May 30, 2023

Economic Substance: Views From the U.S., Europe, and the B.V.I., Cayman, and Nevis

May 30, 2023/ Ruchelman P.L.L.C.

Like concepts of beauty, the presence or absence of economic substance in the tax context often is in the eye of the beholder. More importantly, economic substance means different things to tax authorities in different jurisdictions and the approaches in taxpayer obligations varies widely. This article looks at the concept of economic substance in three separate localities. Stanley C. Ruchelman and Wooyoung Lee look at the U.S., addressing case law establishing the requirement and the 2010 codification of the concept into the tax code. Werner Heyvaert, a partner in the Brussels Office of AKD Benelux Lawyers, and Vicky Sheik Mohammad, an associate in the Brussels Office of AKD Benelux Lawyers, look at the Danish Cases that establish an abuse of rights view for aggressive tax planning – the taxpayer abused rights granted to it by E.U. law – and the Unshell Directive designed to remove certain tax benefits from shell companies. David Payne, Global Head of Governance for Bolder Group, looks at the self-certification rules that have been adopted in the B.V.I., Cayman, and Nevis.

November 29, 2022

Key Features of the New-Fangled Belgium-France Income Tax Treaty

November 29, 2022/ Ruchelman P.L.L.C.

After nearly two decades of negotiations, Belgium and France signed a new Income Tax Treaty in November 2021. The new treaty is in line with the latest O.E.C.D. standards, incorporates the applicable provisions of the Multilateral Instrument, and addresses salient tax issues for taxpayers engaging in cross-border transactions involving the two countries. Key aspects of the New Treaty relate to closing loopholes, expanding coverage to include wealth taxes, and retaining favorable treatment for Belgian investors in French S.C.I.’s. Werner Heyvaert, a partner at AKD Benelux Lawyers, Brussels, and Vicky Sheikh Mohammad, a tax lawyer at the same firm, explain all.

November 29, 2021

Five Reasons Why the Legal Professional Privilege of Belgian Lawyers is Incompatible With the Mandatory Reporting Under D.A.C.6

November 29, 2021/ Ruchelman P.L.L.C.

D.A.C.6 in the E.U. requires Member States to impose a disclosure obligation on intermediaries who advise on, or are involved in, implementing aggressive cross-border arrangements. This poses a conundrum for tax lawyers involved in a transaction because, whatever they do, rights of taxpayers and duties of attorneys to maintain client confidences may be ignored, or significantly cut back. In Belgium, the approach is to ignore Belgian case law that recognizes the obligations of lawyers to keep confidences and forces attorneys to violate various obligations to clients. Not surprisingly, the Belgian Bar Councils and the Belgian Association of Tax Lawyers have challenged the restrictive interpretation of the L.P.P. before national and European courts. Werner Heyvaert, a partner at the Brussels office of AKD Benelux Lawyers, and Vicky Sheikh Mohammad, an associate at the Brussels Office of AKD Benelux Lawyers, explain the five reasons why Belgian implementation of D.A.C.6 is flawed. The case is currently under consideration by the C.J.E.U.

March 30, 2021

European Union’s New Reporting Obligations for Tax Intermediaries: Key Features of the Belgian Administrative Guidance – D.A.C.6

March 30, 2021/ Ruchelman P.L.L.C.

In their article entitled “European Union’s New Reporting Obligations for tax Intermediaries: Key Features of the Belgian Administrative Guidance – D.A.C.6,” Werner Heyvaert and Vicky Sheikh Mohammad of AKD Benelux Lawyers, Belgium, address key features of the Belgian administrative guidance and the list of Frequently Asked Questions recently published by the Belgian Revenue Service.

November 25, 2020

Exchanges of Information in Tax Matters and Fundamental Rights Of Taxpayers – E.C.J. Delivers Landmark Ruling in the Aftermath of Berlioz

November 25, 2020/ Ruchelman P.L.L.C.

In a post B.E.P.S. world, tax transparency is a mantra among stakeholders in government, media, and nongovernmental organizations. The taxpayer may own the funds, but the stakeholders wish to ensure that a chunk of the funds are spent as they deem appropriate. In this environment, governments have a stake in obtaining information on where taxpayers hold their funds and exchanges of information between governments has become a regular occurrence. In the European Union, questions arise as to whether an information request violates a taxpayer’s fundamental rights, and in the event of a fishing expedition, whether the taxpayer has an effective remedy. In a recent decision issued by the E.C.J., the court held that financial institutions holding information have rights to intervene, but not taxpayers must wait until a tax authority assesses tax. Werner Heyvaert, a partner in the Brussels Office of AKD Benelux Lawyers and Vicky Sheikh Mohammad, an associate in the Brussels Office of AKD Benelux Lawyers, explain the rationale of the court and question the validity of its conclusion.