Spain: Spanish Supreme Court confirms that Brazilian ‘juros sobre o capital próprio’ can benefit from Spanish participation exemption regime

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Spain: Spanish Supreme Court confirms that Brazilian ‘juros sobre o capital próprio’ can benefit from Spanish participation exemption regime

calvo
San-Salvador

Rafael Calvo

Elisa San Salvador

On March 16 2016 the Supreme Court handed down a relevant judgement on the tax treatment for Spanish tax purposes of the 'juros sobre o capital próprio' (JSCP) distributed by Brazilian affiliates to their Spanish parent companies.

The judgment resolved the cassation appeal lodged by the Government Attorney against the judgment dated February 27 2014 handed down by the National Court which confirmed, for the first time, that JSCP could benefit from the Spanish participation exemption regime. The National Court reconfirmed its criterion in a decision dated July 9 2015. However, the criterion from the Spanish highest court was pending until the recent decision issued on March 16 2016 by the Supreme Court.

JSCP are profits distributed by Brazilian companies to their shareholders that allow for a tax deduction for Brazilian corporate income tax (CIT) purposes. JSCP were subject to 15% withholding tax under Brazilian domestic law in the years under review.

In turn, the Spanish tax authorities understood that JSCP could not benefit from the Spanish participation exemption regime since the presumed characterisation of JSCP as interest for Brazilian tax purposes determined its characterisation for Spanish tax purposes. Instead, a tax credit was granted at a 20% rate under the tax sparing clause contained for interest payments in the Brazil-Spain double tax convention (DTC).

The Spanish Supreme Court decision is brief and conclusive.

On the one hand, it makes clear that it is the characterisation of the income for legal purposes (and not for Brazilian tax purposes) what determines Spanish taxation. In this regard, JSCP are equivalent to a distribution of profits and not to interest income. Basically, the Supreme Court notes that JSCP derive from the existence of profits and that they are shareholders who are entitled to them. Additionally, JSCP neither remunerate nor are calculated in relation to outstanding debts. Therefore, JSCP qualify as "dividends or participation in profits" under the Spanish participation exemption regime.

On the other hand, the Supreme Court concludes that JSCP were effectively subject to tax in Brazil within the Brazilian entities when the profits distributed were obtained. Moreover, the irrefutable presumption contained in Spanish legislation whereby taxation would be considered to have taken place when the affiliate is resident in a country with which Spain has signed a DTC that contains an exchange-of-information clause would apply. Therefore, economic double taxation would indeed exist and so Spain should avoid it.

Please note that the Spanish Supreme Court judgment refers to the former revised Corporate Income Tax Law. However, from January 1 2015, new Corporate Income Tax Law 27/2014 sets forth that participation exemption will not apply to profits whose distribution generates a tax deductible expense for the affiliate. In any case, the Brazil-Spain DTC sets forth the exemption method – without any qualification as regards the deductibility of payments – to eliminate double taxation of dividends. Thus, the controversy may not have ended as regards to 2015 and following fiscal years.

Rafael Calvo (rafael.calvo@garrigues.com) and Elisa San Salvador (elisa.san.salvador@garrigues.com), Madrid

Garrigues

Tel: +34 915145200

Website: www.garrigues.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Brazil appears to be adopting protocols to align national taxation with international standards, but recent changes are not immune from criticism, experts tell ITR
The US president did not have the authority to impose the tariffs, a court ruled; in other news, Fried Frank and Crowe Ireland made key tax hires
Pillar two considerations have become a fact of life for taxpayers everywhere, not least in Switzerland, where companies nonetheless continue to be active with investment
The Dutch TP software company’s co-founder tells ITR about speeding up documentation processes, following in Steve Jobs’s footsteps, and what makes tax cool
The ruling underscores the need for companies to provide robust and defensible valuations of intangible assets, one partner tells ITR
Pillar two is certain to be a game-changer for tax advisers and their clients. Russell Gammon of Tax Systems outlines 10 reasons why
Despite a general decline in corporate tax rates around the world, jurisdictions are now more reliant on it than in 1990, a Tax Foundation economist found
Australian law firm Webb Henderson’s report said PwC had met 46 of 47 targets; in other news, the OECD has issued new transfer pricing country profiles
The arrival of a seven-strong team from Baker McKenzie will boost WTS Germany’s transfer pricing capabilities and help it become ‘a European champion’, the firm’s CEO said
Germany has forgotten to think about digital reporting requirements, a WTS partner claimed at ITR’s Indirect Tax Forum 2025
Gift this article