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

German legislator finally introduces tax exemption for income resulting from debt waivers in restructuring scenarios with retroactive effect.

To date, a debt waiver has been frequently used as a tool to successfully restructure German-based companies in financial difficulties.

To date, a debt waiver has been frequently used as a tool to successfully restructure German based companies in financial difficulties. A decision of the German Federal Fiscal Court (Bundesfinanzhof) published on February 8, 2017 currently limits such an option, given that it held that one of the main instruments used by tax authorities to grant relief from an otherwise taxable cancellation of debt income (CODI) in the form of the so-called Restructuring Decree (Sanierungserlass) violates fundamental constitutional rights.

Legal & Regulatory

BRRD: FCA publishes modification by consent for Article 55 rules

Restructurings have become an integral part of the reality of the German debt and equity markets.

Amendments to the rules of deductibility of interest expenses

Further restrictions to deductibility of interest expenses incurred in relation to a share purchase¹

Background

In Princeton Office Park, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the bankruptcy and district court rulings that the purchaser of a NJ tax sale certificate forfeited its claim and lien because it included the premium it paid to the State when it purchased the tax certificate.