Rust update january 20229/25/2023 Spain is an important case, as it addresses a number of relevant issues regarding the limits that the Member States must respect when implementing measures to counteract international tax avoidance and evasion.", At the same time, such flat-rate fines were much higher than the penalties imposed in respect of similar infringements in a purely national context, which were not capped. The legislation also provided for a proportional fine of 150% of the tax calculated on amounts corresponding to the value of those assets or those rights, which could be applied concurrently with flat-rate fines. The Spanish legislation provided for very serious economic consequences, such as the taxation of the value of not duly declared assets and rights as unjustified capital gains with no limitation period. The Court held that the Kingdom of Spain had failed to fulfil its obligations under article 63 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) (2007) and article 40 of the EEA Agreement (1992) by imposing disproportionate measures on the failure to duly comply with the obligation to provide information concerning assets and rights located abroad. The Court, in its decision, ruled in favour of the action brought by the Commission and did not fully follow the reasoning of Advocate General Saugmandsgaard e in his Opinion of 15 July 2021, who proposed only partially accepting the action brought by the Commission. Spain (Case C-788/19) (also cited as the Form 720 case), in which the First Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) delivered its decision on 27 January 2022. Spain is an important case, as it addresses a number of relevant issues regarding the limits that the Member States must respect when implementing measures to counteract international tax avoidance and evasion.Ībstract = "This is an Opinion Statement, submitted to the EU institutions in May 2022, of the CFE ECJ Task Force on Commission v. The Court, in its decision, ruled in favour of the action brought by the Commission and did not fully follow the reasoning of Advocate General Saugmandsgaard Øe in his Opinion of 15 July 2021, who proposed only partially accepting the action brought by the Commission. This is an Opinion Statement, submitted to the EU institutions in May 2022, of the CFE ECJ Task Force on Commission v.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |