Countries: Belgium

European Commission vs. Belgium, September 2021, The European Court of Justice, Case No. C‑337/19 P

blank

Since 2005, Belgium has applied a system of exemptions for the excess profit of Belgian entities which form part of multinational corporate groups. Those entities were able to obtain a tax ruling from the Belgian tax authorities, if they could demonstrate the existence of a new situation, such as a reorganisation leading to the relocation […]

Belgium vs “Uniclick B.V.”, June 2021, Court of Appeal, Case No 2016/AR/455

blank

“Uniclick B.V.” had performed all the important DEMPE functions with regard to intangible assets as well as managing all risks related to development activities without being remunerated for this. Royalty-income related to the activities had instead been received by a foreign group company incorporated in Ireland and with its place of management in Luxembourg. In […]

Belgium vs ALCOPA N.V, September 2020, Supreme Court, Case No RG F.19.0056.N

blank

The dispute concerns a tax assessments issued by the plaintiff (the Belgian tax administration) for FY 2002 and 2003. In particular, the claimant (Alcopa N.V – the first company to sign a European distribution contract with Hyundai) contests the classification of reimbursements received from the Korean company HYUNDAI MOTOR COMPANY for publicity services, for an […]

Belgium vs Fortum Project Finance, May 2019, Court of Appeal in Antwerp, Case No F.16.0053.N

blank

Fortum Project Finance (Fortum PF’) is a Belgian company, founded in 2008 by Fortum OYI, a Finnish company, and Fortum Holding bv, a Dutch company. The establishment of Fortum PF was part of an acquisition that the Finnish company Fortum OYI, through its Swedish subsidiary Fortum 1AB, had in mind in Russia. However, the financing […]

Belgium vs Lammers & Van Cleeff, January 2008, European Court of Justice, Case No. C-105/07

blank

The question in this case, was whether EU community law precluded Belgien statutory rules under which interest payments were reclassified as dividends, and thus taxable, if made to a foreign shareholder company. A Belgian subsidiary was established and the two shareholders of the Belgian subsidiary and the parent company, established in the Netherlands, were appointed […]

Belgium vs M. Ruythooren and M. Smets, November 2004, Court of first instance Antwerp, Case No 188/2004

blank

At issue in this case was whether Belgian arm’s length provision in article 344 infringed Article 170 of the Belgian constitution, according to which a tax in favor of the State may only be introduced by law. “Does Article 344(1) of the Income Tax Code 1992, in the version applicable to the assessment years 1996, […]