In the summer of 2016, in the European Union, the Council adopted Directive 2016/1164, also known as the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive. This directive aims at combating methods of tax evasion directly affecting the functioning of the internal market by setting minimum standards for all the member states tocomply with. Article 4 of the Directive contains a provision restricting companies access to interest expenses deduction based on their EBITDA, and it must be implemented by 1. January 2019 at the latest.Danish legislation already contains provisions restricting companies their access to interest expenses deduction, but different from the provisions of the directive the basis for the Danish rule is the companies’ EBIT.This thesis initially examines and analyzes the above-mentioned rules from both a legal and an economical perspective. Legally, the thesis seeks answers to whether the Danish legislation complies with the directives rule while the economical part of the thesis analyzes the effect of such rules for companies’ investments and capital structure. In addition, the economical part also seeks to determine how alternative tax regimes can pursue and contribute to the fulfillment of the objective following the directive.Observations made through the legal and economical sections, respectively, will be gathered in the integrated part of the thesis and discussed in order to make suggestions for further initiatives and legal policy considerations to Danish legislators. As the thesis approaches its end, the conclusion that Denmark needs to make some adjustments to the current legislation is made. It also concludes that limiting deduction for interest expenses directly affects companies’ capital structure and their investments.Alternative tax regimes can under certain conditions be compatible and in accordance with the purpose and minimum standards of Article 4 in the directive. Finally the thesis concludes, the primary legal policy consideration, that Denmark should implement the directive in its direct form so that the minimum requirements are met. This should be done in order to avoid imposing additional economic implications and burdening companies unnecessarily knowing that such burdens effects investments.
|Educations||MSc in Commercial Law, (Graduate Programme) Final Thesis|
|Number of pages||168|
|Supervisors||Bjarne Astrup Jensen|