Agency Permanent Establishment - Zimmer case - Iatj.net

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Issue: Literal and juridical interpretation of 5(5) ?• Conseil d’Etat: « in the name of » means legally binding• In 5(5) the distinction between « pour le compte de » / « on behalf of » and« au nom de » / « in the name of » seems to be borrowed from French legalconcepts, which may be explained by the history of the drafting of the OECDModel• Opinion of Rapporteur public:- 1963 OECD Commentaries confirm that view- § 32.1 of later OECD Commentaries do not affect the outcome (laterCommentaries + designed to solve specific problem in the UK)- Purpose of PE rule: tax the non-resident company in the source countryfor its own activity in this country
Issue: Why not a factual, economic approach ?• There is tax planning going on: should courts step in and interpret 5(5) to prevent taxschemes ?• Legally, does a « economically binding » test make sense ?• Difficult to find a manageable economic test that would not create great legaluncertainty- commissionnaire automatically triggers economic activity by principal? But whatof other distribution arrangements ?- commissionnaire has no risk because no stock? But in some situations otherdistributors may not run many risks.- in the <strong>Zimmer</strong> <strong>case</strong>, the practical elements put forward by the French taxadministration were not uncommon for a commissionnaire• Do not mix the issue of the existence of a PE and the issue of transfer pricing
Page 1 and 2: Agency permanentestablishment - the
Page 3 and 4: Outcome• Conseil d’Etat (31 Mar
Page 5: Issue: combination of 5(5) and 5(6)

Agency Permanent Establishment - Zimmer case - Iatj.net

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?