Neodyum Miknatis
amateur porn
implant
olabahis
Casino Siteleri
Kayseri escort
canli poker siteleri kolaybet meritslot
escort antalya
istanbul escort
sirinevler escort
antalya eskort bayan
brazzers
Articles

Tax efficiency of leveraged dividends challenged by recent court decision

Tax efficiency of leveraged dividends challenged by recent court deci

Tax efficiency of leveraged dividends challenged by recent court decision

10.04.2018 BE law

Traditionally, Belgian tax law has been rather flexible in accepting the tax deductible character of interest due on leveraged financing structures. Recent court decisions, however, seem to challenge this principle.

In a decision of 9 January 2018, the Court of Appeals of Ghent disallowed the tax deductibility of interest payments made in the context of a so-called “leveraged dividend distribution".

The case related to a Belgian company that had acquired the shares of another Belgian company (the 'target company') and that had financed (part of) the purchase price with debt. The reimbursement of this acquisition debt was, in its turn, financed by a post-acquisition “super dividend distribution" by the target company. Since the target company lacked sufficient cash to actually pay out the dividend, it entered into a loan agreement with a third party financial institution to that end. The Court decided that the interest paid in relation to that third party loan was not tax deductible since the target company had not incurred these interest expenses “with a view to acquiring or preserving taxable income". 

This decision follows on another judgment of the Tribunal of First Instance of Antwerp of 29 June 2016, in which the tribunal ruled, on equivalent grounds, that interest expenses incurred in relation to an intragroup loan that was entered into to finance a decrease and reimbursement of (statutory) capital were not tax deductible either.

An appeal has been lodged against the latter decision and is currently still pending, and taking into account the very controversial nature of the reasoning applied by both the Court of Appeals of Ghent and the Tribunal of First Instance of Antwerp the expectation is that both procedures will in due time lead to a ruling by the Supreme Court. It is hazardous, however, to predict how the Supreme Court would eventually rule on the matter.

This new trend in (lower) case law (even if not final yet, and strictly speaking not binding for taxpayers that were not involved themselves in the relevant underlying cases) should nevertheless already be taken into account when structuring acquisitions. In the past, and given the absence of tax consolidation in Belgium, organizing a tax efficient acquisition of a Belgian target company typically involved some form of debt push-down, which often took the form of a leveraged dividend distribution or capital decrease (or a combination of both). If the aforementioned new case law trend would be confirmed, this may obviously jeopardize the fiscal feasibility of these types of structures, as a result of which the organization of a tax efficient debt push-down would become even more challenging than it was in the past. It goes without saying that we will carefully follow up on this matter and will let you know when there are any relevant evolutions.

To end on a positive note: in the context of the Corporate Tax Reform Act of 25 December 2017, a new tax consolidation regime (the so-called “group contribution rule") has been introduced, which will in principle apply as from tax assessment year 2020. It is, however, questionable whether this new rule will have a material positive impact on the tax effectiveness of leveraged share acquisition structures, since one of the conditions for this consolidation regime to apply is that the consolidating companies should have been affiliated without interruption throughout the four preceding taxable periods. It would be helpful that this condition be amended to either shorten the 4 year waiting period or to allow  tax consolidation by anticipation already during the aforementioned period (subject to a claw-back in case the affiliation would not be maintained throughout the entire period).

Team

Related news

03.11.2020 BE law
Chambers and Partners Banking & Finance 2020 Global Practice Guide

Articles - The Chambers Banking & Finance 2020 Global Practice Guide covers 34 jurisdictions and discusses the impact of COVID-19, the high-yield market, restrictions on foreign lenders granting loans or security, foreign currency exchange, debt buy-back, withholding tax, guarantees and security, bankruptcy and insolvency, and EHS laws.

Read more

29.09.2020 NL law
Tax Alert: Public consultation additional source taxation on dividends to low tax jurisdictions

Short Reads - On 25 September 2020, the under minister of Finance released a draft legislative proposal open for public consultation until 23 October 2020. The draft legislative proposal includes a source taxation on profit distributions by Dutch companies to shareholders in low tax jurisdictions. It is proposed to enter into force as per 1 January 2024.

Read more

23.10.2020 NL law
Getting the Deal Through – Private M&A 2021: The Benelux chapters

Articles - Getting The Deal Through works with many of the best lawyers and law firms in the world to bring together a unique legal information resource, written by experts on each subject area, in every significant jurisdiction. This review is focused on global questions with local answers.

Read more

24.09.2020 BE law
Stibbe hosts a webinar on dawn raids organised by IBJ/IJE

Seminar - On 24 September 2020, several Stibbe lawyers ​​​​​explain the rights and obligations of companies when confronted with announced or unannounced raids. What do to when, for example, tax authorities, the competition authorities, police services or a bailiff are at your doorstep?

Read more