In a request for a preliminary ruling from Sweden regarding the refund of withholding tax, the ECJ is asked whether a recalculation of the loss in accordance with the rules of the source State is required for a loss-making non-resident company receiving dividends to benefit from the same treatment as a loss-making resident company. In his Opinion, the Advocate General considers such requirements to be an unjustified and disproportionate burden on foreign corporate entities and a violation of Article 63 TFEU.
Shareholders of a U.S.-based S corporation are eligible for a full refund of the withholding tax on dividends paid by a German-based subsidiary. This was decided by the Supreme Tax Court in a recently published judgment.
Foreign companies as shareholders that are eligible for a refund of withholding tax in accordance with Art. 5 of the Parent-Subsidiary Directive are entitled to interest under EU law if the refund of the tax amounts is withheld from them in violation of EU law or if - for the same reason - tax is withheld from the outset. This was decided by the Supreme Tax Court in a recent judgment.
The Italian Supreme Court issued seven important judgments in which it ruled that Italian withholding taxes levied on dividends distributed to a German investment fund and six US investment funds are in violation of the EU principles on the free movement of capital (Article 63 (TFEU).
In a most recent decision, the Regional Tax Court of Düsseldorf dismissed the claim of a Japanese corporation for a refund of withholding tax on the grounds that the case was within the scope of the EU principles for freedom of establishment which the plaintiff, being a resident of a third country, could not invoke.
The Regional Tax Court of Munich rendered its final decision in the case of the College Pension Plan of British Columbia which is a pension fund in the legal form of a trust under Canadian law. The court held that the pension fund is not entitled to relief from withholding tax on dividends from domestic portfolio holdings. The court saw no violation of the free movement of capital. This judgment was preceded by a decision of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) as a result of a preliminary request submitted by the Munich tax court.
In his Opinion of 20 January 2022, the Advocate General (AG) suggests to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) that Germany’s requirements for withholding tax claims filed by non-resident corporate taxpayers with seat or place of management in the EU or EEA are too strict in two respects and thus in violation of Article 63 TFEU on the free movement of capital.
