According to the current case law of the Supreme Administrative Court (VwGH 12. 11. 2021, Ra 2020/16/0158), the application for suspension of enforcement in customs law already has the effect of inhibiting enforcement, even before this application is granted. This means that legal protection in a customs procedure corresponds to that in a tax procedure. The customs administration is currently still ignoring this case law. The article shows that this is questionable from a constitutional point of view and can result in claims for official liability.
On 27 December 2021 the Federal Fiscal Court (BFG, 27.12.2021, RV/7101196/2021) decided that a director who is held liable for taxes of the company has the right to apply for a reopening of the tax assessment proceedings on his own behalf, irrespective of an application by the company.
Increasingly, tax authorities are refusing the deduction of business expenses on the grounds that the disclosed recipient is, according to their opinion, a sham company. In this context, the term "sham company" is interpreted very broadly. The article highlights the risks and possible arguments against the background of recent case law (VwGH 3.12.2021, Ra 2019/13/0074).
On 22 December 2021, the European Commission published a draft directive implementing a global minimum taxation for multinational groups of companies in the European Union (EU), which provides for rules under which groups of companies operating in the EU will be taxed with a global minimum tax rate of 15%.
On 22 December 2021 the EU Commission published a proposal for a new anti-tax avoidance directive laying down rules to prevent the misuse of shell entities for tax purposes (the ATAD 3 Proposal). The proposed directive is a result of the so-called “Unshell Initiative” and was already announced on 18 May 2021 with the Communication on Business Taxation on the 21st century by the EU Commission.