Advertisement

State Aid and Tax Rulings: Managing the Risk of Recovery

  • Chiara FranciosoEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Despite the undeniable advantages in terms of legal certainty and compliance, tax rulings may facilitate harmful tax competition. The Commission has been investigating on rulings granting a selective advantage to specific economic operators from the perspective of State aid rules. The aids’ recovery that may follow is undermining that same legal certainty that tax authorities attempt to achieve through the issuance of rulings. While it is the State that has failed to comply with the procedure laid down in Art. 108 TFEU, the financial burden of the recovery is entirely borne by the companies. Building on the analysis of the Union Courts’ case law and of the Commission decisions, this contribution attempts to identify the recommended measures and policies to minimize the risk of recovery.

Keywords

State aid Tax rulings Legitimate expectations Recovery Risk management 

JEL

G32 H25 K34 

References

  1. Amatucci, F. (2018). Ruling fiscali, discrezionalità amministrativa e compatibilità con il diritto sovranazionale. Diritto e pratica tributaria internazionale, 1(I), 11–32.Google Scholar
  2. Avi-Yonah, R. S. (2007). Tax Competition, Tax Arbitrage and the International Tax Regime. Bulletin for International Taxation, 61(4), 130–138.Google Scholar
  3. Avi-Yonah, R. S., & Mazzoni, G. (2016). Apple State Aid Ruling: A Wrong Way to Enforce the Benefits Principle? University of Michigan Law & Economics Research Paper Series, Research Paper No. 16-024, 130–138.Google Scholar
  4. Barford, V., & Holt, G. (2013, May 21). Google, Amazon, Starbucks: The Rise of ‘Tax Shaming’. BBC News Magazine.Google Scholar
  5. Bobby, C. (2017). A Method inside the Madness: Understanding the European Union State Aid and Taxation Rulings. Chicago Journal of International Law, 18(1), 186–215.Google Scholar
  6. Boccaccio, M. (2017). L’evoluzione della politica della Commissione su aiuti di Stato e ruling fiscali. Rivista di diritto finanziario e scienza delle finanze​LXXVI(2), I, 204–233.Google Scholar
  7. Bronżewska, K. (2016). Cooperative compliance: a new approach to managing taxpayer relations. Amsterdam: IBFD.Google Scholar
  8. Cachia, F. (2017). Analyzing the European Commission’s Final Decisions on Apple, Starbucks, Amazon and Fiat Finance & Trade. EC Tax Review, 26(1), 23–35. Google Scholar
  9. Daly, S. (2017). The Life and Times of ESCs: A Defence? In P. Harris & D. De Cogan (Eds.), Studies in the History of Tax Law: Volume 8 (pp. 169–194). Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  10. De Broe, L. (2015). The State Aid Review Against Aggressive Tax Planning: ‘Always Look a Gift Horse in the Mouth’. EC Tax Review, 24(6), 290–293.Google Scholar
  11. Del Federico, L. (2008). Autorità e consenso nella disciplina degli interpelli fiscali. In S. La Rosa (Ed.), Profili autoritativi e consensuali del diritto tributario (pp. 155–174). Milano: Giuffrè. Google Scholar
  12. Falsitta, G. (2010). Recupero retroattivo degli ‘aiuti di stato’ e limiti della tutela dei principi di capacità contributiva e di affidamento [nota a Corte cost., ord. n. 36/2009]. Rivista di diritto tributario, 11(II), 655–674.Google Scholar
  13. Forrester, E. (2018). Is the State Aid Regime a Suitable Instrument to Be Used in the Fight Against Harmful Tax Competition? EC Tax Review, 27(1), 19–35.Google Scholar
  14. Fregni, M. C. (2017). Mercato unico digitale e tassazione: misure attuali e progetti di riforma. Rivista di diritto finanziario e scienza delle finanze, LXXVI(1), I, 51–81.Google Scholar
  15. Giraud, A. (2008). A Study of the Notion of Legitimate Expectations in State Aid Recovery Proceedings: “Abandon All Hope, Ye Who Enter Here”? Common Market Law Review, 45(5), 1399–1431.Google Scholar
