Beneficiario efectivo, cláusulas generales antiabuso, Directivas UE, CDI y «sentencias danesas» del TJUE: cómo integrar las piezas evitando conflictos e inseguridad jurídica (que no elimina el caso Colgate)

• Autores: Adolfo J. Martín Jiménez
• Localización: Revista de Contabilidad y Tributación. CEF, ISSN-e 2792-8306, ISSN 2695-6896, Nº 452, 2020, págs. 75-124
• Idioma: español
• Títulos paralelos:
  • Beneficial owner, GAARs, EU directives, double tax treaties and the «Danish judgments» of the CJEU: how to put the jigsaw together (perhaps with the Colgate case) and avoid conflicts and legal uncertainty
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Dialnet Métricas: 3 Citas
• Resumen
  • español

    Dos recientes resoluciones del Tribunal Económico-Administrativo Central (TEAC) de 8 de octubre de 2019 y una sentencia del Tribunal Supremo (caso Colgate) han vuelto a poner de moda en España la problemática del concepto de beneficiario efectivo y su interacción con las cláusulas generales antiabuso, en particular, el artículo 15 de la Ley General Tributaria.

    Este trabajo examina la evolución de tal concepto de beneficiario efectivo en el contexto de la Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económicos (OCDE) y el derecho comparado, poniendo de manifiesto los problemas que la interpretación que propone el TEAC, la doctrina de nuestros tribunales, el Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea o la propia OCDE plantean desde la peculiar perspectiva de nuestro ordenamiento tributario. En realidad, el trabajo sugiere que la experiencia y evolución sobre el beneficiario efectivo debe hacernos reflexionar sobre la manera de legislar (o más bien de no reaccionar) e incorporar instituciones a nuestro derecho de forma acrítica y el impacto que ello produce en términos de (in)seguridad jurídica y respeto de los derechos de los contribuyentes, la interpretación de los convenios de doble imposición o la aplicación del derecho de la Unión Europea.

  • English

    Two recent decisions of the Spanish Central Administrative Economic Tribunal (TEAC) of 8 October 2019 and one of the Supreme Court (Colgate case) have made beneficial owner and its interaction with GAARs (in particular, article 15 General Tax Law) return to popularity. This work studies the evolution of the concept of beneficial owner in the OECD and comparative law contexts, particularly pointing out the problems the interpretation proposed by the TEAC, the Spanish Courts, the CJEU or the OECD pose from the perspective of the Spanish tax system.

    In a nutshell, this work suggests that the experience and evolution of beneficial ownership must make us reflect on the special form of passing legislation (or rather non-passing it) and incorporating foreign institutions into our law system in an acritical manner and the impact it has in terms of legal (un)certainty and respect of taxpayers’ rights, the interpretation of Double Tax Treaties or the application of EU law.

