
domingo, junho 01, 2008
Despacho 14592/2008 de 27 de Maio - Série II – nº 101
Considerando que o Decreto-Lei n.º 29/2008, de 25 de Fevereiro, que estabelece deveres de comunicação, informação e esclarecimento à administração tributária para prevenir e combater o planeamento fiscal abusivo, procede à introdução no sistema tributário nacional de um regime particularmente inovador, sem antecedentes na legislação fiscal portuguesa;
sexta-feira, maio 30, 2008
Regime Público de Capitalização - Revista Aspectos
Foi sob o signo da incerteza, quanto à futura protecção conferida pelo quadro de protecção social, que surgiu o novo regime público de capitalização, aprovado pelo Decreto–Lei n.º 26/2008 (publicado em Diário da República, do dia 22 de Fevereiro de 2008).
Este regime, que entrou em vigor no dia 1 de Março de 2008, mas retroagiu os seus efeitos a 1 de Janeiro de 2008, visa criar um mecanismo de fomento à poupança, com um sistema de gestão pública e enquadrado no âmbito mais lato da reforma do sistema público da segurança social, conforme esta foi definida pela resolução do Conselho de Ministros n.º 141/2006, de 25 de Outubro.
Para se compreender este novo regime, deve-se atentar no efeito negativo que o factor de sustentabilidade teve no cálculo quantitativo do valor das pensões. Dessa forma e com vista à minimização desse efeito foi relevada a importância do reforço dos mecanismos de poupança complementar.
Será deste modo que a resolução supra-referida estipulou a criação de “um regime de contribuição definida e de capitalização real, financiado pelas contribuições voluntárias dos beneficiários da segurança social que serão capitalizadas em contas individuais num fundo a criar, gerido pelo Instituto de Gestão de Fundos de Capitalização da Segurança Social”.
Este mecanismo destina-se a pessoas singulares, que em razão do exercício de uma actividade profissional, se encontram abrangidas por um regime de protecção social de inscrição obrigatória. O seu maior objectivo é permitir a constituição de um complemento de pensão ou de poupança. Este complemento advirá da possibilidade de efectuar um desconto adicional, para um Fundo Público, em função da remuneração, com o objectivo de melhorar o valor da pensão.
A adesão será individual e voluntária e as contribuições de cada aderente serão depositadas na sua conta, convertendo-se em unidades de participação designadas por certificados de reforma, integrando-se num fundo autónomo gerido pelo Instituto de Gestão de Fundos de Capitalização da Segurança Social, I.P. Este fundo apresenta-se como tendo um perfil de risco prudente, idêntico ao FEFSS (Fundo de Estabilização Financeira da Segurança Social) e com custos de gestão previsivelmente baixos.
A adesão poderá ser feita através dos canais da Internet, telefone ou nos postos de atendimento da segurança social, devendo a obrigação contributiva ser cumprida através de transferência bancária. A adesão implica ainda a obrigatoriedade de permanência até ao momento da renovação, não podendo o período de permanência ter duração inferior a um ano. Somente no ano da própria adesão é que o período de permanência poderá ser inferior a um ano.
Para além disso, o pagamento das contribuições, é feita através de entregas mensais, estáveis por um período mínimo de 12 meses. A taxa contributiva poderá ser de 2% ou 4% e para aderentes com 50 ou mais anos de idade, poderá ser de 6% e acresce aos 11% obrigatórios. O pagamento das contribuições deverá ocorrer até o dia 8 de cada mês, reportando-se ao mês em que foi pago.
Anualmente, no mês de Janeiro, o aderente é informado do extracto da sua conta individual, do valor da base de incidência contributiva e do valor da contribuição mensal a vigorar nos 12 meses seguintes.
O saldo da conta individual, através da qual a contribuição será mensalmente creditada, será intransmissível por negócio inter-vivos e impenhorável, distinguindo-se aqui dos planos-poupança reforma de índole privada.
A renovação será anual, havendo contudo sempre a possibilidade de suspender os pagamentos ou de alterar a taxa de contribuição. A suspensão sucederá, entre outras causas, quando haja vontade manifestada nesse sentido, incumprimento da obrigação contributiva por período de três meses consecutivos, perda de emprego, invalidez, doença por um período superior a 30 dias. Não obstante, caso tenha havido suspensão, poderá ser solicitado a qualquer momento o reiniciar do cumprimento da obrigação contributiva, aplicando-se o regime previsto para a adesão.
