Search

The information exchange clause contained in Article 26 of the OECD MTC has evolved to become an instrument that has effectively increased the possibilities of obtaining and exchanging information to fight tax avoidance and tax evasion. This may be inferred from analysis of the Ibero-American network of Double Taxation Conventions. However, such evolution raises some issues yet to be tackled. As an example, the provision has not considered the taxpayers’ rights and guarantees in the course of the information exchange procedure. Also, the evidence value of documents which despite being obtained illegally, have been lawfully exchanged at an international level through cooperation instruments, remains problematic. In the same vein, its retroactive application and the time limits of the clause are also questionable. This paper aims to discuss all of these conflicts and, if possible, to provide some solutions in this respect. Study made in the framework of the research project “Obtaining and exchange of information as mechanism to fight against tax fraud and abuse of law: finding the balance between administrative prerogatives and taxpayer rights” N. ref. DER2016-7829-P, funded by the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, the principal researcher of which is Dr. Hugo López

Pese a que la fiscalidad directa es competencia de los Estados miembros, éstos deben ejercer dicha competencia respetando el Derecho europeo. En este sentido, aunque Navarra cuenta con un régimen tributario propio, no puede contravenir la posición de jerarquía que ostenta el Derecho de la UE. Sin embargo, los incentivos fiscales navarros a las producciones cinematográficas presentan problemas de compatibilidad con dicho ordenamiento jurídico, como consecuencia de los requisitos de territorialización del gasto exigidos en el art. 70 LFIS. Por tanto, el presente trabajo tiene como finalidad examinar la adecuación de estos beneficios fiscales con el Derecho europeo, en especial con las libertades fundamentales y el régimen de ayudas de Estado. Para ello va a ser esencial examinar la doctrina jurisprudencial desarrollada por el TJUE a lo largo de los años, así como la postura adoptada por la Comisión Europea y su proyección en nuestro objeto de análisis. Although direct taxation falls within the competence of the Member States, this competence must be exercised in accordance with EU law. Therefore, in the case of the Autonomous Community of Navarre, even though it has its own tax system, this system cannot contravene the hierarchical position of EU law. However, the territorialisation clauses of the expenditure required by the Navarre tax incentives for cinematographic productions -art. 70 LFIS- present problems of compatibility with EU law. This paper aims to examine, therefore, whether these tax benefits are adequate to the EU law, paying special attention to fundamental freedoms and the State aid scheme. To this purpose, it will be crucial to examine the legal doctrine developed by the ECJ over the years, as well as the position adopted by the European Commission. Máster Universitario en Acceso a la Abogacía por la Universidad Pública de Navarra Abokatutzarako Sarbiderako Unibertsitate Masterra Nafarroako Unibertsitate Publikoan