In September 2023, the European Commission published its proposed directive on Business in Europe: Framework for Income Taxation (BEFIT) aimed at cross-border groups. The proposed directive includes a common set of rules to determine the tax base of companies belonging to the same group within the EU, with the purpose of aggregating the tax bases into one single tax base. Once the aggregated tax base has been determined, each group company will be assigned a percentage of the aggregated tax base. This percentage will be based on the average of the taxable results in the previous three fiscal years.
9.10.2023
The European Commission proposes changes to transfer pricing and the taxation of large international groups within the EU
Janne Juusela, Mikko Alakare & Noora Ahonen
Related services
In the same connection, the Commission issued a separate proposal for harmonising transfer pricing rules within the EU. This proposal aims at enhancing tax certainty and, consequently, reducing tax litigation and double-taxation. Moreover, it also aims at reducing aggressive tax planning schemes.
The proposed directive would concern large groups that are subject to EU regulations
The BEFIT Directive will be mandatory only for groups operating in the EU with a combined revenue of at least EUR 750 million over a certain period, and where the ultimate parent entity hold at least 75% of the ownership rights or of the rights giving entitlement to profit. Another precondition is that the group companies prepare consolidated financial statements. Groups with a lower revenue operating in the EU may also choose to opt in as long as they prepare consolidated financial statements.
The proposed regulation may initially lead to additional work
The proposed directive is another step towards a common EU corporate taxation system and the plan for a common allocation method in which the results, determined under common rules, would be allocated for taxation in the group companies’ home countries using a formulary apportionment. The proposed regulation aims to further develop the EU’s internal market and reduce the procedural costs caused by applying multiple taxation frameworks. It is also expected to encourage cross-border investments within the EU. While the Commission predicts that the regulation could result in significant savings in procedural costs, the implementation and application of the new regulation will likely lead to additional work for groups, at least in the initial stage. The situation is further complicated by the fact that the proposed directive only concerns companies that fall under EU regulation. In other words, it does not apply to cases in which a company’s tax residence is in a non-EU state.
The contents of the directive are not yet set in stone
The BEFIT Directive is proposed to enter into force on 1 July 2028. If the transfer pricing proposal proceeds as planned, it would enter into force on 1 January 2026 already. However, the directives must first pass through the hands of the European Parliament and of the Council. The proposed regulation and the allocation of revenue concern the taxing rights of Member States, which have traditionally been difficult questions on the EU level. It is therefore highly uncertain that the European Parliament and the Council would adopt the proposed regulations, at least exactly as proposed. Nevertheless, it is necessary to renew the international corporate taxation system, and we are bound to see some changes sooner or later.
Latest news
Latest references
WithSecure – Sale of open source data collection product and business
We advised WithSecure Oyj in the sale of its open source data collection product and business to Patria Oyj. The divested business combining software and services falls outside WithSecure’s current strategy. Through the sale, WithSecure sharpens its focus on the Elements portfolio. WithSecure is a global cyber security company (listed on NASDAQ OMX Helsinki) with more than 35 years of industry experience. WithSecure offers partners flexible commercial models, ensuring mutual success across the dynamic cyber security landscape. Patria is an international company in the defence and security industry offering defence, security and aviation life cycle support services and technology solutions. As a result of the transaction, Patria will open a new office in Oulu and 10 WithSecure experts currently working in the business area will join Patria.
Case published 30.9.2024
A. Ahlström – ESG advisory and corporate sustainability due diligence process planning
We advised A. Ahlström in establishing a corporate sustainability due diligence process plan which incorporates best practices and tailored solutions based on our expertise within relevant business sectors. Our comprehensive ESG offering also included tailored training for members of the investment team and management team and the board of directors of several portfolio companies. ‘The ESG team at Castrén & Snellman provided us with legal and practical advice around the ESG regulatory tsunami that we need to incorporate in our ESG work,’ comments Camilla Sågbom, Director, Sustainability and Communications, at A. Ahlström Oy. A. Ahlström is a family-owned industrial company, developing leading global specialist positions in Forest & Fiber and Environmental technology sectors.