As dotações ficam a capitalizar até à idade da reforma do investidor, e rendem benefícios fiscais análogos aos definidos para o sector privado, nomeadamente serão dedutíveis à colecta do IRS, 20% dos valores aplicados, tendo como limite máximo € 350 por sujeito passivo.
É possível ainda cumular os dois sistemas (público e privado) e usufruir dos respectivos benefícios fiscais em simultâneo. Porém, não se admitem transferências de poupanças de outros PPR’s, nem dotações extraordinárias, para não entrar em concorrência directa com produtos já existentes no mercado (apesar de algumas queixas já tornadas públicas por parte de concorrentes neste mercado).
Por outro lado, às importâncias pagas no âmbito do regime público de capitalização é aplicável o regime previsto no Código do IRS para as rendas vitalícias, o que permite que estes valores sejam tributados de forma mais favorável que as pensões.
A utilização do capital acumulado poderá ser feita no momento da reforma ou aposentação por velhice ou nos casos de invalidez absoluta e permanente. Quanto à forma, pode o aderente optar pela atribuição do complemento sob a forma vitalícia, pelo resgate do capital acumulado ou pela transferência do capital acumulado para um plano de complemento de filhos e de cônjuge.
Sendo a opção pelo resgate, poderá fazê-lo de forma parcial, sendo que o capital remanescente terá de ser suficiente para permitir a sua conversão numa renda vitalícia que possa ser considerada como complemento de pensão.
Nas situações por morte do aderente antes de adquirido o direito ao complemento, o capital acumulado na sua conta individual é integralmente transmissível aos herdeiros legais. Após a aquisição do direito ao complemento, há transmissão por morte no primeiros 36 meses de pagamento do complemento: 100% - nos primeiros 12 meses; 66% - do 13º ao 24º mês; 33% - 25º ao 36º mês. Os herdeiros que por sua vez seja, também aderentes do regime público de capitalização podem adicionar à sua conta individual o capital que lhes foi transmitido.
Pelo exposto, afere-se que este produto poderá ser uma alternativa a ter em conta, quer pelas suas características, quer pelos benefícios associados para efeitos de maximização da poupança a efectuar.
Miguel Primaz – 10.04.2008
Artigo publicado na Revista Aspectos ligada à Câmara de Comércio e Indústria Luso-Francesa
Belgium: VAT on the supply of Land
In the framework of the 2008 budget discussions, the Belgian federal government has the intention to subject the sale of land in certain circumstances to VAT (21%). This implies a significant change in the current legislation, which foresees that the sale of land is under any circumstances exempt from VAT but subject to registration duties (10% or 12.5%, depending on the competent region). As the application of VAT in principle implies an exemption from registration duties, the regions will have to limit their scope of competence to impose registration duties on the sale of land.(...)
Fuel prices: French proposal on fuel VAT gets EU cold shoulder
French President Nicolas Sarkozy's proposal for a cap on VAT on fuel oil to alleviate the effects of the sudden hike in petroleum prices got a cold reception in the Union.
On 27 May, Sarkozy said that the EU should consider suspending VAT to help oil consumers. "VAT would no longer be applied at a certain price level," he explained.
Confronted with the uprising of his fishermen and the growing cry of his hauliers and farmers, he said that he was going to "pose the question" to his European partners. But he reiterated that decisions on taxation are made unanimously by member states. French Economy Minister Christine Lagarde, furthermore, acknowledged that obtaining such an agreement would be a difficult exercise. Despite the scepticism of his partners on this matter, Sarkozy said again, on 28 May in Warsaw, that he is "staying the course". "It is a proposal and I want it to be studied before being rejected," Sarkozy told a press conference.
The European Commission quickly reacted by saying that Sarkozy's idea would send a "bad signal" to petrol producing countries. The Austrian Finance Minister, Wilhelm Molterer, said, on 28 May before the press in Vienna, that he thinks "nothing good" of the proposal.
The Portuguese Economy Minister, Manuel Pinho, asked the EU to debate, as a matter of urgency, measures which would "offset the impact of the increase in petroleum prices". In the short and medium term, it is necessary to find "measures which could minimise the negative effect of the increase in petroleum prices," writes the Portuguese minister in a letter sent to his Slovene counterpart, Andrej Vizjak, whose country currently holds the rotating EU Presidency, and to the Vice-President of the European Commission, Gunter Verheugen.
