The BVI tax information exchange system is largely modelled on international principles developed by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development and is split into two types of regime. The 'automatic' exchange of information regime requires financial institutions to exchange formulistic data about the accounts of foreign taxpayers, while the 'on request' regime deals with specific and potentially in-depth investigations into the affairs of named taxpayers with offshore or international holdings.
In Budget 2019 the federal government has continued to bolster its tools and resources to detect and prosecute tax evasion. As such, several measures have been proposed, including a C$150.8 million investment over the next five years to fund new initiatives. More so than ever, tax professionals should be well acquainted with various definitions to ensure that their client services and advice cannot be construed as the commission or facilitation of a criminal offence.
The minister of finance recently tabled the 2019 Budget. As a pre-election budget, the government appears to have shied away from tax measures that could receive negative backlash from the business community. Among other things, the government is proposing to expand the foreign affiliate dumping rules to apply to Canada-resident corporations that are controlled by non-resident individuals or trusts.
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation recently reported that the Canada Revenue Agency has transferred more than 1.6 million Canadian banking records to the US Internal Revenue Service since the intergovernmental agreement for the enhanced exchange of tax information under the Canada-US Tax Convention was entered into in 2014. The agreement provides lengthy and detailed rules with respect to the information that the Canadian government must transfer to the United States.
Earnings within tax-free savings accounts (TFSAs) and other tax-deferred plans are, in principle, supposed to grow tax free. However, some taxes still apply, including the advantage tax which applies at the rate of 100% of any 'advantage' (as defined in the Income Tax Act). This tax has become one of the Canada Revenue Agency's favourite tools to effectively expropriate what it views as improperly boosted returns within a TFSA.
The Federal Court has made a strong statement against an interpretation of the Canada Revenue Agency's (CRA's) powers that would allow almost unlimited invasions of taxpayer privacy. The force with which the court rejected the self-serving interpretation advanced by the CRA should be encouraging for taxpayers. The case serves as an important reminder that the CRA cannot act outside the bounds of law and that it is the courts, and not the CRA, that interpret the law.
A taxpayer recently requested a ruling from the Tax Department on the treatment of gains from cryptocurrency transactions for income and value added tax purposes, as cryptocurrencies are not specifically regulated in Chile or recognised as legal tender or foreign currency. The department's analysis reflected the broad definition of 'income' in the Income Tax Act and the fact that there is no specific exemption or favourable treatment given to these specific gains.
A business group recently requested an advance ruling from the Internal Revenue Service regarding the merger of a Chilean subsidiary with a company resident in a low-tax jurisdiction. The service stated that pursuant to Article 64 of the Tax Code, it will not exercise its assessment authority where it has been effectively proven that the legal effects of a merger in another country will be carried out in accordance with Chilean legislation and that the operation will be carried out under the terms of tax neutrality.
The Tax Department recently issued Circular 57, which provides a definition of a 'permanent establishment' for domestic law purposes and underlines that such fixed places of business require a tax registration number. Although the circular has been issued with a limited scope, it may have additional benefits, including identifying whether a foreign entity or individual has a permanent establishment operating in Chile.
Innovation and entrepreneurship are heavily sought after by countries looking to ameliorate and modernise their economies. Cyprus is no different in this respect and has prioritised creating a vibrant landscape which addresses the needs of start-ups and their investors. The defining features of the Cypriot system are its IP box regime, notional interest deduction, alternative investment funds and various tax incentives which can be coupled with research and development and innovation.
The House of Representatives recently approved legislation implementing the EU Anti-tax Avoidance Directive in Cyprus with the aim of improving the resilience of the internal market against cross-border tax avoidance practices. The new legislation has once again demonstrated the government's commitment to supporting international efforts to tackle tax avoidance practices.
The Cyprus Tax Department recently issued a circular giving guidance on the tax residence provisions for individuals introduced by Law 119(I)/2017. The circular makes clear that an individual who holds office as a director of a Cyprus tax-resident company and delegates this office to an alternate or nominee director at any time during the tax year does not qualify for Cyprus tax residence under the 60-day rule.
Article 9(B) of the Income Tax Law 2002 (as amended) provides for a notional interest deduction for tax purposes on new equity capital injected into companies and permanent establishments of foreign companies on or after 1 January 2015 to finance business assets, calculated by applying a reference rate to the new equity. The Tax Department recently announced the 10-year government bond yields for 31 December 2018, which will be used as the basis for the notional interest deduction for the 2019 tax year.
The Ministry of Finance recently announced that the double tax agreement with Saudi Arabia – which was signed on 3 January 2018 – will enter into force on 1 March 2019. The agreement will apply to amounts paid or credited on or after 1 January 2020 with regard to taxes withheld at source and to tax years beginning on or after 1 January 2020 with regard to other taxes.
For many years, tax authorities have rejected holding companies' right to deduct input value added tax; however, the European Court of Justice has issued several decisions that have enabled a slow but unequivocal paradigm shift towards so-called 'active' or 'mixed' holdings (ie, holding companies which are directly or indirectly involved in the management of subsidiaries and provide them with taxable services). This article examines the most important decisions in this regard.
The European Union has added further impetus to its objective of providing greater transparency with regard to harmful tax practices through an amendment to EU Directive 2011/16/EU. The directive has introduced the mandatory reporting of cross-border arrangements that are indicative of potentially aggressive tax planning. The relevant disclosure requirements must be followed by intermediaries and, in some instances, taxpayers.