000			02039nab a2200277 c 4500
999			_c150386 _d150386
003			ES-MaIEF
005			20250303182142.0
007			ta
008			240628t2023 ne |||||o|||| 00| 0|eng d
040			_aES-MaIEF _bspa _cES-MaIEF
100			_aHannu Itäla _972384
245	1	0	_aCritical review of the atad implementation _helectrónico _bthe implementation of the ATAD in Finland _c Hannu Itälä, Reijo Knuutinen
520			_aIn this article, the authors provide an assessment of the Finnish implementation of the European Union (EU) Anti–Tax Avoidance Directives (ATAD I and II) in consideration of the EU primary law and secondary law requirements. It is focused on examining the conformity between the Finnish implementation rules and the fundamental freedoms arising out of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Although Finland already had an extensive anti-avoidance framework in place before implementing the ATAD I and ATAD II, Finland had to make some adjustments in almost all areas covered by the Directives. What is perhaps most interesting is that the Finnish general anti-abuse rule (GAAR) in section 28 of the Act on Assessment Procedure has retained the exact same textual form that it had decades previously. The essential question is as follows: Has the actual content of the general clause changed based on ATAD Article 6 and, if affirmative, in what way?
650		4	_943410 _aELUSION FISCAL
650		4	_941975 _aDERECHO COMUNITARIO EUROPEO
650		4	_967421 _aATAD
650		4	_963148 _aEROSIÓN DE LA BASE IMPONIBLE Y TRASLADO DE BENEFICIOS
650		4	_963564 _aABUSO DE TRATADOS
650		4	_963565 _aLIMITACIÓN DE BENEFICIOS
650		4	_968772 _aASIMETRÍAS HÍBRIDAS
650		4	_944296 _aFINLANDIA
700			_aReijo Knuutinen _972385
773	0		_9171822 _oOP 2141/2023/12 _tIntertax _w(IEF)55619 _x 0165-2826 _g v. 51, Issue 12, December 2023, p. 851-869
856			_uhttps://kluwerlawonline.com/api/Product/CitationPDFURL?file=Journals\TAXI\TAXI2023081.pdf
942			_cRE