Check Point Software Technologies was assessed administrative penalties by the tax authorities (FIRS) for failure to file a country-by-country report, and a complaint was filed with the Tax Appeal Tribunal by the company. Decision of the Tribunal The Tax Appeal Tribunal held that the administrative penalties issued by the FIRS in enforcement of the CbCR Regulations were unconstitutional and void because the Board of the Federal Inland Revenue Service, which was legally empowered to make the regulations, did not exist between 2012 and 2020. Since the FIRS Board did not exist during the said period, the exercise of the delegated powers under the provisions of the Nigerian CbCR regulations was not possible – any step, process or action taken in the name of the Board would be null and void. Excerpts “A careful consideration of the provisions of Section 61 as exposed above shows that the National Assembly has delegated its powers specifically to the Board of the Federal Inland ... Read more

A GmbH provided funding in the form of a clearing account to its Belgian subsidiary. The account was unsecured and carried an interest of 6% p.a. In 2005, A GmbH and the Belgian company agreed on a debt write-off which was deducted for tax purposes. The tax authorities issued an assessment where the write-off was denied as a tax deductible expense. According to the tax authorities, independent third parties would have agreed on some kind of security. The lack thereof was a violation of the arm’s length principle. A GmbH brought the assessment to court. The Federal Fiscal Court (I R 73/16) found the assessment of the tax authorities to be lawful. This decision was then appealed to the Constitutional Court by  A GmbH, alleging violation of the general principle of equality as well as a violation of its fundamental procedural right to the lawful judge. Decision of the Constitutional Court The Federal Constitutional Court decided in favour of A ... Read more

A Colombian taxpayer had filed an unconstitutionality complaint against Article 70 (partial) of Law 1819 of 2016, “Whereby a structural tax reform is adopted, mechanisms for the fight against tax evasion and avoidance are strengthened, and other provisions are enacted.” The Constitutional Court ruled that the Colombian GAAR legislation was not unconstitutional. Click here for English translation Click here for other translation (1) Corte Constitucional - Sentencia C-480 del 19 de noviembre de 2020 ... Read more

In February 2019, Colegio de Abogados de La Libertad (CALL) in Peru filed an appeal before the Constitutional Court claiming that tax debts of at least 9 billion soles (USD 2,5 billions) owed by 158 large companies could not be collected by the tax authorities (SUNAT) due to the statute of limitation in Legislative Decree 1421. By four votes against and one vote for, the Constitutional Court rejected the claim. NoCOMPANY/TAXPAYERSTATUTE OF LIMITATIONS INVOKEDSTATUTE OF LIMITATIONS NOT INVOKEDTOTAL 1COMPAÑIA DE MINAS BUENAVENTURA S.A.A.2.083.106.4842.083.106.484 2SCOTIABANK PERU SAA1.076.546.4201.076.546.420 3COMPAÑIA MINERA ANTAPACCAY S.A.2.961.028725.065.302728.026.330 4MINERA LAS BAMBAS S.A.698.986.212698.986.212 5SOCIEDAD MINERA CERRO VERDE S.A.A542.560.586542.560.586 6TELEFONICA DEL PERU SAA301.180.21257.714.287358.894.499 7LATAM AIRLINES PERU S.A.332.312.17118.782.845351.095.016 8CONSORCIO MINERO S.A. EN LIQUIDACION122.737.710171.965.780294.703.490 9EMPRESA MINERA LOS QUENUALES S.A.255.456.549255.456.549 10AMERICA MOVIL PERU S.A.C.246.510.566246.510.566 11ENEL GENERACION PERU S.A.A.236.223.504236.223.504 12VOLCAN COMPANIA MINERA S.A.A161.464.638161.464.638 13SUPERMERCADOS PERUANOS SOCIEDAD ANONIMA 'O ' S.P.S.A33.294.659104.866.817138.161.476 14UNIVERSIDAD PERUANA DE CIENCIAS APLICADAS S.A.C128.889.678128.889.678 15COMPANIA MINERA ANTAMINA S.A119.550.076119.550.076 16ELECTROCENTRO S.A.111.905.388111.905.388 17UNION ANDINA DE CEMENTOS S.A.A. - UNACEM S.A.A15.132.22692.121.037107.253.263 18UNIVERSIDAD INCA GARCILASO DE ... Read more

