International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

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 & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The German government unveils plans to implement pillar two, while EY is reportedly still divided over ‘Project Everest’.
With the M&A market booming, ITR has partnered with correspondents from firms around the globe to provide a guide to the deal structures being employed and tax authorities' responses.
Xing Hu, partner at Hui Ye Law Firm in Shanghai, looks at the implications of the US Uyghur Forced Labor Protection Act for TP comparability analysis of China.
Karl Berlin talks to Josh White about meeting the Fair Tax standard, the changing burden of country-by-country reporting, and how windfall taxes may hit renewable energy.
Sandy Markwick, head of the Tax Director Network (TDN) at Winmark, looks at the challenges of global mobility for tax management.
Taxpayers should look beyond the headline criteria of the simplification regime to ensure that their arrangements meet the arm’s-length standard, say Alejandro Ces and Mark Seddon of the EY New Zealand transfer pricing team.
In a recent webinar hosted by law firms Greenberg Traurig and Clayton Utz, officials at the IRS and ATO outlined their visions for 2023.
The Asia-Pacific awards research cycle has now begun – don’t miss on this opportunity be recognised in 2023
An intense period of lobbying and persuasion is under way as the UN secretary-general’s report on the future of international tax cooperation begins to take shape. Ralph Cunningham reports.
Fresh details of the European Commission’s state aid case against Amazon emerge, while a pension fund is suing Amgen over its tax dispute with the Internal Revenue Service.