Belgian Finance Minister Didier Reynders was reserved about the French president's idea of capping the VAT levied on petroleum products, judging that this measure would have "colossal costs". "We are ready to look into the question, but with a reduced rate there are colossal costs, in the region of a quarter of a billion euro in Belgium," Reynders told the agency Belga, stressing that the decrease "would perhaps not change the final price". However, he did defend the system adopted by Belgium, where additional VAT income during periods of high fuel prices is compensated through a drop in duty. "The Commission has never criticised us on the subject," he said.
Contrary to VAT, which varies according to the price billed, excise duty is in accordance with the quantity bought (payment of a given sum per litre sold).
On 27 May, Sarkozy said that the EU should consider suspending VAT to help oil consumers. "VAT would no longer be applied at a certain price level," he explained.
Confronted with the uprising of his fishermen and the growing cry of his hauliers and farmers, he said that he was going to "pose the question" to his European partners. But he reiterated that decisions on taxation are made unanimously by member states. French Economy Minister Christine Lagarde, furthermore, acknowledged that obtaining such an agreement would be a difficult exercise. Despite the scepticism of his partners on this matter, Sarkozy said again, on 28 May in Warsaw, that he is "staying the course". "It is a proposal and I want it to be studied before being rejected," Sarkozy told a press conference.
The European Commission quickly reacted by saying that Sarkozy's idea would send a "bad signal" to petrol producing countries. The Austrian Finance Minister, Wilhelm Molterer, said, on 28 May before the press in Vienna, that he thinks "nothing good" of the proposal.
The Portuguese Economy Minister, Manuel Pinho, asked the EU to debate, as a matter of urgency, measures which would "offset the impact of the increase in petroleum prices". In the short and medium term, it is necessary to find "measures which could minimise the negative effect of the increase in petroleum prices," writes the Portuguese minister in a letter sent to his Slovene counterpart, Andrej Vizjak, whose country currently holds the rotating EU Presidency, and to the Vice-President of the European Commission, Gunter Verheugen.
Belgian Finance Minister Didier Reynders was reserved about the French president's idea of capping the VAT levied on petroleum products, judging that this measure would have "colossal costs". "We are ready to look into the question, but with a reduced rate there are colossal costs, in the region of a quarter of a billion euro in Belgium," Reynders told the agency Belga, stressing that the decrease "would perhaps not change the final price". However, he did defend the system adopted by Belgium, where additional VAT income during periods of high fuel prices is compensated through a drop in duty. "The Commission has never criticised us on the subject," he said.
Contrary to VAT, which varies according to the price billed, excise duty is in accordance with the quantity bought (payment of a given sum per litre sold).
European Report
quinta-feira, maio 29, 2008
Luxembourg slashes corporate tax rate and abolishes capital duty
Luxembourg's international tax competitiveness has been given a boost after the government announced it will reduce the country's corporate income tax rate and abolish capital duty.
In his statement on the economic, social and financial state of Luxembourg [In Luxembourgeois and French], the prime minster Jean–Claude Juncker announced that he will reduce the corporate income tax rate progressively from 29.63% to 25.5%. The first reduction will take effect on January 1 2009 followed by a further reduction in 2010.
The Luxembourg corporate tax rate consists of a nationwide rate of 22% on which a surcharge of 4% is levied and a local business tax rate which varies per community. The rate of 29.63% is the combined rate for Luxembourg City.
The abolition of capital duty as of January 1 2009 follows a previous cut in 2008 from 1% to 0.5% levied on capital contributions to companies and partnerships. The cut was sparked by an EU recommendation which called for member states to eliminate capital duty. The recommendation was amended with no provision to abolish the tax.
"This is a good surprise for Luxembourg as we didn't know if capital duty would be abolished or not. It makes things easier for investors as [capital duty] was one additional cost to consider when structuring investments," said Samantha Nonnenkamp from Atoz, a tax advisory firm in Luxembourg.
"The drop in the corporate income tax rate is also good for investors and puts Luxembourg at around average compared to the rates of its competitors. But to make the country more competitive, more needs to be done," Nonnenkamp said.
"As far as we know the government is working on several tax improvements," said Simon Paul from law firm Loyens & Loeff in Luxembourg. "These cuts improve the country's competitiveness but net wealth tax should be high on the agenda when looking to attract international investors. The government of course can't abolish everything but net wealth tax can be a problem for foreign investors," he said. "I think net wealth tax will be abolished at some point but I don't know when."
