TPcases

Database of Transfer Pricing Case Laws

France vs Foncière Vélizy Rose, December 2022, Court of Appeal of Paris, Case No 21PA05986

Posted on December 7, 2022 | By Courts of France | No comments

« Prev | Next »

This case concerns the application of the beneficial ownership rule to dividends paid by a French corporation Foncière Vélizy Rose to its Luxembourg parent Vélizy Rose Investment.

The Luxembourg parent company Vélizy Rose Investment was not considered to be the beneficial owner of the dividends.

it did not carry out any activity other than the receipt and further distribution of dividends, and
it distributed the full amount of the dividend to its Luxembourg parent one day after receipt;
all entities in the chain of ownership were wholly owned; and
the two Luxembourg entities had common directors.

Click here for English translation

Click here for other translation

Related Guidelines

Supplemental Guidance

France vs Foncière Vélizy Rose, November 2024, Conseil d’État, Case No 471147A French company paid an advance dividend to its Luxembourg parent, claiming withholding tax exemption under domestic law. The tax authorities denied the exemption, finding the Luxembourg entity was not the beneficial owner, as funds were immediately passed upstream to another Luxembourg company with no other assets or activities. The...

France vs Société Planet, May 2022, Conseil d’État, Case No 444451A French distributor of sports programmes paid royalties to intermediary companies in Belgium and Malta for sub-licensing fitness programmes owned by a New Zealand entity. The French tax authority assessed withholding tax, disputing treaty relief. The Conseil d'État ruled in May 2022 that the Franco-New Zealand treaty applied to French-source...

France vs Société Planet, July 2020, CAA, Case No 18MA04302A French company paid royalties to intermediary companies in Belgium and Malta, whose ultimate beneficial owner was resident in New Zealand. The French tax authority assessed withholding tax, arguing the Franco-New Zealand treaty did not apply where payments passed through third-country conduits. The Administrative Court of Appeal upheld the tax...

Korea vs “Lux corp”, 16 January 2020, Supreme Court Case no. 2016두35854A Korean tax authority denied reduced withholding tax rates on dividends and interest paid to Luxembourg SICAV and SICAF investment vehicles, challenging their status as treaty residents and beneficial owners under the Korea–Luxembourg Double Tax Treaty. The Korean Supreme Court ruled in favour of the taxpayers in 2020, confirming that...

Denmark vs Heavy Transport Holding Denmark ApS, March 2021, Court of Appeal, Cases B-721-13A Danish subsidiary in the Heerema group paid dividends to a Luxembourg parent, which passed funds to Panamanian entities. Denmark's Eastern High Court upheld the tax authority's assessment, finding the Luxembourg company was a conduit and not the beneficial owner of the dividends. Exemptions under the EU Parent-Subsidiary Directive and...

France vs Atlantique Négoce (Enka), June 2020, Conseil d’Etat, Case No. 423809A French subsidiary declared dividends paid to its Luxembourg parent, Enka, but the tax authority challenged whether Enka was the actual beneficial owner, noting no evidence linked the company to the Swiss bank account receiving the funds. The Conseil d'État upheld the withholding tax assessment in 2020, confirming that beneficial...

Switzerland vs Coffee Machine Group, April 2020, Federal Supreme Court, Case No 2C_354/2018A Swiss subsidiary paid dividends to an Irish group company that claimed withholding tax exemption under the DTA. Swiss tax authorities denied the refund, finding the Irish entity lacked beneficial ownership and substance. The Federal Supreme Court upheld this in April 2020, adding that the share transfer in 2006 and...

Denmark vs T and Y Denmark, February 2019, European Court of Justice, Cases C-116/16 and C-117/16Danish tax authorities withheld tax on dividends paid to Luxembourg and Bermuda conduit companies where the true beneficial owners resided outside treaty jurisdictions. The European Court of Justice, ruling in 2019 on joined Cases C-116/16 and C-117/16, confirmed that EU Member States may deny Parent-Subsidiary Directive exemptions where fraudulent or...

TPcases

France vs Foncière Vélizy Rose, December 2022, Court of Appeal of Paris, Case No 21PA05986

Related Guidelines

Supplemental Guidance

Leave a Reply

Related Case Law