In this case a complaint was filed requesting that Legislative Decrees Nos. 762, 763 and 764, approved at the Plenary Session of the Legislative Assembly on 30-VIII-2014, which ended on 31-VII-2014, be declared unconstitutional on procedural grounds, for the alleged violation of art. 135 inc. 1 of the Constitution of the Republic. The fundamental reason for the declaration of unconstitutionality is that there was no real possibility for parliamentary deliberation and discussion. Decision of the Supreme Court The court declared certain legislative decrees relating to the income tax law and the tax on financial transactions to be unconstitutional with effect as of December 2018. Among the tax measures affected by the decision were Alignment of El Salvador’s transfer pricing rules with the OECD guidelines; Ability of the El Salvador tax authorities to exchange information with other tax jurisdictions; In its reasoning the court refers to procedural flaw in the legislative process, because the decrees were not deliberated or debated by ... Read more

The Supreme Tax Court has requested the Constitutional Court to rule on the conformity of the interest limitation with the constitutional requirement to tax like circumstances alike. The interest limitation disallows net interest expense in excess of 30% of EBITDA. However, the rule does not apply to companies with a total net annual interest cost of no more than €3 m or to those that are not part of a group. There are also a number of other exemptions, but the overall effect is to render the actual impact somewhat arbitrary. In particular, the asserted purpose of the rule – prevention of profit shifts abroad through deliberate under-capitalisation of the German operation – seemed somewhat illusory to the Supreme Tax Court in the light of the relatively high threshold and of the indiscriminate application to cases without foreign connotations. The court also pointed out that interest, as such, is a legitimate business expense and that the limitation rule can penalise ... Read more

The French Supreme Tax Court has ruled on 2 March 2011 that the transfer pricing legislation is in conformity with the French Constitution. “The plea of SOCIÉTÉ SOUTIRAN ET COMPAGNIE, that the article 57 of code general of the taxes infringing the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution must be regarded as not serious” Click here for translation 20110302 Conseil d_+ëtat N-¦ 342099 ... Read more

A Const S.A. filed an appeal with the Central Administrative Court against a corrections made by the Tax Administration for FY 1990 under application of the arm’s length principle (contained in article 57 of the CIRC in Portugal). The Central Administrative Court dismissed the appeal. An appeal was then filed against this decision to the Supreme Administrative Court. By Judgment of 4 February 2004, the appeal was also dismissed at this instance. Dissatisfied with that decision A Const S.A. filed an appeal with the Constitutional Court. Grounds for the appeal was stated as follows “In compliance with the provisions of nº 2 of art. 75-A of the LTC it is moreover expressly stated that the present appeal is based on the concrete review of the constitutionality of art. 57 of the CIRC (in the wording in force on the date of the facts of the case, applicable in casu) taking into account its applicability in the contested decision: a. either ... Read more

ALP S.A. filed an appeal with the Central Administrative Court against a corrections made by the Tax Administration for FY 1992 under application of the arm’s length principle (contained in article 57 of the CIRC in Portugal). The Central Administrative Court dismissed the appeal. An appeal was then filed against this decision to the Supreme Administrative Court. By Judgment of 6 June 2001, the appeal was also dismissed at this instance. Dissatisfied with that decision ALP S.A. filed an appeal with the Constitutional Court. ALP S.A grounds for the appeal was: By virtue of the Principle of Tax Legality, the rules of incidence must be predetermined in their content, and the elements that comprise it must be formulated in a precise and determined manner. Determining the content of the levy tax rule excludes the use of undetermined concepts, as well as certain normative concepts, whose application to the specific case is based on subjective or personal assessment of the enforcement ... Read more

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, 1997 and 1998, infringe Article 170 of the Constitution, in particular Article 1 of that article, which provides that a tax for the benefit of the State may be introduced only by a law, in that Article 344(1) gives the executive authority the task of determining the taxable circumstances or at least makes it possible to determine taxable circumstances either by means of a standard to be laid down by the State itself or by means of a blank form to be filled in?» The Decision of the Court In accordance with the principle of legality in tax matters, as set out in Article 170(1) ... Read more

On 17 February 2003, the President of the Polish Supreme Administrative Court and the Ombudsman requested the Constitutional Court to declare that Article 24b par. 1 of the Tax Ordinance of 29 August 1997 – by giving the tax authorities and fiscal control bodies, while resolving a tax case, the right to disregard the effects of legal transactions which may give the taxpayer an advantage in the form of reduction of tax liability, increase of overpayment or refund of tax – violates the principle of citizens’ trust in the state and the created law resulting from Article 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and violates the principle of freedom of economic activity expressed in the freedom to arrange one’s civil law relations, i.e. Article 22 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. Article 24b of the Tax Ordinance had the following wording: “Art. 24b par. 1. Tax authorities and tax inspection bodies, when settling tax cases, ... Read more