Guy Schuller, a spokesperson for the prime minister said: "Industry members probably think more needs to be done to boost Luxembourg's competitiveness further, but with general elections taking place next year, this is something for the next government to consider."(...)
In his statement on the economic, social and financial state of Luxembourg [In Luxembourgeois and French], the prime minster Jean–Claude Juncker announced that he will reduce the corporate income tax rate progressively from 29.63% to 25.5%. The first reduction will take effect on January 1 2009 followed by a further reduction in 2010.
The Luxembourg corporate tax rate consists of a nationwide rate of 22% on which a surcharge of 4% is levied and a local business tax rate which varies per community. The rate of 29.63% is the combined rate for Luxembourg City.
The abolition of capital duty as of January 1 2009 follows a previous cut in 2008 from 1% to 0.5% levied on capital contributions to companies and partnerships. The cut was sparked by an EU recommendation which called for member states to eliminate capital duty. The recommendation was amended with no provision to abolish the tax.
"This is a good surprise for Luxembourg as we didn't know if capital duty would be abolished or not. It makes things easier for investors as [capital duty] was one additional cost to consider when structuring investments," said Samantha Nonnenkamp from Atoz, a tax advisory firm in Luxembourg.
"The drop in the corporate income tax rate is also good for investors and puts Luxembourg at around average compared to the rates of its competitors. But to make the country more competitive, more needs to be done," Nonnenkamp said.
"As far as we know the government is working on several tax improvements," said Simon Paul from law firm Loyens & Loeff in Luxembourg. "These cuts improve the country's competitiveness but net wealth tax should be high on the agenda when looking to attract international investors. The government of course can't abolish everything but net wealth tax can be a problem for foreign investors," he said. "I think net wealth tax will be abolished at some point but I don't know when."
Guy Schuller, a spokesperson for the prime minister said: "Industry members probably think more needs to be done to boost Luxembourg's competitiveness further, but with general elections taking place next year, this is something for the next government to consider."(...)
Intervenção do Ministério das Finanças - Alteração do IVA
Intervenção do Ministro de Estado e das Finanças no Debate sobre Propostas de Alteração do IVA na Reunião Plenária da Assembleia da República.
Tax Bulletin - PLMJ
"Encontra-se ainda dependente de aprovação pela Assembleia da República uma Proposta de Lei do Governo que visa alterar a taxa normal deste imposto, de 21% para 20% (e de 15% para 14%, no caso de operações que se considerem efectuadas nas Regiões Autónomas), com efeitos a partir do próximo dia 1 de Julho. À semelhança do que sucedeu em anteriores alterações de taxas do
IVA, a entrada em vigor desta alteração legislativa irá suscitar alguns problemas práticos de aplicação da lei no tempo, os quais, como vem sendo regra nestas situações, deverão vir a ser objecto de instruções administrativas."
IVA, a entrada em vigor desta alteração legislativa irá suscitar alguns problemas práticos de aplicação da lei no tempo, os quais, como vem sendo regra nestas situações, deverão vir a ser objecto de instruções administrativas."
RETIRADO DA ÚLTIMA NEWSLETTER DO DEPARTAMENTO FISCAL DA PLMJ
terça-feira, maio 27, 2008
EU Tax News - Ernst & Young
The EU Tax Newsletter is issued every two months and provides commentary and analysis of the major EU tax issues, cases and proceedings in the prior two months, as well as coverage of other EU tax issues and a regular in-depth look at one particular country from an EU Tax perspective.
The latest issue: EU Tax News May-June 2008.
The latest issue: EU Tax News May-June 2008.
Workshop - Economia e Fiscalidade do Carbono
O IDEFF organiza, no próximo dia 28 de Maio, entre as 10:00 e as 16:00, um Workshop subordinado ao tema Economia e Fiscalidade do Carbono.
Consulte o programa
Inscrição obrigatória com limite de lugares: EUR 100.
Inscrições/Contactem-nos em: ideff@fd.ul.pt, taniagodinho@fd.ul.ptt
Esta iniciativa conta com o apoio do grupo Portucel Soporcel e da KPMG.
Consulte o programa
Inscrição obrigatória com limite de lugares: EUR 100.
Inscrições/Contactem-nos em: ideff@fd.ul.pt, taniagodinho@fd.ul.ptt
Esta iniciativa conta com o apoio do grupo Portucel Soporcel e da KPMG.
