Germany: Heat turned up on intra-group financing

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

Germany: Heat turned up on intra-group financing

tao.jpg
wilmanns.jpg

Yu Tao

Jobst Wilmanns

Captive financing entities and other vehicles for centralising a group's funding arrangements have long been objects of suspicion for the tax auditors. However the scope for negative findings is being progressively curtailed. The 2008 Annual Tax Act effectively disallowed loan losses on intra-group finance and the interest limitation (basically to 30% of EBITDA) of 2009 significantly reduced the scope for withdrawing profits through financing charges. On the other hand, Cadbury Schweppes (ECJ case C-196/04 of September 12, 2006) now prevents a tax auditor from declaring an EU group financing centre abusive, merely because it enjoys a favourable tax regime. The tax authority's attention is now increasingly directed at the interest rate, an area unbounded by hard and fast rules. The interest rate must be at arm's length. Arm's length is undefined, but should lie somewhere between the borrowing and lending rate typically on offer from banks. Third-party comparisons often assume there to be little or no loan risk, not least in reflection of the free-of-charge "group backing" featuring in the transfer pricing rules. This, though, has prompted an intention of changing towards rating a borrower within a group at the group rating rather than on its own financial standing. Unfortunately, attempts to reach a consensus on a rating formula have all foundered on the unanswered question of a parent's ability to strip a subsidiary of assets, and thus to shift the credit risk, at will. The same problem is also felt by members of international cash pools. Frequently, many still take a broad approach of basing the pool interest rates on EONIA or EURIBOR with a discount or premium of, say 20 or 30 basis points to cover the cost of running the pool. However, tax auditors are ever more searching in their demand to know which entity takes the risk and to impute income or disallow expense accordingly.

Yu Tao (yu.tao@de.pwc.com)

Tel: +49 69 9585 6408
Jobst Wilmanns (jobst.wilmanns@de.pwc.com)

Tel: +49 69 9585 5835

PwC

Website: www.pwc.de

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

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
The tax agency has increased compliance yield from wealthy individuals but cannot identify how much tax is paid by UK billionaires, the committee also claimed
Saffery cautioned that documentation requirements in new government proposals must be limited if medium-sized companies are not exempted from TP
The global minimum tax deal is not viable without US participation, Friedrich Merz has argued
Section 899 of the ‘one big beautiful’ bill would have spelled disaster for many international investors into the US, but following its shelving, attention turns to the fate of the OECD’s pillars
DLA Piper’s co-head of tax for the US and Latin America tells ITR about her fervent belief in equal access to the law, loving yoga, and paternal inspirations
Tax expert Craig Hillier agrees with the comparison of pillar two to using a sledgehammer to crack a nut
The amount is reported to be up 57% from the £5.6bn that the UK tax agency believes was underpaid in the previous year
Gift this article