  16. Giraud, A., & Petit, S. (2017). Tax Rulings and State Aid Qualification: Should Reality Matter? European State Aid Law Quarterly, 2, 233–242.Google Scholar
  17. Givati, Y. (2009). Resolving Legal Uncertainty: The Unfulfilled Promise of Advance Tax Rulings. Virginia Tax Review, 29, 137–175.Google Scholar
  18. Gordon, R. K. (1996). Law of Tax Administration and Procedure. In V. Thurony (Ed.), Tax Law and Drafting (Vol. 1, pp. 95–134). The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  19. Guidara, A. (2011). Indisponibilità del tributo e accordi in fase di riscossione. Milano: Giuffrè.Google Scholar
  20. Ismer, R., & Piotrwki, S. (2015). The Selectivity of Tax Measures: A Tale of Two Consistencies. Intertax, 43(10), 559–570.Google Scholar
  21. Ismer, R., & Piotrwki, S. (2018). Selectivity in Corporate Tax Matters After World Duty Free: A Tale of Two Consistencies Revisited. Intertax, 46(2), 156–166.Google Scholar
  22. Lang, M. (2015). Tax Rulings and State Aid Law. British Tax Review, 3, 391–395.Google Scholar
  23. Lepard, B. D. (1999). Is the United States Obligated to Drive on the Right? A Multidisciplinary Inquiry Into the Normative Authority of Contemporary International Law Using the Arm’s Length Standard as a Case Study. Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, 43, 43–180.Google Scholar
  24. Luja, R. H. C. (2015). Will the EU’s State Aid Regime Survive BEPS? British Tax Review, 3, 379–390.Google Scholar
  25. Luja, R. H. C. (2016). Just a Notion of Aid: How (Not) to Create a Fiscal State Aid Doctrine. Intertax, 44(11), 788–790.Google Scholar
  26. Maitrot De La Motte, A. (2017). Tax Recovery of the Illegal Fiscal State Aids: Tax Less to Tax More. EC Tax Review, 26(2), 75–88.Google Scholar
  27. Marian, O. (2017). The State Administration of International Tax Avoidance. Harvard Business Law Review, 7, 201; UC Irvine School of Law Research Paper No. 2015-95, 201–265.Google Scholar
  28. Marino, G. (2018). La Corporate Tax Governance quale nuovo approccio culturale nei rapporti tra Fisco e contribuente, in Corporate Tax Governance. Milano: Egea editore.Google Scholar
  29. Mason, R. (2017). Tax Rulings as State Aid—Part 4: Whose Arm’s-Length Standard? Tax Notes, 155(7); Virginia Law and Economics Research Paper No. 2017-19, 947–966.Google Scholar
  30. McKee, M., Siladke, C. A., Vossler, C. A. (2018). Behavioral Dynamics of Tax Compliance When Taxpayer Assistance Services Are Available. International Tax and Public Finance, 25(3), 722–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Miladinovic, A. (2018). The State Aid Provisions of the TFEU in Tax Matters. In M. Lang, P. Pistone, J. Schuch, & C. Staringer (Eds.), Introduction to European Tax Law on Direct Taxation (pp. 103–142). Wien: Linde.Google Scholar
  32. Monti, M. (1999). How State Aid Affects Tax Competition. EC Tax Review, ​8(4), 208–210.Google Scholar
  33. Moreno González, S. (2017). Tax rulings: intercambio de información y ayudas de Estado en el contexto post-BEPS. Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch.Google Scholar
  34. Moscatelli, M. T. (2007). Moduli consensuali e istituti negoziali nell’attuazione della norma tributaria. Milano: Giuffrè.Google Scholar
  35. Pastoriza, J. S. (2016). The Recovery Obligation and the Protection of Legitimate Expectations: The Spanish Experience. In I. Richelle, W. Schön, & E. Traversa (Eds.), State aid Law and Business Taxation (pp. 247–282). Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  36. Phedon, N. (2016). State Aid Rules and Tax Rulings. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 3, 416–427.Google Scholar
