Partitioning doctrine inapplicable in case of law change, Dutch Supreme Court rules
The Netherlands Supreme Court held on 14 June (Case 11/04538) that the partitioning doctrine for splitting benefits under the participation exemption into taxable and non-taxable periods doesn’t apply if the conditions for the participation exemption weren’t met because of a change in law.
Under the Dutch participation exemption, corporate taxpayers are exempted from Dutch corporate income tax on benefits (such as dividends, capital gains and liquidation profits) derived from qualifying shareholdings. Capital losses are non-deductible unless they result from a subsidiary’s liquidation, and even then, strict conditions must be met.
Several conditions must also be met for shares to fall within the scope of the participation exemption. That raises the question of how benefits are to be taxed if they can be allocated to periods during which the conditions were met as well as periods during which the conditions weren’t met…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Hogan Lovells briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
News from Hogan Lovells
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Hogan Lovells
The UK government supports the European Commission’s decision not to impose mandatory quotas; it favours a self-regulatory national level approach.
Equality between men and women was firmly addressed in Spain by a 2007 act on the effective equality between men and women.
Analysis from The Lawyer
When a firm shouts loudly about a landmark merger, as SJ Berwin did when it joined forces with King & Wood Mallesons, departures are always likely to come under the spotlight.
The Lawyer’s latest Top 50 litigation firms list shows that business for dispute specialists is roaring along while new in-depth detail reveals the winning strategies