Chapter 7 examined the concept of tax avoidance in the context of EU law. This chapter also examined various types of anti-abuse rules and their compatibility with EU law. An attempt was made to assess the Court’s judgments in the area of controlled foreign companies, thin capitalization and transfer pricing. The position following the introduction of the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive was also assessed, whenever relevant. It was shown that there is some tension between established case law and the provisions of the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive, most of which apply primarily in a mechanical way. What was also notable was the shift of emphasis from having the Court of Justice scrutinize national anti-abuse rules, to demanding from Member States to introduce de minimis anti-abuse rules based on this Directive. As regards transfer pricing rules, it was argued that the current judgments of the Court of Justice could give rise to variable interpretation of basic concepts of international tax law, due to the obscure relationship between the Court’s commercial justification test and the OECD’s arm’s length principle.

In Chapter 1, the inherent limitations in the powers of the EU institutions to enact legislation in the field of direct taxes were discussed. The lack of Union competence in this area and the sensitivity of Member States to any attempts for harmonisation were identified as the main reasons for the scarce legislation. Chapter 1 also considered the historical background to some of the legislative proposals for the removal of tax obstacles in the cross-border movement of companies.Proposals for harmonisation were followed by proposals for coordination and ad hoc targeted measures. These led to piecemeal legislative solutions and soft law. It was explained how with the advent of the BEPS project, the Commission produced various legislative proposals, most of which were very protective of Member State tax bases. The soft law initiatives also proved very important, as they laid the ground for the creation of a common external fiscal policy, even in the absence of a common internal fiscal policy. This has proven to be a springboard for further developments, as shown from recent developments and the Brexit discourse.

Chapter 9 is the final chapter which summarises some of the conclusions from each of the previous chapters. There is also a discussion as to the future of EU corporate tax law, in light of recent developments such as Brexit, the EU list of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions, covid-19 etc

Discusses the jurisdiction or right to tax international commercial transactions, including identification of relevant connecting factors, which may be based on the person deriving the income or activities producing the income. In the context of persons, the discussion considers the characterisation of persons under domestic law and its interaction with entity characterisation under tax treaties. It moves to consider residence as a connecting factor, both under domestic law and tax treaties and tax treaty tiebreakers applicable to dual residents. Residence is fundamental to the application of tax treaties. The discussion briefly considers the location of activities that found a jurisdiction to tax based on source of income. These matters are compared to the scope of the fundamental freedoms and relevant Directives under EU Law. The discussion then considers divided economic allegiance and particularly where source and residence are divided between countries. Various notions of neutrality and efficiency are discussed, as well as rules preventing cross-border restrictions, including nondiscrimination. Focus moves to the internation relationship including the OECD harmful tax competition project and BEPS project. These are compared with EU state aid rules and the EU code of conduct on harmful tax practices. Methods of allocating tax rights are discussed.