natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In respect of this category of hybrid mismatches, however, a mismatch outcome would only arise to the extent that the payer jurisdiction allows the deduction in respect of the payment or deemed payment to be set off against an amount that is not dual-inclusion income.
Tako kot pri domnevnih plačilih in plačilih, ki jih izvede hibridni subjekt in jih prejemnik plačila ne upošteva, bi se hibridno neskladje pojavilo le, če je v skladu z jurisdikcijo plačnika odbitek mogoče pobotati z zneskom, ki ni dvojna vključitev dohodka.
If the payer jurisdiction allows the deduction to be carried forward to a subsequent tax period, then the requirement to make any adjustment under this Directive could be deferred until such time as the deduction is actually set off against non-dual-inclusion income in the payer jurisdiction.
To pomeni, da če je v skladu z jurisdikcijo plačnika odbitek mogoče prenesti v naslednje davčno obdobje, potem se lahko zahteva za prilagoditev v skladu s to direktivo odloži, dokler se odbitek dejansko ne pobota z zneskom, ki ni dvojna vključitev dohodka, v jurisdikciji plačnika.
The hybrid mismatch definition should also capture double deduction outcomes regardless of whether they arise as a result of payments, expenses that are not treated as payments under domestic law or as a result of amortisation or depreciation losses.
Različni davčni izidi, ki se lahko pripišejo samo različnemu vrednotenju plačila, vključno z določitvijo transfernih cen, ne bi smeli spadati v področje uporabe hibridnega neskladja.
As with deemed payments and payments made by a hybrid entity that are disregarded by the payee, a hybrid mismatch should only arise, however, to the extent that the payer jurisdiction allows the deduction to be set off against an amount that is not dual-inclusion income.
Poleg tega jurisdikcije uporabljajo različna davčna obdobja in imajo različna pravila za priznavanje, kdaj so bile postavke dohodka ali odhodka dosežene ali kdaj so nastale; te časovne razlike se načeloma ne bi smele obravnavati kot vzrok za neskladja pri davčnih izidih.
This means that if the payer jurisdiction allows the deduction to be carried forward to a subsequent tax period, the requirement to make an adjustment under this Directive could be deferred until such time as the deduction is actually set off against non-dual-inclusion income in the payer jurisdiction.
Odbitno plačilo na podlagi finančnega instrumenta, za katerega ni razumno pričakovati, da bo v razumnem času vključeno v dohodek, pa bi bilo treba obravnavati kot vzrok za hibridno neskladje, če je ta odbitek brez vključitve mogoče pripisati različnim opredelitvam finančnega instrumenta ali plačil, izvedenih na podlagi finančnega instrumenta.
Differences in tax outcomes that are solely attributable to differences in the value ascribed to a payment, including through the application of transfer pricing, should not fall within the scope of a hybrid mismatch.
Razumeti je treba, da bi do neskladja lahko prišlo, če plačilo, izvedeno na podlagi finančnega instrumenta, ni vključeno v dohodek v razumnem času.
Furthermore, as jurisdictions use different tax periods and have different rules for recognising when items of income or expenditure have been derived or incurred, those timing differences should not generally be treated as giving rise to mismatches in tax outcomes.
Tako plačilo bi bilo treba obravnavati kot plačilo, vključeno v dohodke v razumnem roku, če jih prejemnik plačila vključi v 12 mesecih po koncu davčnega obdobja plačnika, ali kot je določeno v skladu z načelom običajnih tržnih pogojev.
However, a deductible payment under a financial instrument that cannot reasonably be expected to be included in income within a reasonable period of time should be treated as giving rise to a hybrid mismatch if that deduction without inclusion outcome is attributable to differences in the characterisation of the financial instrument or payments made under it.
Države članice bi lahko zahtevale, da se plačilo vključi v določenem roku, da bi zagotovili, da ne pride do neskladja in zagotovili davčni nadzor.
It should be understood that a mismatch outcome could arise if a payment made under a financial instrument is not included in income within a reasonable period of time.
Zaradi hibridnih prenosov bi lahko prišlo do razlik v davčni obravnavi, če se zaradi ureditve za prenos finančnega instrumenta osnovni donos tega instrumenta obravnava, kot da ga prejme več kot ena stran, vključena v ureditev.
Such a payment should be treated as included in income within a reasonable period of time, if included by the payee within 12 months of the end of the payer's tax period or as determined under the arm's length principle.
V teh primerih lahko plačilo pri hibridnem prenosu privede do odbitka za plačnika, pri čemer ga prejemnik plačila obravnava kot donos pri osnovnem instrumentu.
Member States could require that a payment be included within a fixed period of time in order to avoid giving rise to a mismatch outcome and secure tax control.
Ta razlika v davčni obravnavi bi lahko privedla do odbitka brez vključitve ali do presežka davčne olajšave za davek, odtegnjen pri viru pri osnovnem instrumentu.
Hybrid transfers could give rise to a difference in tax treatment if, as a result of an arrangement to transfer a financial instrument, the underlying return on that instrument was treated as derived by more than one of the parties to the arrangement.
Takšna neskladja bi bilo zato treba odpraviti.
In those cases, the payment under the hybrid transfer could give rise to a deduction for the payer while being treated as a return on the underlying instrument by the payee.
V primeru odbitka brez vključitve bi morala veljati ista pravila kot pri nevtraliziranju neskladij za plačila v okviru hibridnega finančnega instrumenta.
