Strategizing International Tax Best Practices – by Keith Brockman

US FDII Final Regs

The Final Reg’s for Section 250, used in FDII and GILTI calculations, have been finalized.  These Reg’s are now undergoing analyses in trying to understand the complexities and nuances.  Some highlights include:

  • The Final Reg’s are effective for tax years beginning on or after 1/1/2021, although they can be applied retroactively in their entirety
  • General relaxation of the FDII documentation requirements
  • Formal ordering rules for interaction with other Code sections are reserved in the Final Reg’s
  • Final Reg’s require deductions to be apportioned to gross DEI and gross FDDEI without regard to the limitations in Sections 163(j), 170(b)(2), 246(b) and 250k, that may cause a mismatch in the deductions allowable for taxable income
  • Final Reg’s apply the exclusive geographic apportionment rule of Treas. Reg. Section 1.861-17(b) for purposes of apportioning R&E expenses to gross DEI and gross FDDEI

The Final Reg’s provided additional clarity, although a taxpayer will have to consider  if the Proposed Reg’s or Final Reg’s will be favorable for tax years prior to 2021.

EY’s Tax Alert provides additional details, as referenced.

https://www.ey.com/en_gl/tax-alerts/us-final-fdii-regulations-retain-proposed-regulations-structure-but-reduce-documentation-burden-defer-effective-date-and-make-important-substantive-changes-to-the-computation-of-section-250-deduction

DAC6: Germany out

The German ministry has advised that they will not delay the optional 6-month reporting obligation, thus the reporting dates revert to the end of July 2020 for 30-day reporting, and 31 August for historical arrangements.

It is interesting to note that Germany has retreated from their prior 30-day delay, citing system setup obstacles.  Additionally, this last-minute retreat of position did not affect the delay of FATCA and CRS reporting.  The exchange of DAC6 with other Member States by Germany will be delayed due to the positions taken to delay such reporting.

Everyone is awaiting further background on this position, which would align with Finland’s refusal to also adopt the 6-month deferral period.

 

Finland has provided additional guidance stating they have not elected to defer the COVID-19 6-month dates, thus the original dates of the end of July 2020 and August 2020 apply for reporting 30-day arrangements and historical arrangements, respectively.

Additionally, the guidance provides further clarity on hallmark definitions to apply for reportable cross-border arrangements between Finland and another country.

ey-finland-publishes-official-tax-guidelines-on-mdr.pdf

 

Finland has interpreted the “new” guidance for Financial Transactions as merely a clarification of prior law.

This interpretation is not novel, and is a position sometimes taken in an audit, rightly or wrongly, for which taxpayers should be aware.

In tax administration statement No. VH/3605/00.01.00/2020, published July 1, Finland’s tax agency explained the relevance of the newly added chapter 10 of the OECD transfer pricing guidelines on financial transactions. With the sole exception of the new guidance on the relevance of a parent company’s credit rating in determining the credit rating of another group member for purposes of pricing intercompany debt, chapter 10 will be applied both prospectively and retrospectively, according to the statement. This includes the guidance on cash pooling, guarantees, captive insurance, and determination of risk-free and risk-adjusted returns.

“The new chapter 10 of the OECD transfer pricing guidelines on transfer pricing for financial transactions does not, in the opinion of the tax administration, contain fundamental new interpretative guidance, except for [determining] the creditworthiness of a separate company. Therefore, the guidelines can otherwise be used as a source of interpretation for tax years ended before the guidelines were published,” the statement says.

The UK House of Commons Notice of Amendments, as of 29 June 2020, includes an interesting proposed amendment re: Country-by-Country (CbC) reporting.  A CbC report would be submitted as part of the UK group’s tax strategy for taxpayers subject to the DST.

The CbC public transparency initiative was included in proposed legislation in other countries, including France and the U.S.  These proposals were never finalized, and the UK proposal, for certain groups, may be nearing certainty.

The Australian Tax Office (ATO) has provided valuable guidance re: addressing the effects of COVID-19 and potential transfer pricing arrangements.

The main takeaway is to ascertain the financial effects before and after COVID-19, using objective data to provide a reasonable basis for reviewing transfer pricing risks and arrangements.

This guidance should represent a template to review transfer pricing arrangements in other countries.

https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/Business-bulletins-newsroom/General/COVID-19-economic-impacts-on-transfer-pricing-arrangements/

The UK has signified its intent to adopt the optional 6-month deferral of DAC6 reporting.

