000			01636nab a2200253 c 4500
999			_c147903 _d147903
003			ES-MaIEF
005			20230719133054.0
007			ta
008			230719t2023 ne ||||| |||| 00| 0|eng d
040			_aES-MaIEF _bspa _cES-MaIEF
100			_970833 _aSzudoczky, Rita
245		0	_aForeign permanent establishment losses under the fundamental freedoms _bdoes W AG bring an end to a rollercoaster ride? _c Rita Szudoczky
500			_aResumen.
520			_aThe article discusses the W AG case (C-538/20) and the previous ECJ cases on the cross-border deduction of foreign permanent establishment (PE) losses. The inconsistency of the case law is highlighted by demonstrating first the conflicts that remain in the case law regarding the status of final PE losses in the enterprise’s residence state, second, by the arbitrary use of comparability criteria by the Court when comparing the situation of domestic and foreign PEs. The article examines the consequences of the W AG decision with regard to the remaining questions on foreign PE losses, the potential impact on foreign subsidiary losses, and the damaging effect of the inconsistency of the Court’s methodology on the quality of its case law.
650		4	_aLIBERTADES FUNDAMENTALES _968997
650		4	_aESTABLECIMIENTO PERMANENTE _942622
650		4	_aPERDIDAS _947978
650		4	_aIMPUESTOS _947460
650		4	_aTRIBUNAL DE JUSTICIA DE LAS COMUNIDADES EUROPEAS _948611
650		4	_aUNION EUROPEA _948644
650		4	_aJURISPRUDENCIA _947570
773	0		_9169602 _oOP 2141/2023/5 _tIntertax _w(IEF)55619 _x 0165-2826 _g v. 51, n. 5, May 2023, p. 432-443
942			_cART