000 02784nab a2200229 c 4500
999 _c139948
_d139948
003 ES-MaIEF
005 20191126143719.0
007 ta
008 190219t2018 ne ||||| |||| 00| 0|eng d
040 _aES-MaIEF
_bspa
_cES-MaIEF
041 _aeng
100 1 _964670
_aParada, Leopoldo
245 0 _aHybrid entity mismatches and the international trend of matching tax outcomes
_ba critical approach
_c Leopoldo Parada
260 _c2018
500 _aResumen.
520 _aThe international tax debate as regards hybrid entities has certainly changed after the OECD BEPS Project. Since then, the trend has been focused exclusively on matching transactions involving hybrids and reverse hybrid entities and double non-taxation, however without questioning whether these two elements are necessarily interconnected or whether they should serve each other in the design of domestic anti-hybrid provisions. This is particularly evident as regards the notion of hybrid (entity) mismatch arrangements the design of which is based on the assumption that income should be taxed somewhere - no matter where - and as regards the complex set of domestic solutions proposed (linking rules) the true efficacy of which is nevertheless still unknown. In this vein, this article adopts a critical approach both as regards the diagnosis of the problems and as regards the solutions proposed. As to the diagnosis, the author argues that the artificial attempt to match transactions involving hybrid entities and double non-taxation not only disregards the fundamental issue as regards hybrid entity mismatches (i.e. the disparate tax characterization of the same entity by two different states), but also carries with it the risk of creating presumptions of abusive practices in all those cases in which a hybrid entity structure is simply not taxed at all. As to the remedies, the author argues against the complexity, excessive reliance on foreign laws and potential economic double taxation issues that the implementation of linking rules might cause from a tax policy perspective. From a practical perspective, the author questions the proper interaction between linking rules and other anti-base erosion provisions, such as interest limitations and CFC rules. This article ultimately concludes that a re-orientation in the international debate regarding hybrids and reverse hybrid entities is crucial in order to open the door for more fundamental - and perhaps also more coordinated - solutions.
650 4 _961626
_aINSTRUMENTOS HÍBRIDOS FINANCIEROS
650 4 _958702
_aSOCIEDADES EXTRANJERAS CONTROLADAS
650 4 _944303
_aFISCALIDAD INTERNACIONAL
773 0 _9158613
_oOP 2141/2018/12
_tIntertax
_w(IEF)55619
_x 0165-2826
_g v. 46, n. 12, December 2018, p. 971-993
942 _cART