The UK joins Belgium and Luxembourg in this adoption, 25 Member States to go!

https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/international-exchange-of-information/ieim800010

The Council of the EU has announced an optional 6-month deferral for adoption of DAC6 by each Member State, with an optional 3-month extension if approved unanimously.

Luxembourg and Belgium have already announced their intent to adopt such delay, hopefully the other Member States will signify their intent as soon as possible.

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2020/06/24/taxation-council-agrees-on-the-postponement-of-certain-tax-rules/

 

PE update

An update of recent PE developments:

  • BEPS Multilateral Instrument (MLI) updates for PE actions by several countries, as OECD MLI provisions for PE are not mandatory, thus these developments should be closely monitored
  • Home office PE’s are clarified in several countries, especially important for companies with no other business presence in that country and their job is a significant function of the company
  • US IRS Rev. Proc. 2020-30 re: COVID-19 guidance for possible PE situations
  • Denmark ruling, noting a significant home office employee performing a significant job function for the company was not preparatory or auxiliary
  • Malaysia’s clarification of “place of business”

PE will be a significant concern as the uncertainty of COVID-19 continues, with various cross-border travel restrictions.  Companies may want to consider planning alternatives and avoid this trap that some countries may want to exploit in their search for revenues.

EY’s summary highlights the above provisions in greater detail.

https://www.ey.com/en_gl/tax-alerts/pe-watch–latest-developments-and-trends–june-2020

DAC6 presentation

Attached is a co-presentation that I was honored to be a part of, and hope the insights are helpful in this ever- changing and subjective EU disclosure initiative.

TPA Global DAC6 17062020

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has clarified a Romanian court request that a company cannot be required to verify that a VAT supplier has met its reporting obligations re: fraudulent conduct.  The judgment was provided on June 4th, SC CF SRL v. AJFPM, DGRFPC, C-430/19 (CJEU 2020).  The court stated that tax authorities cannot require that a company have supporting VAT compliance documentation, nor ensuring that the supplier has the goods and is able to provide them.

The CJEU has established a valuable EU precedent, stating that a taxpayers’ right to deduct VAT is a fundamental principle of the VAT system without limitations, absent evidence of fraud.  Additionally, Article 178(a) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (the VAT Directive) does not require such additional documentation.  This would violate the principle of neutrality.

 

 

IRS office update

Several IRS offices are still at work-from-home status, impacting mail received, sent and phone communications.

The latest status is attached for reference.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2020/06/11/whats-open-and-whats-not-as-the-irs-begins-to-reopen/#717828a41b0a

Recent developments include a political agreement reached by the ambassadors of the Member States to submit an amended proposal, with each Member State having to make a formal decision thereto, for deferral of the reporting dates.

  • The prior period, from June 25, 2018 to June 30, 2020 will be deferred to February 28, 2021 (from August 31, 2020)
  • For arrangements commencing July 1, 2020 subject to the 30-day reporting deadline, the 30-day period begins on January 1, 2021 and would include arrangements from July 1 through December 31, 2020.

Next steps will be a written procedure in the EU Council, followed by formal adoption.  If a Member State fails to respond to the proposal, the original reporting timelines will apply.

Dutch guidance has also been issued, providing further clarification.

https://globaltaxnews.ey.com/news/2020-5837-eu-council-ambassadors-reach-agreement-on-amended-proposal-for-deferral-of-mdr-filing-deadlines

 

NL: Mandatory Disclosure Rules/DAC6

The European Mandatory Disclosure Rules (MDR)/DAC6 Directive will come into effect on 01 July 2020. Following its implementation in the Netherlands, intermediaries and/or taxpayers have to report potentially aggressive international tax arrangements to the Tax and Customs Administration. This concerns arrangements that involve residents from various countries and that may be used to avoid tax.

On this page, you can read more about the following subjects:

Intermediaries virtually always have to report a potential tax avoidance arrangement

If you are an intermediary and you are involved in a potentially aggressive international taxarrangement, you have to report it. There are two exceptions to this rule. You do not have to report a potentially aggressive international tax arrangement in the following cases:

  • Another intermediary has already reported the tax arrangement and he has given you a reference number to prove it.
  • You have a legal professional privilege.

Note!

