The acts of the EU tax law and double tax treaties: the problems of correlation in establishing anti-tax avoidance rules

The subject. The specifics of the functioning of tax systems and the risk of double taxation require a solution to the issue of whether tax competence can remain only at the national level. Modern cross-border tax relations operate within a multi-level system of legal regulation based on the norms of international, supranational and national lawThe difficulties of correlating these levels are rooted in the fact that, in accordance with international law, each State has the right to tax persons or transactions with which it has a sufficient connection. Different situations may occur when both countries believe that the taxpayer is their resident, or when each of them claims that the income was received in this state. States solve this problem both unilaterally with the help of national legislation, and on a bilateral basis with the help of a double tax treaty.With the adoption of the Action Plan aimed at combating the erosion of the tax base and the withdrawal of profits (hereinafter referred to as the BEPS plan) and the EU Council Directive 2016/1164 (ATAD), tax strategies for using gaps and inconsistencies in tax rules to artificially transfer profits to low-tax jurisdictions were limited.Purpose of the study. The article discusses possible scenarios arising from the interaction of tax agreements and acts of EU tax law. It is necessary to take into account the obligation of the Member States to eliminate inconsistencies between acts of national legislation and acts of EU law. Member States have committed to achieve this goal at the time of EU accession and, therefore, before the adoption of any secondary EU law.Methodology. The research was carried out with the application of the formally legal interpretation of legal acts as well as the comparative analysis of international and European legal literature. Structural and systemic methods are also the basis of the research.The main results. Due to the clear coordination between the European Union and the OECD of actions in terms of establishing common measures to combat tax evasion and focusing on the subjective element of assessing potential abuse situations, a new standard for combating tax evasion has been established.Сonclusions. The author comes to the conclusion that the priority of the EU law over DTTs has been established. However, Member States retain the right to establish their own tax regimes and enter into tax treaties, thereby creating conflicts in legal regulation. In order to be directly applicable, the norm of the treaty must be clearly and definitely formulated, as well as be unconditional and independent of any national implementation measures.National legislation provides measures to eliminate the legal multiple taxation only for its residents. On the other hand, with respect to tax agreements concluded with third countries, the predominance of one system over another depends on the specific scenario, and in some cases the result achieved is the result of interpretation of existing provisions. In particular, tax treaties should prevail only when concluded before a state joins the EU.

Beihilfenkontrolle zwischen Supranationalität und Intergouvernementalität

The Brexit experience sheds new light on the question of whether credible state aid regulation must by its nature be supranational. Following a review of the disciplines of EU state aid law and WTO subsidy law, which shape international subsidy law, it is explained why the introduction of bi- and plurilateral control regimes beyond the WTO is necessary from the EU's point of view and which hurdles these efforts must overcome. Finally, on the basis of an overall analysis of EU (free trade) agreements, a concentric circle model of state aid law is developed, which reveals the link between type of agreement, market integration, geographical proximity and the impact of EU law on the state aid rules agreed with the treaty partners.

REFUND FOR CANCELLED TRAVEL DURING THE PANDEMIC: COMMISSION DECIDES TO REFER SLOVAKIA TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE

Purpose. The purpose of the article is to assess the conformity of the Slovak solutions with regard to refunds for cancelled travels and their conformity with EU law, i.e. the Package Travel Directive. In the article, the position is analysed of the European Commission and its reflection to Slovak legislation on refunds of travels after cancellation of the breach concerning travels by the travel agencies. Method. Legal analyses regarding the Slovak amendment of Package Travel Act and comparison of its provisions with the Package Travel Directive. Findings. In the article, the way is described as to how the Slovak legislator solved the reimbursement for cancelled travels due to pandemic situation. Also provided is the statement regarding the reasoned opinion of the European Commission that followed the adoption of the amendment of the Slovak Package Travel Act. The authors analyse compatibility of the COVID PTA Amendment with European Union law. In the article, it is described that due to time constraints set by the COVID PTA Amendment for refund because of cancelled travels, non-compliance with EU legislation had probably expired by September 2021. Research and conclusions limitations. The research was focused on EU (Package Travel Directive) and Slovak legislation (Package Travel Act) and assessment of compliance of Slovak with EU law. Practical implications. The article draws attention to the question whether some effects of the COVID PTA Amendment will persist after September 2021 provided that the topical purpose of this legislation to postpone refund for travellers has already been accomplished by setting the deadline for 14 September 2021. Secondly, it raises the question of possible damage suffered by the individuals due to the breach of EU law by the Slovak Republic. Originality. As the article is focused on the most current situation, this topic has not been discussed by other authors in other studies. The authors assume a view that makes assessment regarding legality of the Slovak amendment for Package Travel Act with EU law. Type of paper. Research paper.

