Greece rules that the special solidarity tax falls within the scope of double tax conventions

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Greece rules that the special solidarity tax falls within the scope of double tax conventions

Sponsored by

eygreece.png
National governments continue to respond to COVID-19's challenges

The case at hand concerned an appeal of an individual, who is a tax resident of the UK, who requested annulment of the special solidarity tax assessment imposed by the Greek tax authorities on income realised in the 2015 tax year

By means of a pilot trial, Greece's Supreme Administrative Court (SAC) has ruled (No. 2465/2018) on the nature of the special solidarity tax and whether it falls within the scope of the double tax agreements (DTAs) signed by Greece.

The case at hand concerned an appeal of an individual, who is a tax resident of the UK, who requested annulment of the special solidarity tax assessment imposed by the Greek tax authorities on income realised in the 2015 tax year. The applicant alleged that since their income was exempt from Greek income tax (pursuant to the provisions of the Greece-UK DTA), imposition of the special solidarity tax was unlawful.

In contrast, the tax authorities, who were operating on the basis of Opinions No. 130/2017 and 13/2018 (issued by the Legal Council of State, which had been accepted by the Greek tax authorities though Circulars POL 1100/2018 and 1099/2018, respectively), were of the opinion that the special solidarity tax is not regulated by DTAs.

The court rejected the tax administration's position, accepted the appeal, and held that the special solidarity tax falls within the scope of Article 1 of the DTA, as a tax imposed on income or, at least, a tax of a "substantially similar character" to an income tax.

Furthermore, the aforementioned ruling applies irrespective of whether the above financial burden is of an "extraordinary" nature (the DTA does not differentiate between ordinary and extraordinary taxes). It also does not include a conceptual definition for their distinction based on objective and predictable criteria, thus creating vagueness, which is not in compliance with the principle of legal certainty.

Consequently, an interpretation that excludes extraordinary taxes from the scope of the DTA would in general provide the contracting countries with the ability to circumvent its provisions, and not preserve their effectiveness.

Moreover, the provisions of the DTA also cover a tax burden. While this is initially provided as extraordinary or temporary, it becomes ordinary. During the disputed tax year (2015), the tax in question had already been imposed for six consecutive tax years, and consequently could not be classified as "extraordinary" or temporary. Besides, the nature of such tax as "ordinary" or regular is confirmed by its later integration in the Greek Code of Income Tax and its imposition for the following tax years, without a time limit.

The recent decision of the SAC is of great importance as it establishes a correct interpretation of the scope of Article 1 of the DTA, and protects the legal supremacy of the DTAs by denying to Greece the possibility of circumventing the DTA and altering taxing rights, as these have been agreed and allocated through the agreed DTA between the two states.

Greek tax authorities have already recalled their previous administrative guidance and have complied with the said decision by issuing Circular E.2009/2019, confirming that the special solidarity tax falls within the scope of all 56 DTAs that Greece has signed.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

ITR’s data has highlighted the US firm’s ambition to become America’s ‘premier’ tax player via a concerted partner recruitment strategy
Jaap Zwaan’s arrival continues a recent streak of A&M Tax investing in the region; in other news, the US and Japan struck a deal that significantly lowered tariff rates
In a world where international tax concepts rely on human activity, Leonard Wagenaar poses existential questions about the future of such ideas when AI is ever-present
France v Axa provides a practical illustration of how the burden of proof is applied in TP matters under French law, ITR also heard
In an exclusive interview with ITR, Ian Gary calls for a central public CbCR database and bemoans the US’s lack of involvement in international tax transparency
Reckitt Benckiser is to divest its Essential Home business, which includes more than 70 brands, to private equity firm Advent International
In the first of a new series of weekly opinion pieces, ITR Editor Tom Baker reflects on the OECD’s attempts to sanitise the US’s brazen pillar two negotiations
The threat of 50% tariffs on Brazilian goods coincides with new Brazilian legal powers to adopt retaliatory economic measures, local experts tell ITR
The country’s chancellor appears to have backtracked from previous pillar two scepticism; in other news, Donald Trump threatened Russia with 100% tariffs
In its latest G20 update, the OECD also revealed tense discussions with the US where the ‘significant threat’ of Section 899 was highlighted
Gift this article