  37. Pinto, C. (2003). Tax competition and EU law. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  38. Pistolesi, F. (2007). Gli interpelli tributari. Milano: Giuffrè.Google Scholar
  39. Rogers-Glabush, J. (Ed.) (2015). International Tax Glossary. Amsterdam: IBFD.Google Scholar
  40. Remeur, C. (2015). Tax Policy in the EU: Issues and Challenge. European Parliament Research Service.Google Scholar
  41. Romano, C. (2001). Private Rulings Systems in EU Member States: A Comparative Survey. European Taxation, 41(1), 18–31.Google Scholar
  42. Romano, C. (2002). Advance Tax Rulings and Principles of Law Towards a European Tax Rulings System? Amsterdam: IBFD.Google Scholar
  43. Ronco, S. M. (2018). Il contesto di riferimento nell’ambito del giudizio di selettività in materia di aiuti di Stato di matrice fiscale: spunti di riflessione alla luce della giurisprudenza della CGUE. Diritto e pratica tributaria internazionale, 2(II), 601–630.Google Scholar
  44. Rossi-Maccanico, P. (2015). A New Framework for State Aid Review of Tax Rulings. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 14(3), 371–381.Google Scholar
  45. Smit, D. S. (2016). International Juridical Double Non-taxation and State Aid. EC Tax Review, 25(2), 109–118.Google Scholar
  46. Szudoczky, R., & Majdanska, A. (2017). Designing Co-operative Compliance Programmes: Lessons from the EU State Aid Rules for Tax Administrations. British Tax Review, 2, 204–229.Google Scholar
  47. Tesauro, F. (2017). Istituzioni di diritto tributario. Parte generale. Milano: UTET.Google Scholar
  48. Thomson, A., & Hardwick, E. (2017). The European Commission’s Application of the State Aid Rules to Tax: Where Are We Now? Journal of Taxation of Investments34(3), 29–50.Google Scholar
  49. Traversa, E., & Sabbadini, P. M. (2016). Anti-avoidance Measures and State Aid in a Post-BEPS Context: An Attempt at Reconciliation. In I. Richelle, W. Schön, & E. Traversa (Eds.), State aid Law and Business Taxation (pp. 85–110). Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  50. Tropea, A. (2018). I profili giuridici dell’adempimento collaborativo. Rivista trimestrale di diritto tributario, 3–4, 789–817.Google Scholar
  51. Valente, P. (2017). Tax governance e tax risk management. Milanofiori-Assago: Wolters Kluwer.Google Scholar
  52. Van De Velde, E. (2015). ‘Tax rulings’ in the EU Member States. Study for the ECON Committee (European Parliament – Directorate-General for Internal Policies).Google Scholar
  53. Van Eijsden, A., Killmann, B., & Meussen, G. T. K. (2010). General Part. In M. Lang, P. Pistone, J. Schuch, & C. Staringer (Eds.), Procedural Rules in Tax Law in the Context of European Union and Domestic Law (pp. 1–48). Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  54. Vann, R. J. (1998). International Aspects of Income Tax. In V. Thurony (Ed.), Tax Law and Drafting (Vol. 2, pp. 718–810). The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  55. Vella, J., Van De Velde, E., & Luja, R. (2016). International Taxation and Tax Rulings: Policy Issues at Challenging Times. Compilation of notes for the Special Committee on Tax Rulings (TAXE2) 2016 (European Parliament – Directorate-General for Internal Policies).Google Scholar
  56. Versiglioni, M. (2001). Accordo e disposizione nel diritto tributario. Contributo allo studio dell’accertamento con adesione e della conciliazione giudiziale. Milano: Giuffrè.Google Scholar
  57. Wattel, P. J. (2016). Stateless Income, State Aid and the (Which?) Arm’s Length Principle. Intertax, 44(11), 791–801.Google Scholar
  58. Wattel, P. J., Marres, O., & Vermeulen, H. (2018). European Tax Law: General Topics and Direct Taxation. Deventer: Wolters Kluwer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of LawUniversity of Milano-BicoccaMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations