1 / 10

Can tax planning be criminal? The answer is NO

Can tax planning be criminal? The answer is NO. Andrés Báez Moreno Profesor Titular de Derecho Financiero y Tributario de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid andres.baez@uc3m.es. A NON ANALITICAL APPROACH. IFA 2002 ( General report , p. 54-55) Mere description of national situations

ismet
Download Presentation

Can tax planning be criminal? The answer is NO

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Can taxplanningbe criminal?Theansweris NO Andrés Báez Moreno Profesor Titular de Derecho Financiero y Tributario de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid andres.baez@uc3m.es

  2. A NON ANALITICAL APPROACH IFA 2002 (General report, p. 54-55) Mere description of national situations General trend: no crimes and no penalties Exceptional situations Related to the taxpayers Related to third persons (tax advisers)

  3. A NON ANALITICAL APPROACH (II) Sentimental reactions in the absence of a technical debate By taxpayers and tax advisers A pretended right to tax planning By tax Administrations Use of extravagant constructions The Spanish case: “negocio indirecto” Confusion between Sham and Avoidance

  4. ELEMENTS FOR A TECHNICAL UNIVERSAL? DEBATE Tax crimes legal design. Tax crimes as “fraud crimes” (criminal deception as a model). Hiding as an element of tax penalties. How universal is this design? Legality principle in criminal law (analogy) Tax crimes as “blanket remisions” What does the application of a GAAR mean?

  5. I. Taxcrimesdesign Which is the model? Not compliance crimes? Fraud crimes? Art. 305 Spanish Criminal Code: “El que por acción u omisión defraude a la Hacienda (…), eludiendo el pago de tributos, cantidades retenidas (…) § 370 (1) 1 German Abgabenordnung “ Proporcionar información incorrecta o incompleta a la Administración sobre hechos de trascendencia tributaria …”. CONCLUSION: FAKE MUST BE PRESENT

  6. I. Taxcrimesdesign. • Fake in Tax Crimes and Tax Avoidance. • Traditional position: sham vs. avoidance. • Sham = FAKE CRIME • Avoidance = LACK OF FAKE NO CRIME • Spanish Constitutional Court (R.120/2005) • “En el fraude de ley (tributaria o no) no hay ocultación fáctica sino aprovechamiento de la existencia de un medio jurídico más favorable (norma de cobertura) previsto para el logro de un fin diverso, al efecto de evitar la aplicación de otro menos favorable (norma principal). Por lo que se refiere en concreto al fraude de ley tributaria, semejante «rodeo» o «contorneo» legal se traduce en la realización de un comportamiento que persigue alcanzar el objetivo de disminuir la carga fiscal del contribuyente aprovechando las vías ofrecidas por las propias normas tributarias, si bien utilizadas de una forma que no se corresponde con su espíritu. De manera que no existe simulación o falseamiento alguno de la base imponible, sino que, muy al contrario, la actuación llevada a cabo es transparente, por más que pueda calificarse de estratagema tendente a la reducción de la carga fiscal”.

  7. I. Taxcrimesdesign • Fake in Tax Crimes and Tax Avoidance. • Critical position: both instruments (sham and avoidance) imply an element of fake . • Sham: factual fake. • Avoidance: purpose fake (artificial transactions) • BÁEZ; ZORNOZA. The 2003 revisions… In our opinion, even if both, simulation and avoidance, share a fake element this refers to different objects. In sham transactions tax payers lie on what has been labelled as “pure or real facts” (was the price actually paid?; did that person really take part in that meeting?). In turn, in abusive transactions, tax payers do not hide real facts – actually they pretend their legal consequences- but the purpose of the transactions they have conducted”. Diapositiva 7

  8. I. Taxcrimesdesign • Fake on the purpose: criminal fake? • Problem: criminal conduct is totally imprecise (fraud) • Solution: precision • Deception for swindle purposes (engaño bastante) • Definición: “…el engaño será bastante si ha sido capaz de provocar un error en el sujeto pasivo que éste no pudiera haber evitado mediante una conducta diligente, exigible socialmente en el marco del hecho concreto ejecutado”. • What about tax crimes?. • Extraordinary self protection measures of Tax Administrations. (v. gr. Interpretation mistakes or “innocent lies” • Does this work when we deal with complex avoidance constructions?

  9. II. Legalityprinciple in criminal law • General ban of analogy (integration) in Criminal Law. • Tax crimes as blancket remissions • Real nature of GAARs: what are they?

  10. II. Legalityprinciple in criminal law • Answering the question. • What does abuse mean? • Abuse through avoidance (pure avoidance is rare!) • Abuse through capture (treaty shopping) • Mixed cases (dividend stripping) • How is it solved? • Simple interpretation (steuerretliche Wirtschaftsbegriffe) • Beneficial ownership vs. Private Law attribution criteria • Is it always enough? NO: special link to Private Law • Avoidance cases: analogy • Capture cases: teleological reduction

More Related