Should we cut "final" losses? Georg Kofler
By: Kofler, Georg
.
Material type: 







Item type | Current location | Home library | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Artículos | IEF | IEF | OP 2141-B/2022/3-1 (Browse shelf) | Available | OP 2141-B/2022/3-1 |
Browsing IEF Shelves Close shelf browser
No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | ||
OP 2141-B/2022/2-3 The costly stalemate of EU VAT harmonization | OP 2141-B/2022/2-4 The potential relevance of the CJEU case law on group taxation under the EU / UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement | OP 2141-B/2022/3 EC Tax Review | OP 2141-B/2022/3-1 Should we cut "final" losses? | OP 2141-B/2022/3-2 The shortcomings of the EU Public Country-by-Country Reporting Directive | OP 2141-B/2022/3-3 "VAT gap" estimation | OP 2141-B/2022/3-4 BEFIT and formulary apportionment |
Resumen.
This editorial considers the European Court of Justice's jurisprudence on cross-border loss relief. The author focuses on the question of comparability between cross-border and domestic situations and comments on the "final losses" doctrine. The following cases are discussed: Lidl Belgium (C-414/06), Timac Agro (C-388/14), W AG (C-538/20), Bevola (C-650/16).
There are no comments for this item.