English Summary 10-11/2021
Tax News 10-11/2021
Tax News 10-11/2021
Draft bill for Austrian ecological tax reform 2022
Pursuant to the government’s announcement on the Austrian Tax Reform 2022 (see here), the Austrian Ministry of Finance recently published the draft bill which is in principle in line with the previous announcements. However, as from March 1, 2022 also crypto currencies are qualified as taxable investments.
C. Plott / M. Vaishor
Austrian Tax Reform
Draft legislation: National Emissions Trading System and Climate Bonus
Starting from 1st July 2022, Austria shall implement a National Emissions Trading System targeted at implementing Carbon-Pricing. Emissions relating to the utilization of coal, natural gas or petroleum products shall be subject to the submission of Emissions Certificates. As those products are subject to Energy Taxes, Certificates shall be submitted whenever Energy Tax is triggered. The new legislation shall cover sectors not yet covered by the EU Emissions Trading System (traffic, industry, real estate, etc). To make up for the additional financial burden, private individuals shall receive annual payments in the form of a “climate bonus”.
C. Plott / B. Matzka
Austrian Federal Finance Court: Are dividends reserved for the seller of shares dividend income or part of the purchase price?
The Austrian Federal Finance Court decided whether a dividend reserved for the seller of shares of a national entity can be qualified as CIT exempt dividend income or as a part of the purchase price. Due to the special provisions of the contract the resolution of the distribution was made prior to the transfer of the shares. Thus, the reserved dividend could be qualified as CIT exempt dividend income. If the economic ownership is transferred prior to the resolution of the distribution, the dividend is qualified as a part of the purchase price and is therefore not covered by the CIT exemption of Art 10 of the Austrian CIT Act.
M. Vaishor / S. Stadik
Austrian Administrative Supreme Court on unilateral relief according to Art 48 sec of the Austrian General Federal Fiscal Code: criteria for discretion and juridical double taxation as condition for application of unilateral relief
The Austrian Administrative Supreme Court confirmed his view that Art 48 sec of the Austrian General Federal Fiscal Code is only applicable in case of a juridical double taxation. In case of a self-inflicted double taxation the taxpayer cannot rely on such relief.
S. Papst / S. Stadik
Austrian Federal Finance Court on rejection of judge because of prejudice
Based on Art 268 sec 1 Austrian General Federal Fiscal Code a taxpayer may reject a judge at the Austrian Federal Finance Court in case of prejudice. However, the reasons for rejection need to be substantiated. Recently, the Austrian Federal Finance Court ruled that it is not a justified reason for rejection if the tax payer expects the judge to deny the appeal.
Austrian Administrative Supreme Court on multiple extensions of time limit for appeal
The time limit for appeal/request for appeal is one month and can be extended by application. By filing an application for extension, the running time limit is stopped. After delivery of the (rejecting) decision the remaining time limit is continued. In a recent judgment the Austrian Administrative Supreme Court clarified the question of how the remaining time limit is to be calculated in case of repeated extensions of the time limit: The assessment of the remaining time limit has to be made for each application for extension separately. Time limits from past applications cannot be “carried forward” to later applications. They do not enlarge the remaining time limit of the last rejected application.
S. Papst / W. Gurtner / S. Rettenbacher
Austrian Administrative Supreme Court on liability of representatives for taxes: tax office must consider the passing of a long period since the tax liability arose
The Austrian Administrative Supreme Court decided that the tax authorities have to consider, if a long period has passed since the tax liability arose, if they hold representatives liable for tax liabilities of the represented taxable person. It is not correct to consider the date when the assessment of the primary debtor becomes legally effective.
S. Papst / S. Stadik