Luxembourg: Luxembourg introduces CFC 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 2026

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

Luxembourg: Luxembourg introduces CFC rules

Sponsored by

Sponsored_Firms_deloitte.png
intl-updates-small.jpg

Luxembourg has introduced controlled foreign company (CFC) rules for the first time in national legislation as part of its transposition of the EU's Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD 1).

Luxembourg has introduced controlled foreign company (CFC) rules for the first time in national legislation as part of its transposition of the EU's Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD 1).

The rules are in effect for Luxembourg taxpayers from their financial years commencing on or after January 1 2019.

From the two options provided by ATAD 1, under which member states can choose to impose the CFC charge, Luxembourg has elected option B, which will allow it to tax a CFC's undistributed income which has arisen from non-genuine arrangements that are put in place, essentially for the purpose of obtaining a tax advantage.

This is to be interpreted as a situation where Luxembourg resident companies have or retain "significant people functions" in managing assets of a CFC.

The rules refer to transfer pricing (TP) concepts, including those developed under the BEPS Action Plan, demonstrating Luxembourg's full alignment with the OECD TP principles that already are reflected in its domestic legislation.

Under the CFC rules, a Luxembourg taxpayer is required (as a general rule) to include in its taxable basis the net income of a foreign collective undertaking, or a foreign permanent establishment (PE) that qualifies as a CFC for the purposes of the application of the CFC rules. A foreign collective undertaking or PE qualifies as a CFC if:

  • The Luxembourg taxpayer, alone or together with associated enterprises, directly or indirectly: (i) holds more than 50% of the voting rights, (ii) holds more than 50% of the capital, or (iii) is entitled to receive more than 50% of the profits of the foreign collective undertaking/PE;

  • The actual corporate income tax (CIT) paid by the foreign collective undertaking/PE on its income is lower than the difference between the CIT that would have been paid on the same profits in Luxembourg, and the actual CIT paid in the CFC country; and

  • The income of the foreign CFC is not taxable or is tax exempt in Luxembourg.

Municipal business tax is excluded from the scope of the application of the CFC rules, so it is disregarded for purposes of the "subject to tax" test performed to assess whether a foreign entity/PE qualifies as a CFC.

Similarly, a net CFC income inclusion at the level of a Luxembourg taxpayer is subject only to CIT, and not to the municipal business tax.

The net CFC income is to be included in the taxable basis of a Luxembourg taxpayer in the financial year during which the relevant financial year of the foreign CFC ends, proportionally to the ownership percentage (deemed to be) held by the Luxembourg taxpayer in the CFC.

The net income inclusion is also limited to the revenue generated by the assets and risks located in the CFC, but controlled by the significant people functions located at the Luxembourg taxpayer, and is determined based on the arm's-length principle.

A tax credit is provided for foreign tax paid by the CFC on the portion of the net CFC income included in the taxable basis of the Luxembourg taxpayer.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

A new focus on early intervention and increased AI use is transforming how tax authorities are approaching TP audits, though capacity-constrained jurisdictions risk falling behind
The French administration has used AI to detect undeclared swimming pools and verandas but always includes a human in the loop, the AI in Tax Forum heard
The UK tax authority’s deputy director of large business also reassured taxpayers that HMRC will not ‘nitpick’ returns
Sucafina’s tax chief was speaking at the ITR Pillar 2 Forum in London alongside experts from HMRC and other organisations
India’s Supreme Court rattled cross‑border structuring with its Tiger Global ruling. Subsequent rule changes narrowed the impact, but significant risks around GAAR, substance and treaty access persist
The UK-based big four spin-off firm has hired Marc Lien, who declared that most AI in professional services today is ‘cosmetic’
Projected revenue losses and exemption requests are harming the project’s capability and viability
HMRC secured lengthy prison sentences in a major payroll VAT fraud case, while law firms announced tax promotions and hires
Significant changes include an update to profit markers and an alteration to how an ‘inbound distributor’ is defined
ITR sat down for a pre-event interview with Tim Zech, WTS Germany, and Jeff Soar, WTS UK, keynote speaker at next week’s ITR AI in Tax Forum 2026 in London
Gift this article