14.9.2015

IFA Annual Congress: Practical Protection of Tax Payers’ Rights and BEPS in Focus

There are often a few major issues on everyone’s lips in the international community of tax lawyers. This was the case also at The International Fiscal Association’s (IFA) 69th Congress in Basel, Switzerland. One of the main subjects in the congress was how tax payers’ rights can be most efficiently protected in practice.

A general report prepared for the IFA drew conclusions from data provided by the branch reports from each jurisdiction. The idea was to identify minimal standards and best practices for the timely and effective protection of fundamental tax payers’ rights.

Twelve separate aspects were identified, which were then discussed in the panel. An interesting observation was that Finland was mentioned only three times among the best practices rated in the charts presented. It seems the protection of tax payers’ rights deserves to be in focus in the Finnish tax field, as well.

Seeking Greater Transparency in Taxation

As expected, hardly any seminars at the IFA congress were held without mentioning BEPS (base erosion and profit shifting). BEPS is a project of the OECD and the G-20 aimed at getting rid of tax planning strategies that exploit gaps and mismatches in tax rules to shift profits to locations where they are lightly taxed so that little or no overall corporate tax is paid.

Within that project, the OECD has created an action plan that sets out fifteen key areas of international tax rules. These should be addressed by 2015.

The panelists representing tax advisors and business life at the IFA/OECD seminar took a somewhat cautious viewpoint when they evaluated what aspect of BEPS would have the biggest impact. For example, Krister Andersson, Chairman of the Tax Policy Group BUSINESSEUROPE, noted that there is a risk that countries may have different views or interpretations of the steps presented by the OECD in the action plan.

The panelists felt that it is crucial that all countries implement the BEPS actions consistently. Double taxation disputes could arise if countries unilaterally attempt to address these issues without consensus-based principles. It was underlined in the seminar that the OECD must take a strong role in the finalisation and implementation procedure, as BEPS may cause some uncertainty between the countries.

Ron Durand, Partner at Stikeman Elliott, took the view that governments have to make the system work, and national tax administrations need to be well educated. In addition, most of the panelists noted that effective dispute resolution mechanisms are an essential part of the BEPS project.

In sum, it seems to be up to countries how BEPS is implemented in their jurisdictions.

A Step in the Right Direction

Marlies De Ruiter from the OECD agreed that BEPS may not be ideal, but it is a good first step. A package related to the action plan will be delivered to the G20 Finance Ministers in October 2015, together with a plan for follow-up work and a timetable for its implementation.

During the next stage, implementation measures will be stated at the level of domestic legislation and international coordination.

Adapting to a New Environment without Forgetting Tax Payers’ Rights

The practical protection of tax payers’ rights will continue to be a topic for some time to come. This is due to the focus of current international discussions and projects, such as BEPS, being on increasing tax payers’ liability to deliver information to the tax administrations. This will cause extra compliance and administrative costs and increase of reporting requirements.

More disputes between businesses and tax authorities are expected to arise as the rules are amended, especially where they lead to arrangements or structures previously accepted by tax authorities becoming forbidden. Tax payers may not have a well-protected position in this situation, and tax assessments result in lengthy appeal procedures.

Taking into account the increasing exchange of information between the countries, it will be worth paying attention to confidentiality and the proper use of tax payers’ commercially sensitive or tax-related information.

Latest references

We successfully represented insurance companies LähiTapiola and OP Henkivakuutus in two cases concerning an important point of principle: the right of insurance companies to process health data as part of the insurance application process. The Supreme Administrative Court handed down twin decisions ( one published as precedent ) addressing the matter in light of contrary DPA decisions. Under the Finnish Data Protection Act, insurance companies may, to simplify, process health data concerning “insured persons” (vakuutettu, försäkrad) to determine liability under the insurance. This rule constitutes an exception to Article 9 GDPR. At issue was whether the term “insured person” also covers people in the process of obtaining insurance coverage or only people who are already covered. In more practical terms: can an insurance company rely on the rule when considering whether/how to grant the insurance in the first place? The SAC answered in the affirmative and thus upheld the traditional industry approach over the DPA’s contrary view. The SAC noted that the Data Protection Act did not define the term “insured person” and thus looked at insurance legislation for guidance. As argued by the insurance companies, that legislation also uses the term in the context of describing the insured person’s pre-contractual informational obligations. Thus, and in view of the underlying purpose of the rule at issue, the SAC found that an “insured person” could be someone in the process of obtaining coverage, not just a person already covered. The outcome clarifies the scope of the local rule at the insurance application stage for the Finnish insurance industry.
Case published 22.1.2026
Castrén & Snellman organised a practical AI workshop for Taaleri’s lawyers, combining the basic principles of AI thinking with practical applications in a legal environment. The training utilised use cases that were designed in collaboration based on Taaleri’s own materials. Participants found the use cases particularly useful and noted that what they had learnt was readily applicable to their daily work. The training was delivered by Castrén & Snellman’s legal technology experts with a legal background, and participants praised their strong expertise in both legal technology and its application in a legal environment. ‘Our team gained valuable insights into leveraging AI, which will continue to support our organisation’s AI journey,’ says Irina Bergström, Development Manager at Taaleri.
Case published 19.1.2026
We advised the shareholders in Puhdistamo – Real Foods Oy in the sale of all shares in Puhdistamo to PK Consumer Health. Puhdistamo is a leading Nordic wellbeing company, best known for its high-quality supplements, sports nutrition products and, functional beverages. Puhdistamo employs 120 employees in Finland and Sweden. PK Consumer Health is owned by Avista Healthcare Partners and Damier Group. The sellers will make a reinvestment into PK Consumer Health as part of the transaction. Completion is subject to customary closing conditions.
Case published 15.1.2026
We advised the real estate investor and developer Urban Partners in the financing of a EUR 100 million construction project in Helsinki, which combines build-to-rent housing and care homes within one scheme.  A fund managed by Urban Partners (NSF V) purchased the plot of land in Herttoniemi, Helsinki and subsequently secured planning consent to deliver a hybrid living scheme. The modern complex will offer high-quality housing and care facilities for the elderly alongside rental accommodation. A total of 425 apartments and 108 care homes will be delivered across four buildings on the site.  The project will be implemented in accordance with Urban Partners’ sustainability targets. All buildings will be constructed to energy class A, and the project will aim for the highest Platinum level of the international LEED environmental certification and will be implemented in accordance with the EU taxonomy criteria.
Case published 5.1.2026