Luxembourg: Luxembourg adopts exit tax rules aligned with ATAD 1

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

Luxembourg: Luxembourg adopts exit tax rules aligned with ATAD 1

Sponsored by

Sponsored_Firms_deloitte.png
luxembourg.jpg

The Luxembourg Parliament transposed the EU Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive 1 (ATAD 1) into Luxembourg legislation on December 21 2018

The Luxembourg Parliament transposed the EU Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive 1 (ATAD 1) into Luxembourg legislation on December 21 2018. One of the measures of ATAD I is a requirement that EU member states adopt exit tax provisions that will apply (at the latest) from January 1 2020 (notably, exit taxation is not one of the recommendations under the OECD BEPS project but was initiated by the European Commission).

Exit tax is designed to prevent taxpayers from avoiding tax by transferring residence, activities or assets out of a country without the exit tax being imposed on deemed unrealised capital gains upon this transfer.

Prior to implementing the ATAD 1 measures, Luxembourg already had exit taxation rules, but those rules were revised to bring them in line with ATAD 1.

Transfers to Luxembourg

Articles 35 and 43 of the Income Tax Law (ITL), which already broadly addresses transfers to Luxembourg, will be amended to specifically cover a transfer of tax residence, the activities of a permanent establishment (PE) and assets from another country to Luxembourg.

With respect to such transfers, Luxembourg will use the value of the assets as determined by the departure state for tax purposes unless that value is not comparable to the fair market value as defined in the ITL. The acquisition date of the assets should correspond to the historical acquisition date, not the transfer date. This rule is designed to achieve the symmetry criterion introduced by ATAD 1, i.e. the same valuation of transferred assets between the country of origin and the country of destination.

Although the scope of the exit tax rules in ATAD 1 is limited to transfers between two EU member states, the modified Articles 35 and 43 of the ITL encompass transfers from any jurisdiction to Luxembourg.

Transfers out of Luxembourg

The scope of Article 38 of the ITL relating to transfers out of Luxembourg has been extended to ensure that, in specific cases, taxpayers in Luxembourg are subject to tax on the transfer of assets (either part of an enterprise, a PE or isolated assets as part of the net invested assets) from Luxembourg to any other jurisdiction in an amount equal to the fair market value of the transferred assets at the date of exit less their tax value.

Paragraph 127 of the General Tax Law details the mechanism for deferring the payment of exit tax covered by Article 38 of the ITL. The possibility for indefinite deferral of payment of the tax liability will be abolished on January 1 2020. Instead, the payment of Luxembourg tax arising on a transfer of assets/residence outside the country may be made in instalments over five years only in cases where the transfer is made to a country within the EU or the European Economic Area (in line with ATAD 1). However, where instalment payments are made, Luxembourg has opted not to impose interest on the deferred payments or to require a guarantee to benefit from the deferral.

Although some may argue that exit tax rules may be incompatible with the fundamental EU principle of freedom of establishment, harmonising rules at the level of each member state's domestic law should facilitate the overall tax harmonisation process at the EU level. However, it may be questionable whether allowing each member state to implement exit taxation using various options could impede that harmonisation goal.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

E-invoicing is currently characterised by dynamism, with fragmentation acting as a key catalyst for increasing interoperability, says Aida Cavalera of the International Observatory on eInvoicing
Pillar two and the US tax system ‘could work in harmony’, Scott Levine tells ITR in an exclusive interview to mark his arrival at Baker McKenzie
Peter White, who has a tax debt of A$2 million, has been banned for five years from seeking registration with Australia’s Tax Practitioners Board (TPB)
Wopke Hoekstra’s comments followed US measures aimed against ‘unfair foreign taxes’; in other news, Grant Thornton and Holland & Knight made key tax partner hires
An Administrative Review Tribunal ruling last month in Australia v Alcoa represents a 'concerning trend' for the tax authority, one expert tells ITR
A recent decision underlines that Indian courts are more willing to look beyond just legal compliance and examine whether foreign investment structures have real business substance
Following his Liberal Party’s election victory, one source expects Mark Carney to follow the international consensus on pillar two, as experts assess the new administration
A German economics professor was reportedly ‘irritated’ by how the Finnish ministry of finance used his data
Countries that care about the fair taxation of tech multinationals and equitable global distribution of wealth should back the UN’s tax framework, writes economist Abdelmalek Riad
The cuts disproportionately affected staff in certain positions, the report also found; in other news, MHA announced the €24m acquisition of Baker Tilly South East Europe
Gift this article