Greece: New Greek Income Tax Code is supplemented by additional anti-avoidance rules

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: New Greek Income Tax Code is supplemented by additional anti-avoidance rules

stathis.jpg

Dionisios Stathis

On July 23 2013, a new Greek law (4172/2013) introduced a virtually new Greek Income Tax Code, which inevitably leads to significant changes in the former Greek Income Tax legislation (for both individuals and legal entities) as we knew it. It has not officially been confirmed yet if the provisions of the former Greek Income Tax Code (law 2238/1994) are automatically abolished after the introduction of said law, or if they continue to apply to the extent they do not run contrary to the new provisions. The new law aims at introducing simpler and more straightforward tax rules with a view to enhance clarity and predictability among taxpayers and effectively build trust and stability in the relationship between taxpayers and the tax authorities.

Interestingly enough, the new code is supplemented by a series of anti-avoidance provisions which were not present in the previous code. In particular, further to the transfer pricing, thin capitalisation and anti-tax haven provisions that already existed in the previous code, which are refined and/or amended to a certain extent in the new code, new controlled foreign companies (CFC) rules are introduced for the first time in Greek tax legislation.

Most importantly, the new code includes a more general anti-abuse rule which covers all kinds of transactions which are now embedded in the Greek Income Tax Code, such as mergers, divisions, contributions of assets, exchanges of shares and transfers of the registered seat of an SE (Societas Europaea – a European public limited liability company) or SCE (European Cooperative Society) to another EU member state.

Under this rule, all tax benefits enjoyed when performing such transactions may be lost if it is found that the principal objective or at least one of the principal objectives for effecting such transactions was merely tax avoidance and/or evasion and, thus, the corresponding transaction was not motivated by sound business reasons. Said rule effectively quotes the corresponding provision found in the Merger Directive (90/434/EEC), which was implemented into Greek law several years ago through a separate legal document (law 2578/1998).

Given the fact that the new law is still fairly recent, it is expected that additional guidance will be provided by the Greek Ministry of Finance in due course via relevant administrative circulars to shed additional light on any ambiguous points.

Dionisios Stathis (dionisios.stathis@gr.ey.com)

EY

Tel: +30 210 2886573

Website: www.ey.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Veteran Elizabeth Arrendale will lead the new advisory practice, which will support clients with M&A tax structuring, post-deal integration, and more
MAP cases keep increasing, and cases closed aren’t keeping pace with the number started, the OECD’s Sriram Govind also told an ITR summit
Nobody likes paperwork or paying money, but the assertion that legal accreditation doesn’t offer value to firms and clients alike is false
Ryan hopes the buyout will help it expand into Asia and the Middle East; in other news, three German finance ministers have called for a suspension of pillar two
SKAT, which was represented by Pinsent Masons, had accused Sanjay Shah and other defendants of fraudulent dividend tax refund claims
TP managers must be able to explain technical issues in simple terms, ITR’s European Transfer Pricing Forum heard
Prudential had challenged HMRC over VAT group relief; in other news, Donald Trump unveiled timber and wood tariffs, and the European Commission published a ViDA implementation strategy
Australia’s CbCR rules have ‘widespread support’ and do not put American companies at a competitive disadvantage, the FACT Coalition said
Baker McKenzie advised two of the member firms involved, while several advisers provided transaction counsel to US-based Grant Thornton Advisors
Foreign remittance requirements put additional administrative burden on Indian law firms and strain their relationship with foreign associate firms, according to practitioners
Gift this article