Type of court: District Court

Czech Republic vs. Eli Lilly ČR, s.r.o., August 2023, Supreme Administrative Court, No. 6 Afs 125/2022 – 65

blank

Eli Lilly ČR imports pharmaceutical products purchased from Eli Lilly Export S.A. (Swiss sales and marketing hub) into the Czech Republic and Slovakia and distributes them to local distributors. The arrangement between the Czech company and the Swiss company is based on a Service Contract in which Eli Lilly ČR is named as the service […]

Korea vs “Fuel Injection Corp”, August 2023, District Court, Case No 2022구합50258

blank

In this case, “Fuel Injection Corp” had acquired a patent from its shareholder. The patent related to the manufacture of fuel injectors for marine engines. The tax authorities considered that the value placed on the patent by the related parties was unsubstantiated. On this basis, a tax assessment was issued in which “Fuel Injection Corp”‘s […]

Netherlands vs “Lux Credit B.V.”, July 2023, Court of Hague, Case No AWB – 21_4016 (ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2023:12061)

blank

“Lux Credit B.V.” took out various credit facilities from related parties [company name 2] s.a.r.l. and [company name 3] s.a.r.l. – both resident in Luxembourg. These were financings whereby “Lux Credit facility B.V.” could draw funds (facilities) up to a pre-agreed maximum amount. In doing so, “Lux Credit B.V.” owed both interest and “commitment fees”. […]

Israel vs Medtronic Ventor Technologies Ltd, June 2023, District Court, Case No 31671-09-18

blank

In 2008 and 2009 the Medtronic group acquired the entire share capital of the Israeli company, Ventor Technologies Ltd, for a sum of $325 million. Subsequent to the acquisition various inter-company agreements were entered into between Ventor Technologies Ltd and Medtronics, but no transfer of intangible assets was recognised by the Group for tax purposes. […]

Netherlands vs “Tobacco B.V.”, October 2022, Rechtbank Noord-Holland, Case No ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2022:8936

blank

“Tobacco B.V.” is a Dutch company belonging to an international tobacco group. Following an audit an assessment of additional taxable income of €196,001,385, €220,624,304 and €179,896,349 for FY 2008-2010 was issued to “Tobacco B.V.”, and a penalty for non-compliance for FY 2010 of €477,624 was imposed. The dispute focused on whether the fees charged by […]

Netherlands vs “BR-AGRI B.V.”, September 2022, Rechtbank Noord-Holland, Case No ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2022:9062

blank

A Dutch company “BR-AGRI B.V.” had transferred functions, assets and risks to a Swiss sister company as part of a business restructuring. The profit resulting from the transfer had been determined by the group to be EUR 1,831,037. The Dutch tax authorities found that the arm’s length value of the assets transferred was EUR 350 […]

Netherlands vs “Dividend B.V.”, May 2022, District Court, Case No AWB-21_2426 (ECLI:NL:RBZWB:2022:2432)

blank

“Dividend B.V.” is the legal successor of a BV that has made (dividend) distributions. With respect to the distributions to a Luxembourg company (LuxCo), no Dutch dividend tax was withheld on the basis of the withholding tax exemption. Prior to the first distribution, the relevant shares in the BV were held by a limited partnership […]

Poland vs “Fertilizer Licence SA”, April 2022, Provincial Administrative Court, Case No I SA/Po 788/21

blank

“Fertilizer Licence SA” (“A”) transferred its trademarks to “B” in 2013, previously financed the transfer through a cash contribution, and then, following the transfer, paid royalties to “A” in exchange for the ability to use the assets. According to the tax authorities, a situation where an entity transfers its assets to another entity, finances the […]

Czech Republic vs Avon Cosmetics Ltd, February 2022, Municipal Court, Case No 6 Af 36/2020 – 42

blank

In 2016 the British company Avon Cosmetics Limited (ACL) became the sole licensor of intellectual property rights for Europe, Africa and the Middle East within the Avon Cosmetics Group and was authorised to issue sub-licences to other group companies, including the Czech subsidiary, Avon Cosmetics spol. s r.o.. ACL charged a fee for issuing a […]

Korea vs “K-GAS Corp”, November 2021, Daegu District Court, Case No 2019구합22561

blank

K-GAS Corp had issued loans and performance guarantees to overseas subsidiaries but received no remuneration in return. The tax authorities issued an assessment where additional taxable income was determined by application of the arm’s length principle. An appeal was filed by K-GAS with the district court. Decision of the Court The court upheld the decision […]

Israel vs Sephira & Offek Ltd and Israel Daniel Amram, August 2021, Jerusalem District Court, Case No 2995-03-17

blank

While living in France, Israel Daniel Amram (IDA) devised an idea for the development of a unique and efficient computerized interface that would link insurance companies and physicians and facilitate financial accounting between medical service providers and patients. IDA registered the trademark “SEPHIRA” and formed a company in France under the name SAS SEPHIRA . […]

Netherlands vs “Related Party B.V.”, July 2021, District Court, Case No ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2021:3382

blank

In 2013 “Related Party B.V” entered into an agreement with “X BV” for the provision of transportation- and support services for oil and gas. The Dutch tax authority suspected that the parties were affiliated within the meaning of Section 8b of the Corporate Income Tax Act 1969. Decision of Court The Court decided in favor […]

