Teikėjai, kurie savo tekste tiesiogiai nurodė būtent šį straipsnio numerį. Tai citata iš jų pačių teksto — ne mūsų vertinimas ir ne priežastinis ryšys.
| Kas | Šalis | Ką parašė |
|---|---|---|
| Deloitte | BE | Commission to consider only keeping one GAAR generally applying to all situations, transactions or tax arrangements. In addition, article 6(3) of the ATAD reads that “Where arrangements or a series thereof are ignored in accordance with paragraph 1, the tax li ↗ |
| Loyens & Loeff N.V. | NL | nt outside the EU. Hence, we see a tendency of tax authorities to extensively interpret the concept of abuse, as also confined in Article 6 of the ATAD. ↗ |
| Tax Justice Network | GB | rule proposed by the EU Commission in its directive proposal from 2022 for a debt-equity bias reduction allowance (DEBRA). Under Article 6 of the DEBRA proposal, the deductibility of interest would be limited to 85% of excess borrowing costs (ie. interest pai ↗ |
| International Chamber of Commerce | FR | clude five minimum requirements for anti-tax avoidance: • Article 4: Interest Limitation Rules • Article 5: Exit Taxation Rules • Article 6: General Anti-Abuse Rules (GAAR) • Articles 7 & 8: Controlled Foreign Company (CFC) Rules • Article 9: Anti-Hybrid Misma ↗ |
| CFE Tax Advisers Europe | BE | dance has shaped the EU approach. Consequently, EU legislation operates with descriptive and explanatory language instead, as per Article 6 of the ATAD, setting out the European GAAR: “For the purposes of calculating the corporate tax liability, a Member State ↗ |
| European Business Initiative on Taxation (EBIT) | BE | anti-abuse rule (ATAD Article 6); - CFC-rules (ATAD Articles 7, 8); and - Hybrid mismatches (ATAD Article 9). General issues with regard to the ATAD evaluation EBIT’s Members consider that the approaches under ATAD and other tax Directives, in particular Pilla ↗ |
| European Tax Adviser Federation (ETAF) | BE | g the effectiveness of the EU’s anti-tax avoidance rules. I. Relevance and effectiveness of the GAAR The general anti-abuse rule (Article 6 of the ATAD) tackles abusive tax practices that have not been dealt with through specifically targeted provisions. ↗ |
| — | IT | e relationship between the arm's length principle, the interest limitation rules (under art 4 of the ATAD) and the EU GAAR (under art 6 of the ATAD). Assuming that: i) under Chapter 10 of the OECD TP Guidelines (2022) a cross border intragroup provision of fun ↗ |
| NOVA Tax Research Lab - NOVA School of Law | PT | concern, over its content, relates with the issue of the complexity associated with the General Anti-Abuse Rule, mentioned in its Article 6. 1. ↗ |
| Max Velthoven | NL | In response to the call for evaluation, I kindly refer to my PhD thesis "The General Anti-Abuse Rule of Article 6 of the EU Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive" which was defended at the University of Amsterdam on July 1, 2024. This thesis analyses the history and co ↗ |
| Studio Savorana & Partners- Advisor | IT | torio, consenta al contribuente di poter dimostrare che non ha inteso avvalersi di un regime fiscale di vantaggio, anche perché l’art. 6 della Direttiva (Norma generale antiabuso), non risolve questa precaria situazione. In ultimo, credo sia necessario che con ↗ |
Šaltinis: viešų konsultacijų atsiliepimai ir pozicijų dokumentai. n = 11 paminėjimų; skaičiuojama pažodinė nuoroda į straipsnio numerį.