This website uses its own cookies and those of third parties to analyze the use of this site to improve its contents and your user experience. If you continue to browse, we understand you accept their use. You can change your configuration or obtain further information here.
This website uses its own cookies and those of third parties to analyze the use of this site to improve its contents and your user experience. If you continue to browse, we understand you accept their use. You can change your configuration or obtain further information here.
It is not surprising that within an economic outlook which seems permanently set to "gloomy" many companies are having to think about reorganising their operations or restructuring their holding structures This article highlights some of the tax and other considerations which must be borne in mind when considering such reorganisations or restructurings with reference to some recent (and less recent) cases and changes in the law and points which have come to the fore in the current climate.
Recapitalisations
On March 29, 2017, the United Kingdom (UK) delivered notice of its withdrawal from the European Union (EU), triggering the most comprehensive legislative review and revision ever to occur in the UK. This update discusses legislative changes that might affect structured finance. Changes in Law Upon the UK’s withdrawal, EU treaties, directives, directly effective decisions and regulations, and rulings of the European Court of Justice will cease to apply to the UK unless their effect is specifically preserved by English law.
On 26 January 2011 the European Commission declared the so-called Restructuring Clause (Sanierungsklausel) (Sec. 8c (1a) of the German Corporate Income Tax Act (CTA)) as inconsistent with EU funding guidelines. The decision of the European Commission is criticized by national experts and stresses the German economy with a hardly tolerable uncertainty as regards tax issues in restructurings.
Does the German restructuring clause of Sec. 8c para. 1a CTA (see our Client Alert of 10 July 2009) conform to European Community law? This will be analyzed by the European Commission which has — by circular of 24 February — announced the initiation of a formal examination procedure (Art. 108 para. 2 TFEU, former Art. 88 para. 2 of the EC Treaty). Already before completion of the formal procedure, corporations with unrestricted and restricted tax liability in Germany may face farreaching consequences.
A. The Restructuring Clause of Sec. 8c para. 1a CTA
La justicia europea se pronuncia sobre la aplicación de las garantías laborales en la transmisión de empresas cuando cedente y cesionario prevén la posterior desaparición del cesionario por liquidación. Nada impide segregar una parte de la empresa y posibilitar su autonomía, pero mantener la dependencia y provocar su quiebra resulta contrario al principio de estabilidad que rige el transfondo laboral de toda transmisión empresarial.
Todos los supuestos de extinción en que ésta es adoptada por voluntad del trabajador, pero derivada de una decisión unilateral de la empresa, han de tener el mismo tratamiento por parte de los Estados miembros. Así lo señala el Tribunal de de Justicia en un reciente pronunciamiento en el que resuelve una cuestión cuya trascendencia práctica desborda el supuesto planteado específicamente.
(La Sentencia del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea de 20 de septiembre del 2017)
El Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea establece las condiciones para no considerar ayuda de Estado la decisión de una autoridad pública cuando se comporta como lo haría un acreedor privado en una economía de mercado al aceptar una quita en un procedimiento de convenio de acreedores...
1. El supuesto de hecho
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has just made a pronouncement on three of the most important matters open to interpretation concerning the regime applicable to financial collateral arrangements under Directive 47/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 June 2002.