Maritime Concessions in Italy

The paper deals with the treatment – both legislative and judicial – of maritime concessions in Italy. It first analyses legal provisions regarding the term of duration of such concessions and then focuses on some recent sentences. The first of them could have made stronger the conflict between the Italian legal environment and EU one, as the legislative automatic prorogation of concessions was deemed to be legitimate. Luckily, further rulings stated that this legislative statute is not in line with EU law and so has to be non applied. The Council of State solved the question very recently: not only Italian legal discipline was sentenced not to be in line with the EU law, but also some guidelines were given to step out the impasse. Judicial review so proved out to be once again the key element to grant rule of law, even when relationships between different legal environments are concerned.

Legal conflict between the EU and the republic of Poland regarding polish judicial reform

Problem setting. On October 7, 2021, the Constitutional Tribunal of the Republic of Poland ruled in favor of Polish law over European Union law, which in the long run may violate the principles according to which the Union operates and the rights enjoyed by citizens of the state. Such a precedent can further serve as a basis for identical decisions of the bodies of constitutional jurisdiction of those states that have problems in fulfilling their obligations in the European community. Analysis of recent researches and publications. The problems of the functioning of the bodies of the European Union, the implementation of their decisions and the general status in EU law are widely studied in national science. In particular, many scholars have studied the legal nature of the EU, including: TM Anakina, VI Muravyov, NM Ushakov, A. Ya. Kapustina, NA Korolyova, Yu. Yumashev, BN Topornin, OYa Tragniuk, SS Seliverstov, IV Yakovyuk and others. Target of research is to establish the foundations of EU law in the functioning of Union bodies, especially the Court, as well as to determine the hierarchy of national law and EU law. Article’s main body. Over the years, the Court has, within its jurisdiction, issued a large number of judgments which have become the source of the Union’s Constituent Treaties and of EU law in general. Over the last two decades, the powers of the Court of Justice have changed significantly. In particular, this is due to the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty, which amended the EU’s founding treaties on the powers of the Court, then the reform of the European Court took place in 2015-2016, which concerned a change in the organizational structure of the Court. Despite the generally well-established case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the unification of the observance by the Member States of the basic principles of the European Union, the Constitutional Tribunal of the Republic of Poland adopted a decision on 7 October. Conclusions and prospects for the development. Following the decision of the Constitutional Court, the Polish authorities found themselves in a situation that significantly complicated its internal and external situation. The way out of which requires answers to fundamental questions about the legal nature of the EU. Undoubtedly, this is an issue not only between Poland and the EU, but also between other member states.

National Security Concerns as an Exception to EU Standards on Data Protection

Discussions on the appropriate fundamental rights standards in the EU and the need to take into account conflicting interests are increasingly being reframed as debates on the conflict between the primacy of EU law and the constitutional standards of the Member States. One example of this reframing is the French administrative supreme court’s decision following the ECJ judgment in La Quadrature du Net. The Conseil ruled that the EU standards set in that judgment must be reviewed, at the national level, with regard to a national understanding of security concerns and the requirements of the fight against terrorism. Thus, constitutional requirements related to public security may be relied upon to argue for a lower standard of protection of personal data than those which the ECJ requires. As this decision shows, the ability of corporations and Governments to rely on litigation before national courts to challenge the standard of protection set at the EU level creates a significant risk, not only for the uniformity of EU law, but also for the protection of the rights of individuals.

IMMUNITY AND PROTECTION AGAINST RETALIATION GRANTED TO „WHISTLEBLOWERS” – PERSONS WHO REPORT VIOLATIONS OF EUROPEAN UNION LAW AND POLICY

The author analyzes the Directive 2019/1937 promoting the idea of cooperation between employees and public authorities regarding information on abuses of European Union law and policy. It outlines the purpose (to improve enforcement and EU policies), methods and techniques for this cooperation (internal and external reporting and follow-up). It discusses the immunity and legal protection (prohibition against retaliation) granted to persons who report a breach of EU law and policy. The author believes that due to historical events, the employed persons, potential whistleblowers, may be critical of the above idea. According to the author, the success of the existing directive depends on its effects, which will be known only in five years.