Greece: Clarifications pending on the use of foreign terminal losses

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


Greece: Clarifications pending on the use of foreign terminal losses

intl-updates-small.jpg

The imposition of L 4446/2016 tried to clarify the provisions relating to the tax treatment of losses generated abroad, by amending Article 27 of the Greek Income Tax Code (L 4172/2013).

More specifically, Article 27 generally stated the inability to offset losses generated abroad with profits incurred in Greece, excluding such losses generated in an EU/EEA country with which Greece had either signed a double tax treaty (DTA), based on which profits from a business activity abroad are not exempt, or with which Greece had not signed a DTA (in accordance with circular POL 1088/2016).

With the new provisions of Article 124 of L 4446/2016, it is now explicitly clarified that from January 1 2014 onwards, losses generated abroad from a permanent establishment cannot be used to offset existing or future profits in Greece, while the above exception still remains.

Following the renowned European Court of Justice judgment for the Marks & Spencer case (C446/03), circular POL 1200/2016 provided further clarifications on the implementation of the new provisions, setting the condition that only terminal losses deriving from the liquidation of the permanent establishment could be used to offset profits in Greece. In other words, the permanent establishment should have exhausted the possibilities of using these losses in the country where it was established before their use could be considered in Greece.

For the feasible use of losses resulting from a permanent establishment in an EU/EEA country, these should be monitored on a country-by-country basis and in a way that is easy to ascertain their origin each time. Failure of the taxpayer to easily prove the origin of the losses intended to be used in Greece will render the provisions inapplicable and any such losses taken into account for the determination of the tax result in Greece will be disregarded.

For the correct implementation of the above, the taxpayer must be able to prove by any appropriate means that the losses have become terminal, the amount thereof, the year in which they became terminal, and that all possibilities of using these losses in the country of establishment have been exhausted.

Moreover, the relevant provisions give certain examples of what 'appropriate means' may refer to in order for the taxpayer to establish the above, such as by providing to the Greek tax authorities a relevant certificate from the foreign tax authority or alternatively, a relevant report by a statutory auditor in the country of establishment.

However, a controversy ensued as regards the aforementioned examples focusing on the type of losses that could be used in Greece, i.e. whether they are accounting or tax losses. In other words, a certificate from the foreign tax authority leads us to believe that the new provisions refer to tax losses, while on the contrary a report by a statutory auditor can only mean accounting losses.

So, despite the fact that these new regulations provide much-anticipated clarifications on the overseas-generated loss treatment, at the same time they still lead to skeptical conclusions on the type of said losses. This is a situation pending resolution as of today, given that no further guidance has been provided by the Independent Authority for Public Revenues.

papourdanou.jpg

Eva Papourdanou

Eva Papourdanou (eva.papourdanou@gr.ey.com), Maroussi

EY

Tel: +30 210 2886 000

Website: www.ey.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

It was also a memorable night for Galicia, KPMG, Skadden and Pinheiro Neto, all of which scooped major awards at a gala ceremony in New York
The former Deloitte UK CEO earned a 45% raise in a year when 1,000 staff reportedly lost their jobs – and the pay gap is only getting bigger
In a seminal development for big law, the 95-year-old firm is set to cease operations after a series of high-profile partner departures
UK Chancellor John Healey extended a VAT cut, suspended tariffs, increased a bank surcharge and vowed to increase funding for HMRC
Kristine Riisberg warned that TP decisions can determine top-up tax exposure under pillar two, while global consensus over the rules remains unsettled
Both Germany’s NIS2 and the EU AI Act now determine whether a tax function can meet its obligations – and both can make management personally accountable
Originators, loan purchasers and securitisation vehicles may need to revisit servicing agreements and pricing after a key judgment narrowed the VAT credit management exemption
Opening doors for existing talent within Baker McKenzie and a desire for enhanced legal capabilities informed Ricardo Perera’s switch from KPMG
Boaz Goren’s move to the upstart PE-backed firm takes the number of senior UK tax professionals who have left EY this year to 13
The allegations against Deloitte Cyprus raise uncomfortable questions about how far the big four can distance themselves from misconduct at member firms
Gift this article