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • Aaronson, G. (2011). GAAR Study: A study to consider whether a general anti-avoidance rule should be introduced into the UK tax system. Recuperado...
  • Arnold, B. (2017). The Role of a General Antiavoidance Rule in Protecting the Tax Base of Developing Countries. En UN Handbook on Selected...
  • Avery Jones, J. (2006). The Origins of Concepts and Expressions Used in the OECD Model and Their Adoption by States. 60 Bulletin of International...
  • Avery Jones, J. (2013). The Beneficial Ownership Concept Was Never Necessary in the Model. En M. Lang y P. Pistone (eds.). Beneficial Ownership:...
  • Baker, P. (2000). Double Taxation Conventions. London: Sweet & Maxwell.
  • Barba de Alba, A. y Arribas, D. (9 de julio de 2020). Spanish Tax Authorities Rejoice over the Danish Cases. Kluwer Tax Blog. Recuperado...
  • Bernstein, J. (2007). Beneficial Ownership: An International Perspective. 47 Tax Notes International 17.
  • Calderón Carrero, J. M. (2019). Comentario a la SAN de 30 de noviembre de 2018 en el caso Colgate Palmolive: ajustes colaterales derivados...
  • Calderón Carrero, J. M. (2020a). La doctrina del TEAC sobre la interpretación de la exención del artículo 14.1 c) TRLIRNR a la luz de la jurisprudencia...
  • Calderón Carrero, J. M. (2020b). La interpretación de los convenios de doble imposición en los tiempos de la COVID19. Revista de Contabilidad...
  • Calderón, J. M. y Martín, A. (2020a). La Directiva Matriz-Filial. En N. Carmona Fernández (coord.), Todo Convenios Fiscales Internacionales...
  • Calderón, J. M. y Martín, A. (2020b). Los CDI en el ordenamiento español: naturaleza, efec-tos, interpretación e impacto del Proyecto OCDE/G20...
  • Danon, R. (2004). Switzerland’s Direct and International Taxation of Private Express Trusts. Zurich: Schulthess.
  • Danon, R. (2007a). Le concept de bénéficiaire effectif dans le cadre du MC OCDE. IFF Forum für Steuerrecht, 1.
  • Danon, R. (2007b). Le concept de bénéficiaire effectif et les structures de relais direct. 77 Archives de Droit Fiscal Suisse
  • De Broe, L. (2008). International Tax Planning and Prevention of Abuse. Amsterdam: IBFD, Doctoral Series 14.
  • De Broe, L. (2020). Should Courts in EU Member States Take Account of the ECJ’s Judgment in the Danish Beneficial Ownership Cases When Interpreting...
  • De Broe, L. y Gommers, S. (2019). Danish Dynamite: The 26 February 2019 CJEU Judgments in the Danish Beneficial Ownership Cases. EC Tax Review...
  • Du Toit, Ch. (1999). Beneficial Ownership of Royalties in Bilateral Tax Treaties. Amsterdam: IBFD.
  • Kuźniacki, B. (2020). The GAAR (Article 6 ATAD). En Werner Haslehner Georg Kofler, K. Pantazou y Alexander Rust, A Guide to the Anti-Avoidance...
  • Lang, M. y Pistone, P. (eds.). (2013). Beneficial Ownership: Recent Trends. Amsterdam: IBFD.
  • Martín Jiménez, A. (2003). Los Comentarios al MC OCDE: su incidencia en el sistema de fuentes del Derecho Tributario y sobre los derechos...
  • Martín Jiménez, A. (2004). The 2003 Revision of the OECD Commentaries on the Improper Use of Tax Treaties: A Case for the Declining Effect...
  • Martín Jiménez, A. (2010). Beneficial Ownership:Current Trends. World Tax Journal. Vol. 2, n.º 1.
  • Martín Jiménez, A. (2019). Article 12: Royalties (OECD and UN Models) and Article 12A: Technical Services (UN Model (2017)). En R. Vann (ed.),...
  • Martín Jiménez, A. (2020a). Beneficial Ownership. En R. Vann (ed.), Global Tax Treaty Commentaries. IBFD: Amsterdam.
  • Martín Jiménez, A. (2020b). The Prohibition of Abuse in EU and the Codification of the EU GAAR. En B. Arnold (ed.), The General Anti-Avoidance...
  • OCDE. (1986a). Double Taxation Conventions and the Use of Base Companies. Paris: OECD.
  • OCDE. (1986b). Double Taxation Conventions and the Use of Conduit Companies. Paris: OECD.
  • OCDE. (1989). Tax Treaty Override. Paris: OECD.
  • OCDE. (1999). The Application of the OECD Model Tax Convention to Partnerships. Paris: OECD.
  • OCDE. (2011). Clarification of the Meaning of «Beneficial Owner» in the OECD Model Tax Convention discussion draft 29 April 2011 to 15 July...
  • OCDE. (2012). OECD Model Tax Convention: Revised Proposals Concerning the Mean-ing of «Beneficial Owner» in Articles 10, 11, and 12 (19 October...
  • OCDE-G20. (2015). Preventing the Granting of Treaty Benefits in Inappropriate Circumstances, Action 6 - 2015 Final Report. Paris: OECD.
  • Oliver, J., Libin, J., Van Weeghel, S. y Du Toit, C. (2001). Beneficial Ownership and the OECD Model. British Tax Review, 1 (también publicado...
  • Pijl, H. (2000). The Definition of «Beneficial Owner» under Dutch Law. 54 Bulletin for International Fiscal Documentation 6.
  • Pijl, H. (2003). Beneficial Ownership and Second Tier Beneficial Owners in Tax Treaties of the Netherlands. 31 Intertax 10.
  • Sanz Gadea, E. (2019). Beneficiario efectivo: Análisis de la STJUE de 26 de febrero de 2019, asuntos acumulados C-115/16, C-118/16, C-119/16...
  • Schön, W. (20 Nov. 2019). The Concept of Abuse of Law in European Taxation: A Methodological and Constitutional Perspective. Working Paper...
  • Smit, D. (2013). The Concept of Beneficial Ownership and Possible Alternative Remedies in Netherlands Case Law. En M. Lang y P. Pistone (eds.)....
  • Van Weeghel, S. (1998). The Improper Use of Tax Treaties. Deventer: Kluwer.
  • Vann, R. Beneficial Ownership: What Does History (and Maybe Policy) Tell Us. Sydney Law School Research Paper n.º 12/66.
  • Vega Borrego, F. (2003). Las medidas contra el «treaty Shopping». Madrid: Instituto de Estudios Fiscales.
  • Vega Borrego, F. (2005). El concepto de beneficiario efectivo en los Convenios para Evitar la Doble Imposición. Documentos del Instituto de...
  • Vogel, K. (1997). On Double Taxation Conventions. London: Kluwer.
  • Waerzeggers, C. y Hillier, C. (2016). Introducing a GAAR. Tax Law IMF Technical Note vol. 1/2016. Recupeardo de .
  • Walser, J. (2000). The Concept of Beneficial Ownership in Tax Treaties. En IFA, The OECD Model Convention – 1998 and Beyond (Proceedings of...
  • Weber, D. (2016). The New Common Minimum Anti-Abuse Rule in the EU ParentSubsidiary Directive: Background, Impact, Applicability, Purpose...
  • Wheeler, J. (2005). The Attribution of Income to a Person for Tax Treaty Purposes. 59 Bulletin for International Fiscal Documentation 11.
  • Wheeler, J. (2007). General Report. Conflicts in the Attribution of Income to a Person. Cahiers de droit fiscal international, Vol. 92b. Amersfoort:...
  • Working Party OECD no. 21 (United States - Denmark). (21 de diciembre de 1967). Third Report on Tax Avoidance through the Improper Use or...
  • Zalasinski, A. (2019). The ECJ’s Decisions in the Danish «Beneficial Ownership» cases: Impact on the Reaction to Tax Avoidance in the European...