Tag: SICAV

Banca Generali announces EUR 45 Million Settlement with Italian Revenue Agency

Banca Generali announces EUR 45 Million Settlement with Italian Revenue Agency

Italian financial institute, Banca Generali, has signed a agreement with the Italian Revenue Agency, whereby the parties agreed upon the terms and conditions for the settlement of tax claims in relation to transfer pricing for FY 2014 to 2018. Under the agreement, Banca Generali will incur an additional tax charge of €45.99 million for FY 2014-2018. The tax dispute relates to remuneration for a transfer in 2008 of fund management activities in Italian to a newly established Luxembourg company, BG Fund Management Luxembourg S.A. According to the announcement, no penalties will be applied due to the penalty protection regime. Italy BG_Tax+Agreement_2022 ... Read more
Korea vs "Lux corp", 16 January 2020, Supreme Court Case no. 2016두35854

Korea vs “Lux corp”, 16 January 2020, Supreme Court Case no. 2016두35854

In this case the Korean Supreme Court held that Luxembourg SICAV and SICAF are entitled to reduced withholding tax rate on interest and dividend income under the Korea–Luxembourg Tax Treaty. Meaning of “residents of Luxembourg,” which is subject to the “Convention between the Government of the Republic of Korea and the Government of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income and on Capital” (held: any person who, under the laws of Luxembourg, is liable to pay tax therein), and in a case where tax is not imposed in accordance with the benefit of tax exemption, etc. for which legal requirements has been fulfilled, whether it may be considered that the tax liability does not exist (negative). Standard for determining whether one qualifies as the “beneficial owner” as prescribed in Article 10(2) Item (b) or 11(2) of the “Convention between the Government of the Republic ... Read more
Sweden vs Nordea Nordic Baltic AB, October 2015, Administrative Court of Appeal, Case No 4811-14, 4813–4817-14

Sweden vs Nordea Nordic Baltic AB, October 2015, Administrative Court of Appeal, Case No 4811-14, 4813–4817-14

Nordea Nordic Baltic AB was the manager of funds and a central distributor in Sweden of certain funds registered in Luxembourg. The company entered into a new distribution agreement that replaced two previous agreements. According to this new agreement, the remuneration to the company was lower than under the previous agreement. The company considered that the compensation under the old agreements had been too high which therefore compensated for (set-off) the lower compensation received according to the new agreement. The Court of Appeal stated that the set-off principle must be applied with caution. A basic precondition should be that these are transactions that have arisen within the framework of the same contractual relationship. It did not matter if the company was overcompensated by another party to the agreement. Any overcompensation in previous years from the same contracting party could also not be taken into account as it was the result of a different pricing strategy within the framework of another ... Read more