000			01936nab a2200217 c 4500
999			_c150525 _d150525
003			ES-MaIEF
005			20250328135802.0
007			ta
008			250328t2024 ne ||||| |||| 00| 0 spa d
040			_aES-MaIEF _bspa _cES-MaIEF
100			_972483 _aHrdlicka, Lukas
245	1	4	_aThe Pillar 2 Directive and the qualified domestic (minimum) top-up tax puzzle _helectrónico _c Lukas Hrdlicka
520			_aThe article argues for using a teleological interpretation of the Pillar 2 Directive to allow EU Member States to comply with Pillar 2’s soft law requirements for the qualified domestic minimum top-up tax (QDMTT) and its safe harbour (SH). This interpretation is necessary because the directive’s text is not aligned with certain requirements under Pillar 2 soft law since the directive was adopted before the Inclusive Framework issued any administrative guidance. Without the teleological interpretation, EU Member States cannot comply with the qualified domestic top-up tax (QDTT) requirements and, therefore, cannot attain its SH. This would decrease taxpayers’ legal certainty and undermine EU Member States’ fiscal interests. To pursue the argument, the article analyses Pillar 2’s soft law, i.e., the model rules, the commentary, and two sets of administrative guidance related to the QDMTT and its SH, and compares their provisions with the relevant provisions of the Pillar 2 Directive. Consequently, the study offers solutions to discrepancies between these two sets of rules and joins a broader discussion regarding the relationship between EU tax law and soft law.
650		4	_967772 _aSEGUNDO PILAR (OCDE)
650		4	_967681 _aTIPO MÍNIMO GLOBAL
650		4	_943600 _aEMPRESAS MULTINACIONALES
650		4	_948644 _aUNION EUROPEA
650		4	_942086 _aDERECHO FISCAL
773	0		_9173114 _oOP 2141/2024/10 _tIntertax _w(IEF)55619 _x 0165-2826 _g v.52, n.10, oct 2024, p.602 – 620
942			_cART