When do national tax rulings violate EU state aid rules? Does the European Commission's approach raise concerns about Member State Sovereignity and what is the impact on corporate investments in Europe?
Multinational companies pay taxes in different jurisdictions which have different tax rates. Hence, they can develop incentives to allocate a high share of profit to low tax jurisdictions and a low share of profit to high tax jurisdictions. National tax authorities may give companies specific rulings relevant to their business models to clarify how their corporate tax will be calculated. While such tax rulings are legal in general, they may violate state aid rules if they use methodologies to establish transfer prices with no economic justification and which unduly shift profit to reduce the taxes they pay. At this event we will address the following questions:
Check-in and lunch
Clemens Fuest, President and Director, CESifo Group Munich
Chair: Guntram B. Wolff, Director
President and Director, CESifo Group Munich
Professor of International Economics at the Graduate Institute of Geneva
Deputy Director General, European Commission, DG COMP
Senior Consultant, Oxera
The complicated tax system in India with multiple rates is one of the most difficult issues investors and industry face. The new uniform tax rate aims to attract investors as well as create lower tax burdens for manufacturing firms and final consumers in India. However, a successful implementation of the goods and services tax (GST) will require an efficient IT infrastructure and capacity building of the entire tax administration.
What’s at stake: On August 30th, following the results of an in-depth state aid investigation started in 2014, the European Commission concluded that Ireland granted undue tax benefits of up to €13 billion to Apple. The decision is based on state aid grounds: the Commission argues that two tax rulings issued by Ireland effectively granted Apple preferential treatment, which amounted to state aid. The Commission ordered Ireland to recover up to €13 billion (plus interest) from Apple, but the decision is controversial and opinion differ as to the effects it will have. We summarize reactions.
If the UK leaves the EU without any agreement in place, this could change the way that competition law is applied. It could also make antitrust cases more costly and competition policy instruments less effective.
Have competition authorities kept up with globalisation? Geographic market definition is one of the most pressing issues.
On March 2, 2016, the German Federal Cartel Office opened an antitrust investigation into Facebook’s contract clauses on data use, in what appears to be the first antitrust case in Europe based on a breach of data protection rules. We discuss the link between data protection rules and competition policy, which is still underexplored.
European companies often post employees to another EU country to work there temporarily. These ‘posted workers’ must be paid at least the minimum wage of the host country, yet their wages can be lower than the wages of local workers. Now proposals for ‘the same pay for the same work at the same place’ are creating new clashes between EU countries.
The green agenda is a top priority of the Juncker commission. In this event we will focus the role of competition policy in promoting sustainability and green innovation.
The patent system is never out of the spotlight. Do patents achieve their ultimate goal of incentivising innovation, or actually stifle it? The debate is especially heated in the ICT sector...
In the transition to a low carbon energy sector, what role does the European Commission foresee for competition policy ?
The paper investigates the distortions that national competition authorities generate when they pursue non-competitive goals in favour of domestic firms, and discusses ways to address this negative policy development in a globalised world.
Today the European Court of Justice (ECJ) will rule on a dispute between Chinese tech companies Huawei and ZTE regarding a patent “essential” to the “Long Term Evolution” (LTE) wireless broadband technology standard.
Foreign takeovers are often a source of concern for national governments. Concerns might be of a strategic nature (for example over deals in the defence sector) or of a more economic nature. In the latter cases, the public perception is often that, because they are less physically or psychologically attached to the host country, foreign investors could more easily take decisions that harm the host economy, such as downgrading the acquired company’s brand or cutting jobs or research expenditure.