Dutch newspapers report on budget plans of the Dutch government to keep the CIT rate at 25% (with a reduced step-up rate of 15% for the first EUR 400k of taxable profits). Companies can benefit from increased investment deduction possibilities.
Today, the General Court of the EU ruled that Ireland did not grant illegal state aid to Apple through contested tax rulings. According to the General Court, EU state aid rules require taxation to be based on the arm’s length principle, which means that tax should be levied over income allocable to value generated from functions in the jurisdiction.
An opposition member of Dutch parliament proposed a bill to introduce an exit tax and step-up into the Dutch dividend withholding tax. The exit tax would apply to migrations, mergers etc., but only to a limited number of states that do not have a comparable withholding tax (most notably: the UK).
The Dutch Ministry of Finance published the written guidance (leidraad meldingsplichtige grensoverschrijdende constructies) with further details on how to interpret and apply the Dutch implementation of EU Council Directive 2018/822 (DAC6).
The Netherlands will postpone the deadlines for the DAC6 reporting obligation by 6 months. The notification obligation will take effect on 1 January 2021 (instead of 1 July 2020). The retroactive period will be maintained. This means that structures set up from 25 June 2018 must be reported.
The European Commission decided to allow EU member states to defer the deadline of filing information on potentially aggressive arrangements (DAC6) by up to 6 months. Please note that European member states may or may not follow the postponement.
The Dutch government announced a “no tax haven” requirement for companies receiving individual aid in view of the corona crisis. Applicants may not be established in listed low tax jurisdictions (the same applies for direct subsidiaries and major shareholders), nor make payments from the Netherlands to such countries. A 12-month term applies to meet this requirement.
The Supreme Court ruled that the transfer of a newly developed property two weeks after the start of the lease constitutes a transaction for VAT, and does not qualify as a transfer of a generality of goods (Article 37d).
The Dutch Supreme Court ruled that Fixed-to-Floating Perpetual Securities are treated as debt for Dutch tax purposes. The ruling confirms the clear rules around the qualification of debt, as formulated in earlier case law.
Commentary (in Dutch) to an interesting Dutch TP case (Hof Den Bosch, 13 maart 2020, ECLI:GHSHE:2020:968), published in NL Fiscaal 2020/1121). The case is about a business restructuring and the arm's length character of the conversion remuneration.
The Dutch government will allow companies to form a ‘corona tax reserve’ in the year 2019. The reserve amounts to the expected 2020 loss as a result of the corona crisis and is maximized at the 2019 fiscal profit. As a result, a refund of corporate income tax relating to 2019 may be obtained quickly. This creates a liquidity advantage.
The Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs published a letter with a broad view on improving the Dutch investment climate to keep and attract foreign businesses. The government targets all businesses that are willing to build a substantial presence in the Netherlands. Specific focus sectors include IT, Life Sciences & Health, AgriFood, High Tech Systems & Materials, Chemicals and (sustainable) Energy. The letter does not yet contain a response to the recent Report on the taxation of multinationals, but acknowledges the importance of a competitive and predictable tax system for maintaining an attractive Dutch investment climate.
Dutch Parliament adopted a resolution to amend the Dutch tax loss settlement rules in the context of the Covid-19 situation. Under the current loss settlement rules, 2019 profits can only be offset against 2020 tax losses when filing the 2020 corporate income tax return, i.e. earliest in 2021. Dutch Parliament requests the Dutch Government to allow the 2020 tax losses to be carried back already in the course of 2020 based on the estimated 2020 tax loss amount. If implemented, this would be a very welcome measure to improve liquidity of Dutch taxpayers affected by Covid-19 because the offset would result in a tax refund.
The Dutch government just announced a package to soften the economic effects of the coronavirus for businesses. All businesses may request a 3 month extension for paying Dutch taxes (CIT, VAT, wage tax, income tax) without having initially to furnish proof. Reduced taxation interest applies. Further, a lower preliminary CIT assessment may be requested. Several non-tax measures include compensation for wage costs, financing aid and a social minimum aid.
An outline of Pillar 1 tax measures was published by the Inclusive Framework. Pillar 1 aims to re-allocate taxation rights of automated digital service companies and consumer facing businesses to user/market jurisdictions.
The Dutch Supreme Court issued a ruling on the Dutch tax treatment of a German Sondervermögen with a single investor. The case is relevant for funds that claim refunds of Dutch dividend withholding tax. The EU law questions on the matter remain unanswered pending a final decision by the ECJ in case C-156/17 (Köln Aktienfonds).
For the first time, the Dutch Supreme Court applied the Danish beneficial ownership judgements (ECJ C-116/16 and C-117/16) in a Dutch CIT case. The case involves a low substance, non-conduit holding structure. The Supreme Court acknowledges that the Netherlands must apply the EU tax abuse concept to the Dutch CIT regime applicable to foreign substantial shareholders in 2012. This means that the tax authorities should prove the existence of a tax abusive motive (subjective test), but the taxpayer may provide counter-evidence that the structure is not artificial and devoid of economic reality (objective test). This case underlines the importance of real substance in case a tax benefit is obtained.
An interesting Dutch lower court pilot case was published last Friday regarding Dutch dividend withholding tax reclaims by a German open investment fund (Publikum Sondervermögen). The German fund argued that the reclaim should be granted because of its comparability with a Dutch fiscal investment institution (FBI).