Case published 5.9.2024
Vapaus Bikes Finland – Series A funding round
We represented Vapaus Bikes Finland Oy, a company offering employee benefit bikes, in its international EUR 10 million Series A funding round. The investors behind the funding are private equity investors Shift4Good and Superhero Capital Ltd as well as Tesi together with the European Guarantee Fund of the European Investment Bank. The equity-based funding will support the company’s international expansion, software development, platform automation, and the growth of its concept for the second-hand market of bikes. Vapaus Bikes Finland is at the forefront of sustainable mobility services and has been a pioneer in the Employee Benefit Bikes sector since late 2020. It has been ranked among Finland’s fastest growing companies. Shift4Good is an impact venture capital fund focused on the decarbonisation of the transportation sector. Tesi (officially Finnish Industry Investment Ltd) is a state-owned, market-driven investment company that invests in venture capital and private equity funds and directly in Finnish startups and growth companies.
Case published 21.8.2024
City of Rovaniemi – Former employees ordered to pay damages in an investment decision matter
We successfully acted for the City of Rovaniemi in a matter concerning offence in public office and damages claims in relation to a significant investment decision made by the city. The defendants were the city’s former municipal corporate officer, who was in an employment relationship, and a city treasurer, who was in a public-service employment relationship and acted as the supervisor of the municipal corporate officer. The criminal matter related to the City Board’s decision to invest EUR 2 million of the city’s funds in bonds offered by a newly established investment company in accordance with a decision prepared by the defendants. A significant part of the company’s operations involved quick loan business. The main legal question in the matter was whether the investment of public funds constitutes an exercise of public authority and whether regulation on offences in public office therefore becomes applicable even to a person in an employment relationship. The municipal corporate officer in an employment relationship was charged with aggravated abuse of public office based on her negligence in the preparation and presentation of the investment decision as well as based on a conflict of interest due to the fact that she had invested her own money in a company that received funding from the investment target presented to the City Board. The charges of an offence in public office against the city treasurer concerned his position as the supervisor and reporter of the city’s investment activities. He was also involved in the preparation and presentation of the City Board’s decision. The processing of the matter started in the District Court of Lapland in June 2022. In its judgment given in August 2022, the District Court stated, based among other things on our argumentation, that the investment of public funds constitutes an exercise of public authority and that regulation on offences in public office can therefore be applied to the municipal corporate officer. The District Court deemed that the conduct of the former municipal corporate officer fulfils the characteristics of abuse of public office and that the conduct of the former city treasurer fulfils the characteristics of violation of official duty with respect to the preparation of the investment decision, but the right to bring charges had become time-barred. Punishments could therefore not be imposed on the defendants, but the defendants were ordered to jointly and severally pay the city approximately EUR 114,000 in damages plus interest for late payment. The city treasurer’s share of the amount was 10%. The prosecutor accepted the judgment but the other parties appealed it to the Court of Appeal. Acting for the city, we pursued claims for both punishment and damages in the Court of Appeal. The Rovaniemi Court of Appeal processed the matter in November and December 2023. In its judgment given in June 2024, the Court of Appeal upheld the District Court’s judgment with respect to the abuse of public office and violation of official duty. The Court of Appeal deemed that the municipal corporate officer had failed in her duty to declare the conflict of interest. In addition, she had failed in her duty to ensure that the prepared decision was in compliance with the city’s investment guidelines and that it had been properly put out to tender. The Court of Appeal also found that the text of the investment proposal was insufficient and misleading and that the municipal corporate officer’s conduct was intentional. As regards the city treasurer, the Court of Appeal held that he had failed in his duty to ensure that the investment proposal to the City Board complied with the investment guidelines, that the presentation was not misleading and that risks were taken into account as required by the investment guidelines. With the judgement, the Court of Appeal took a clear position that abuse in public offices and when exercising public authority is not acceptable. The judgment is also significant as it declares that investing public funds constitutes an exercise of public authority and that the liability for acts in office therefore becomes applicable even to persons in employment relationships. In addition, a key question for the Court of Appeal to assess was defining the amount of economic damage in a matter related to investment activities. The Court of Appeal held based on our arguments that the conduct of the municipal corporate officer and the city treasurer had caused damage to the city. The Court of Appeal increased the amount of damages to EUR 210,000 with the city treasurer’s share limited to 10%. The amount was increased because the Court of Appeal deemed that the city had suffered damage not only in terms of the loss of capital but also in terms of the loss of estimated return on investment. The judgement is not final.
Case published 21.8.2024