Search

This article analyses both the goods and services tax (GST) grouping scheme and GST anti-avoidance measures in New Zealand in order to determine whether the NZ GST system can provide legal alternatives or solutions which could eliminate or minimize problems found specifically within the area of value-added tax (VAT) grouping and tax avoidance in the EU. NZ GST grouping is noteworthy, as it appears to have been infected only to an insignificant level by the risk of tax avoidance. Thus, the article reflects on why NZ GST grouping seems to function so well, and what lessons can be learned from it in respect of EU VAT grouping and the prevention of tax avoidance. VAT, GST, groups, grouping, group of companies, avoidance, abuse, EU, New Zealand

På Det Juridiske Fakultet, Københavns Universitet, udvikles en ny læringsplatform i form af et e-tidsskrift inden for skatte- og afgiftsret, UCPH Fiscal Relations Law Journal, med et tilhørende kursus. Her skal de studerende skrive videnskabelige og innovative artikler under tæt supervision af en forsker fra universitetet eller en praktiker fra det offentlige eller private erhvervsliv. Læringsplatformen skal hjælpe de studerende til bedre muligheder for at kombinere retsvidenskabelig forskning med juridisk praksis i en sammenhæng, hvor der lægges vægt på innovation og bredere forståelse af samfundsmæssige problemstillinger. Denne artikel præsente-rer, hvordan e-tidsskriftet og det tilhørende kursus påtænkes at arbejde med pro-blemorienteret og forskningsbaseret læring inden for en professionsorienteret uni-versitetsuddannelse. Kurset afholdes for første gang i efterårssemestret 2017. Ar-tiklen præsenterer derfor alene kursusdesignet og de pædagogiske overvejelser bag det, idet vi endnu har evalueringerne til gode, der vil vise, om forventningerne til læringsplatformen kan indfries, når kurset er blevet gennemført

Value-added tax (VAT) grouping schemes, whereby several legally independent entities are treated as a single taxable person for VAT purposes, are well known, though their detailed rules differ from country to country. This article deals with specific tax avoidance and fiscal competition aspects of VAT grouping schemes in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. The article gives examples of tax abuse and avoidance by using various VAT grouping models, with the main emphasis on the practice in Denmark, which may be indicative of similar problems in other countries. The article shows that there are significant differences in the rationales for national VAT grouping schemes, and these indicate that there are mismatches between the national schemes of the EU Member States and the original intention of the EU scheme. Finally, an examination of the different national rationales shows the necessity of striking a balance between combating tax avoidance and preventing distortion of competition.

The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union became legally binding following its entry into force with the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009, and it has the same legal value as the EU Treaties. Since then, the EU fundamental rights aspect of VAT law has not been subject to much academic discussion or particular attention from VAT practitioners. This article contributes to further development of research in the area of EU fundamental rights and VAT law by examining; when the Charter is relevant in VAT law and if so how the Charter manifests itself in EU VAT case law, and what special interpretative principles the Charter triggers itself in connection with interpretation of fundamental rights comprised by the Charter. The Charter has proved to play an important—but also diversified—role in both formal and substantive aspects of VAT law, such as national rules on administrative sanctions and penalties, criminal proceedings, procurement of evidence, procedural guarantees, VAT fraud and abuse, VAT exemptions, VAT deductions, VAT impositions, VAT increases and so on. Any current or potential impact of the Charter on VAT-related matters must be considered in connection with legislation, case law, administrative practice etc, which must comply with the Charter given its status as EU primary law. If citizens, companies or their advisers etc are not aware of their EU fundamental rights under the Charter, this could lead to the loss of those rights and the loss of the formal or substantive case, with potential professional liability for advisers.