The EU’s Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD), implemented in January 2019, confronts Member States with complex challenges, particularly via the introduction of an interest limitation rule. This timely book, the first in-depth analysis of the features and implications of the directive, provides insightful and practical discussions by experts from around Europe on the crucial interactions of the ATAD with other existing anti-tax avoidance measures, the European financial sector and the fundamental freedoms. Specific issues and topics covered include the following: relation with the OECD’s Base Erosion and Profit Sharing project (BEPS) and the EU’s Common Corporate Tax Base initiative; technical subjects relating to corporate taxation and debt funding; problems caused by the diametrically opposite tax treatment of debt and equity within a group of companies; exclusion clauses for interest expenses; and interplay between interest limitation rules and anti-hybrid rules. A comparative analysis of implementation issues in four leading Member States—Germany, Italy, Spain and The Netherlands—as well as a global general survey with regard to interest limitation rules allow readers to assess the particular complexities associated to the implementation of the ATAD. This matchless commentary by leading European tax law academics and practitioners on an important and much-debated item of EU legislation gives practitioners, enterprises and tax authorities an early opportunity to understand the practical effects of the directive in the various Member States.
See also Country Community Timberlake Village v. HMW Special Utility District of Harris, 438 S.W.3d 661 (Tex. Ct. App. 2014) (holding that a neighboring ...
After Justin Timberlake exposed Janet Jackson's pierced nipple on national television for 9/16ths of a second, the FCC received over 540,000 complaints.
Volume III: The Chesapeake and New England, 1660-1750 William E. Nelson ... Decision of Law, Surry County Ct. 1673/74, in Eliza Timberlake Davis ed., ...
E. Edwards v. California, 314 U.S. 160 (1941), 66 Edwards v. Housing Authority of City of ... Timberlake, 148 Ind. 38,46 N.E.339 (1897), 69,70 Graves v.
Fitzgerald, 4.08[B][2], 5.05[D] Fitzgerald v. ... Mastrapa-Font, 7.03[A][3] Fontaine, In re, 5.05[D] Fontenette v. ... Frost, 5.05[A] Formato v.
The sole remedy is avoidance, however; damages cannot be claimed under s. ... 17, it places a great deal of power in the hands of insurance companies to ...
Normally, a mate«s receipt would later be given up for a bill of lading, ... they necessarily prejudice the rights of those who deal in the goods ...
27 257 U.S. 184, 42 S. Ct. 72, 66 L. Ed. 189 (1921). ... 38 Argensinger, “Right to Strike”: Labor Organization and the New Deal in Baltimore, 78 MD . HIST .
704 Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017, s. 80. 705 Leith v. Gould [1986] 1 NZLR 760. It is not clear how a New Zealand court would deal with a case such ...
... to meet the reasonable expectations of claimants about how the corporation should deal with them, by, inter alia, ... 7 Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, s.