A Rebelião Fiscal
Portugal tem que evoluir em muitos pontos, sob pena de prolongar indefinidamente uma situação de pouco investimento.
A rebelião fiscal é o título de um artigo da revista “The Economist” de 10 de Maio de 2008, que descreve a reacção das empresas a um aumento dos impostos na Grã-Bretanha. Várias empresas, nomeadamente a Shire, (terceira maior farmacêutica inglesa), e a WPP, alteraram a sua sede para países com níveis de impostos mais baixos. A percepção que os empresários têm dos aumentos dos impostos, é que estes resultam da má gestão e da falta de controlo da despesa por parte do Estado, e que os seus accionistas não têm de pagar por esse laxismo.A Confederação da Indústria britânica afirma que este aumento dos impostos põe as empresas inglesas em desvantagem competitiva com as suas congéneres da União Europeia e do resto do mundo. O Governo inglês ficou naturalmente alarmado e suspendeu as referidas medidas, demonstrando o bom-senso que tanto tem faltado nos últimos dez anos em Portugal, onde os agentes económicos não são ouvidos nem achados sobre algo que lhes diz directamente respeito – os impostos. Naturalmente que cada empresa que abandona um país gera um empobrecimento considerável da economia, pondo a descoberto todos os problemas e fraquezas de competitividade e conflitualidade fiscal existentes.Em Portugal, várias associações de PME e outros movimentos associativos chegaram ao nível de desespero de sugerirem aos seus associados, para que constituam novas empresas em Espanha, Inglaterra, para a partir daí operarem em Portugal e serem competitivas. Só os políticos ignoram esta realidade, pois vivendo no sector público, o aumento dos impostos corresponde a um aumento de receita, e naturalmente à possibilidade de fazerem mais despesa. Por outro lado, dão-se com os presidentes e administradores das empresas públicas, e circulam entre si em cargos de empresas actualmente privadas mas monopolistas, que na realidade nunca sofrem com as crises ou impostos, pois têm a capacidade de fixarem os preços que querem aos consumidores, dado que não existem alternativas – a tão conhecida “renda monopolista”, típica dos países mais atrasados. A última medida tomada pelo Governo em matéria fiscal, entrou em vigor no passado dia 15 de Maio de 2008, e na teoria destina-se a combater o planeamento fiscal agressivo. Digo na teoria porque, segundo a OCDE, a experiência nesta matéria correu particularmente mal, tendo-se as Administrações Fiscais de inúmeros países reunido para voltar a abordar o papel dos intermediários fiscais (advogados, auditores e outros) no desenvolvimento económico dos países.Tendo concluído que as legislações agressivas e penalizadoras dos intermediários fiscais, não só não alteram os comportamentos das grandes empresas e clientes, como têm um efeito profundamente negativo na economia. Este grupo de trabalho da OCDE concluiu que o planeamento fiscal não agressivo é essencial para as empresas e contribuintes prosseguirem os seus projectos de investimento, e que a acção agressiva da Administração Fiscal em matérias de planeamento fiscal não agressivo leva à estagnação económica dos países, ao não investimento e mesmo ao desinvestimento. Foi também concluído que a Administração Fiscal de qualquer país tem que ter cinco atributos base no tratamento ou na relação com todos os contribuintes:
1. Compreensão das opções dos contribuintes baseadas num conhecimento profundo das áreas de negócios;
2. Imparcialidade;
3. Proporcionalidade;
4. Ser transparente e informar os contribuintes;
5. Responder rapidamente às questões por estes colocadas.
Só com estes atributos é possível reduzir o planeamento fiscal agressivo, sem afectar o crescimento económico e o investimento por parte dos contribuintes. Portugal tem que evoluir em todos estes pontos, sob pena de prolongar indefinidamente uma situação de pouco investimento, neste momento ainda mais agravadas pela crise internacional que se vive, e consequentemente ultrapassar a situação de estagnação económica em que se encontra há mais de oito anos.
segunda-feira, maio 26, 2008
International Tax Planning - Conferência na UCP
Conferência: International Tax Planning in an Era of Globalization pelo Prof. Charles Gustafson, Georgetown Univ., 28 de Maio, 18.00. Moderação: Dr. Miguel Teixeira de Abreu (Abreu Advogados).
Subscrever:
Mensagens (Atom)