Poland vs A S.A., June 2021, Provincial Administrative Court, Case No I SA/Gl 1649/20

blank

The business activity of A S.A. was wholesale of pharmaceutical products to external pharmacies, hospitals, wholesalers (including: to affiliated wholesalers). The tax authority had noted that the company’s name had been changed in FY 2013, and a loss in the amount of PLN […] had been reported in the company’s tax return. An audit revealed […]

Russia vs PJSC Vimpelcom-Communications, May 2021, Arbitration Court of Moscow, Case No. A40-36350/21-140-1024

blank

PJSC Vimpelcom-Communications submitted to the tax authority a revised notice of controlled transactions for 2017, under which contract numbers for 68 transactions were adjusted, including an agreement with a foreign counterparty Veon Wholensale Services B.V. (Netherlands) for the provision of agency-services (the “Controlled Transactions”), and information was also provided on another transaction with another foreign […]

Czech Republic vs. LCN Group s.r.o., April 2020, Regional Court, Case No 25 Af 76/2019 – 42

blank

LCN Group s.r.o. had deducted costs in its taxable income for marketing services provided by related parties. Following an audit, the tax authorities concluded that the prices agreed between the parties was not at arm’s length and issued an assessment. Decision of the Regional Court The Regional Court annulled the assessment and decided in favor […]

Japan vs. “Metal Plating Corp”, February 2020, Tokyo District Court, Case No 535 of Heisei 27 (2008)

blank

“Metal Plating Corp” is engaged in manufacturing and selling plating chemicals and had entered into a series of controlled transactions with foreign group companies granting licenses to use intangibles (know-how related to technology and sales) – and provided technical support services by sending over technical experts. The company had used a CUP method to price […]

Norway vs Orange Business Norway A/S, January 2020, Borgarting Lagmannsrett, Case No 2018-84331

blank

Orange Business Norway AS, a subsidiary of the French Orange Telecom Group, had been issued a tax assessment for FY 2006-2008. According to the Norwegian tax authorities, Orange Business Norway had determined the remuneration by applying a Profit Split Method in a way that closely resembled Global formulary apportionment. The tax authorities also found that […]

Netherlands vs “Fertilizer BV”, November 2019, District Court, Case No. ECLI:NL:RBZWB:2019:4920

blank

In 2016 Fertilizer BV had been issued a tax assessment for FY 2012 in which the tax authorities had imposed additional taxable income of €162,506,660. Fertilizer BV is the parent company of a fiscal unity for corporation tax (hereinafter: FU). It is a limited partner in a limited partnership under Dutch law, which operates a […]

Israel vs Broadcom, December 2019, Lod District Court, Case No 26342-01-16

blank

Broadcom Semiconductors Ltd is an Israeli company established in 2001 under the name Dune Semiconductors Ltd. The Company is engaged in development, production, and sale of components to routers, switches etc. The shares in Dune Semiconductors were acquired by the Broadcom Corporation (a US group) in 2009 and following the acquisition intellectual property was transferred […]

Czech Republic vs. Eli Lilly ČR, s.r.o., December 2019, District Court of Praque, No. 6 Afs 90/2016 – 62

blank

Eli Lilly ČR imports pharmaceutical products purchased from Eli Lilly Export S.A. (Swiss sales and marketing hub) into the Czech Republic and Slovakia and distributes them to local distributors. The arrangement between the local company and Eli Lilly Export S.A. is based on a Service Contract in which Eli Lilly ČR is named as the […]

Norway vs A/S Norske Shell, September 2019, Borgarting lagmannsrett, Case No LB-2018-79168 – UTV-2019-807

blank

A/S Norske Shell – an entity within the Dutch Shell group – had operations on the Norwegian continental shelf and conducted research and development (R&D) through a subsidiary. All R&D costs were deducted in Norway. The Norwegian tax authority applied the arms length principle and issued a tax assessment. It was assumed that the R&D […]

Japan vs “TH Corp”, January 2017, District Court, Case No. 56 of 2014 (Gyoseu)

blank

A tax assessment based on Japanese CFC rules (anti-tax haven rules) had been applied to a “TH Corp”‘s, subsidiary in Singapore. According to Japanese CFC rules, income arising from a foreign subsidiary located in a state or territory with significantly lower tax rates is deemed to arise as the income of the parent company when the principal business of the […]

Netherlands vs “Holding B.V.”, March 2007, District Court, Case No AWB 06/288, V-N 2007/35.6

blank

“Holding B.V.” is a holding company. The actual activity of the [X] group in the Netherlands – a wholesale trade in garden-related (gift) items – takes place in [X] B.V. The latter is included in a fiscal consolidation for corporate tax purposes with “Holding B.V.”. Customers of [X] B.V. are located in both the Netherlands […]

Netherlands vs “Dutch Low Risk Treasury B.V.”, August 2003, District Court, Case No 01/04083, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2003:AJ6865

blank

This case concerns a Dutch treasury company with a low risk intra-group borrowing and on-lending activity. The interested party was incorporated on 5 August 1995 by a legal person named V Limited, under Canadian law. Its subscribed and paid-up capital amounted to NLG 40,000 in the years under review. The claimant is part of the […]