Oct 17

16.00 – 17.00 CET

TAX TALKS Webcast – latest tax update to be provided by the OECD’s Centre for Tax Policy and Administration (CTPA).

TOPICS

·   BEPS, including the latest results of the minimum standard peer reviews and implementation guidance.

·   Current public consultation on digital economy taxation.

·   Other recent developments: work of the Forum on Tax Administration, and on tax transparency.

QUESTION FOR THE PANEL?

Questions can be sent in advance to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

You can also tweet your questions during the webcast to @OECDtax or via #OECDtaxtalks.

One has to register upfront to be able to follow this live webcast. Click here to be forwarded to the website where you can register for the webcast.

Oct 18

14.00 CET

Meeting of the European Parliament’s Committee of Inquiry into Money Laundering Tax Avoidance and Tax Evasion (PANA Committee)

A live webcast of the meeting will be available here

The PANA Committee will decide on its findings and recommendations in two separate voting sessions. The draft inquiry report and the draft recommendations of the PANA Committee -prepared by the co-rapporteurs Jeppe Kofod (S&D) and Petr Jezek (ALDE) - were debated at the Committee meeting on July 10,  2017 and the subsequent amendments to both texts were discussed at the Committee meeting on October 12, 2017.

·   Draft report (conclusions)

·   Part II of the draft report - Overview of activities during the mandate of the PANA Committee

·   Amendments to the draft report (1 to 313)

·   Amendments to the draft report (314 to 667)

·   Draft motion for Parliament recommendation

·   Amendments to the draft recommendation (1 to 376)

·   Amendments to the draft recommendation (377 to 783)

Oct 19

CJEU expected to deliver judgment in Case C-573/16, Air Berlin (Indirect taxes on the raising of capital)

Questions referred for a preliminary ruling:

1.     Is the levying by a member state of Stamp Duty of 1.5% on the transfer, as set out in the reference, in the circumstances set out in the reference, contrary to one or more of:

a.     Article 10 or Article 11 of the First Directive;

b.     Article 4 or Article 5 of the Second Directive; or

c.     Articles 12, 43, 48, 49 or 56 of the EC Treaty?

2.     Does the answer to the first question differ in circumstances where the transfer of shares to the clearance service was required in order to facilitate a listing of the company in question on a stock exchange in that member state or another member state?

3.     Does the answer to the first question or the second question differ in circumstances where the national law of the member state enabled an operator of a clearance service, where it receives approval from the taxation authority, to elect that no Stamp Duty is payable on the transfer of shares into the clearance service but that SDRT is instead charged on each subsequent sale of shares within the clearance service (at the rate of 0.5% of the sale consideration)?

4.     Does the answer to the third question differ in circumstances where the structure of the transactions chosen by the company in question means that the benefit of the election cannot be enjoyed?

Oct 19

CJEU expected to deliver judgment in Case C-303/16, Solar Electric Martinique (VAT – interpretation of the expression ‘works of construction’ within the meaning of Article 5(5) of the Sixth Directive and Article 14(3) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC)

Question referred for a preliminary ruling:

Do the sale and installation of photovoltaic and solar water heating panels on buildings, or with a view to supplying electricity or hot water to buildings, constitute a single transaction that may be characterised as works of construction for the purposes of Article 5(5) and Article 6(1) of [the Sixth Directive], now Article 14(3) and Article 24(1) of [the VAT Directive]?

More information regarding the Opinion of the Advocate General in this case can be found here

Oct 19

CJEU expected to deliver judgment in Case C-101/16, Paper Consult (Right to deduct VAT – Invoices issued by a taxpayer declared inactive by the tax authorities)

Questions referred for a preliminary ruling:

(1)   Does Directive 2006/112/EC preclude national rules under which a taxable person is denied the right to deduct VAT on the ground that the person upstream, who issued the invoice on which the expenditure and VAT are indicated, has been declared as inactive by the tax authorities?

(2)   If the answer to the first question is in the negative, does Directive 2006/112/EC preclude national rules under which it is sufficient to display the list of registered inactive taxpayers at the headquarters of the Agenției Națională de Administrare Fiscală (National Agency for Fiscal Administration) and to publish that list on the website of that agency, in the section Public information — Information relating to economic operators, in order that the right to deduct VAT in the circumstances described in the first question may be refused?

More information regarding the Opinion of the Advocate General in this case can be found here