The DAC6 Directive applies to all intermediaries . For instance, tax consultants, lawyers, accountants, civil-law notaries, financial advisers, banks and trust offices.

Taxpayers sometimes have to report a potential tax avoidance arrangement themselves

The taxpayer for whom a potentially aggressive international fiscal arrangement is intended, has to report it himself in the following cases:

  • An intermediary from outside the European Union is involved in the artificial tax arrangement.
  • An intermediary who is involved in the artificial tax arrangement has a legal professional privilege, therefore, he does not have to report the arrangement.
  • No intermediary is involved in the tax arrangement.

When you are not sure if someone else has reported a potential tax avoidance arrangement

When in doubt, report it yourself.

When to report a potential tax avoidance arrangement

The DAC6 Directive has retrospective effect. Potentially aggressive international tax arrangements youare involved in between 25  June 2018 and 01 July 2020 must be reported between 01  July 2020 and31 August 2020.

Every arrangement you are involved in after 01 July 2020 must be reported within 30 days.

Which fiscal arrangements must be reported?

The DAC6 Directive provides a list of hallmarks. If a tax arrangement has one or more of these hallmarks, you have to report it. A guide line with more details and examples will be available soon.

Note!

The hallmarks have been set at a European level and may, therefore, be interpreted differently at times. If you are not sure if a tax arrangement is potentially aggressive, be on the safe side and report it anyway.

Which taxes does the DAC6 Directive apply to?

It applies to:

  • corporation tax
  • income tax
  • Payroll tax
  • dividend tax
  • inheritance tax and gift tax
  • most other taxes

It does not apply to:

  • VAT (turnover tax)
  • customs duties
  • excise duties
  • social insurance contributions
  • charges
  • fees

How to report potential tax avoidance arrangements

You can report them by means of the Cross-Border Arrangements Reporting form, in English. You can complete this form via the data portal of the Tax and Customs Administration from 01 July 2020.

Your report must include:

  • details about yourself
  • details about the taxpayer and his affiliated persons
  • a summary of the content of the artificial tax arrangement
  • the relevant hallmarks
  • the relevant national statutory provisions
  • the value of the artificial tax arrangement
  • the implementation date
  • the relevant EU Member States

After you have submitted your report, we will send you a reference number.

What happens if you don’t report?

You will risk a (high) fine.

More information

For questions about the mandatory disclosure legislation such as questions about the hallmarks, pleasecontact the MDR team of the Tax and Customs Administration by e-mail at MDR-team@belastingdienst.nl

If you have a question about submitting the Cross-Border Arrangements Reporting form, please send an e-mail to the Tax and Customs Administration Contact Centre at gegevensuitwisseling@belastingdienst.nl

If you are a software developer or if you are going to develop software for your own organisation to report potential tax avoidance arrangements, you can register at the Digital Messaging Support [Ondersteuning Digitaal Berichtenverkeer (ODB)] website of the Tax and Customs Administration for the necessary specifications, IT-related questions (for instance, about the required technical specifications of the various fields) and support. You can also contact the service desk at servicedesk.odb@belastingdienst.nl

Answers to frequently asked questions about the mandatory disclosure legislation are collected in the Mandatory Disclosure Rules/DAC6 Knowledge Database (only available in Dutch).

 

On May 27th, a €750 billion entitled “Next Generation EU” has been proposed.  The plan would be made up of grants and loans for every EU Member State, to be repaid via a digital tax, carbon tax and/or a tax on recycled plastics.  However, the European Central Bank is not expected to be a player in this plan, due to Germany’s top court ruling earlier this month that it violated the German constitution.  The referenced link provides additional details.

On May 28th, as follow up,  the EU Commission said it is ready to act on a digital tax if the OECD fails to achieve a global consensus on taxation of the digital economy.  This statement, along with unilateral tax proposals, provides the impetus for OECD to act on this proposal by year-end, for which it has dedicated to fulfill this timeline.

The EU is committed to a global strategy for digital taxation and minimum corporate taxation, and will present their own plans  if the OECD fails by act by the end of 2020. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-52819126

I have authored a DAC6 best practices article, published today by Bloomberg Tax in the Daily Tax Report.

Hope you find the content informative.

https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report/insight-dac6-past-present-and-future

Additionally, NL is scheduled to publish DAC6 guidelines tomorrow on its website.