This difference in tax treatment could lead to a deduction without inclusion outcome or to the generation of a surplus tax credit for the tax withheld at source on the underlying instrument.
V primeru hibridnih prenosov, ki so strukturirani tako, da ustvarjajo presežek davčnih dobropisov, bi morala zadevna država članica plačniku preprečiti uporabo presežka olajšave za pridobitev davčne ugodnosti, vključno z uporabo splošnega pravila o preprečevanju zlorab, v skladu s členom 6 Direktive (EU) 2016/1164.
Such mismatches should therefore be eliminated.
Treba je določiti pravilo, ki bi državam članicam omogočilo odpravljanje neskladnosti pri prenosu in izvajanju te direktive, ki vodijo do hibridnega neskladja kljub dejstvu, da države članice delujejo v skladu s to direktivo.
In the case of a deduction without inclusion, the same rules should apply as for neutralising mismatches from payments under a hybrid financial instrument.
Če pride to takšnega položaja in se primarno pravilo iz te direktive ne uporablja, bi bilo treba uporabiti sekundarno pravilo.
In the case of hybrid transfers that have been structured to produce surplus tax credits, the Member State concerned should prevent the payer from using the surplus credit to obtain a tax advantage including through the application of a general anti-abuse rule consistent with Article 6 of Directive (EU) 2016/1164.
Vendar se primarna in sekundarna pravila lahko uporabljajo samo pri hibridnih neskladjih, kot so opredeljena v tej direktivi, ne bi pa smela vplivati na splošne značilnosti davčnega sistema države članice.
It is necessary to provide for a rule that allows Member States to tackle discrepancies in the transposition and implementation of this Directive resulting in a hybrid mismatch despite the fact that Member States act in compliance with this Directive.
Uvožena neskladja preusmerjajo učinek hibridnega neskladja med stranmi v tretjih državah v jurisdikcijo države članice z uporabo nehibridnega instrumenta, s čimer spodkopavajo učinkovitost pravil, ki nevtralizirajo hibridna neskladja.
Where such a situation arises and the primary rule provided for in this Directive does not apply, a secondary rule should apply.
Odbitno plačilo v državi članici se lahko uporabi za financiranje odhodkov, ki vključuje hibridno neskladje.
Nevertheless, the application of both the primary and secondary rules only apply to hybrid mismatches as defined by this Directive and should not affect the general features of the tax system of a Member State.
Da bi preprečili takšna uvožena neskladja, je treba vključiti pravila, ki prepovedujejo odbitek plačila, če se ustrezni dohodek iz tega plačila neposredno ali posredno pobota z odbitkom, ki izhaja iz hibridnega neskladja, ki vodi do dvojnega odbitka ali odbitka brez vključitve med tretjimi državami.
Imported mismatches shift the effect of a hybrid mismatch between parties in third countries into the jurisdiction of a Member State through the use of a non-hybrid instrument thereby undermining the effectiveness of the rules that neutralise hybrid mismatches.
Neskladje pri družbah, ki so dvojni rezidenti, bi lahko vodilo do dvojnega odbitka, če se plačilo, ki ga izvede davčni zavezanec, ki je dvojni rezident, odbije v skladu z zakonodajo obeh jurisdikcij, v katerih je davčni zavezanec rezident.
A deductible payment in a Member State can be used to fund expenditure involving a hybrid mismatch.
Ker bi lahko neskladja pri družbah, ki so dvojni rezidenti, privedla do dvojnega odbitka, bi morala spadati v področje uporabe te direktive.
To counter such imported mismatches, it is necessary to include rules that disallow the deduction of a payment if the corresponding income from that payment is set off, directly or indirectly, against a deduction that arises under a hybrid mismatch giving rise to a double deduction or a deduction without inclusion between third countries.
Država članica bi morala zavrniti dvojni odbitek za družbe, ki so dvojni rezidenti, če se to plačilo pobota z zneskom, ki se ne obravnava kot dohodek v skladu z zakonodajo druge jurisdikcije.
A dual resident mismatch could lead to a double deduction if a payment made by a dual resident taxpayer is deducted under the laws of both jurisdictions where the taxpayer is resident.
Cilj te direktive je izboljšati odpornost celotnega notranjega trga na hibridna neskladja.
As dual resident mismatches could give rise to double deduction outcomes, they should fall within the scope of this Directive.
Tega ni mogoče zadovoljivo doseči s posamičnim delovanjem držav članic, saj so nacionalni sistemi davka od dohodkov pravnih oseb različni in bi s samostojnimi ukrepi držav članic le ohranjali obstoječo razdrobljenost notranjega trga na področju neposredne obdavčitve.
A Member State should deny the duplicate deduction arising in respect of a dual resident company to the extent that this payment is set off against an amount that is not treated as income under the laws of the other jurisdiction.
Tak pristop bi še naprej omogočal neučinkovitost in izkrivljanje pri vzajemnem delovanju različnih nacionalnih ukrepov.
The objective of this Directive is to improve the resilience of the internal market as a whole against hybrid mismatches.
Posledica bi bila pomanjkanje usklajenosti.
This cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting individually, given that national corporate tax systems are disparate and that independent action by Member States would only replicate the existing fragmentation of the internal market in direct taxation.
Zaradi čezmejne narave hibridnih neskladij in potrebe po sprejetju učinkovitih rešitev za celotni notranji trg je ta cilj zato lažje doseči na ravni Unije.
It would thus allow inefficiencies and distortions to persist in the interaction of distinct national measures.
Unija bi lahko zato sprejela ukrepe v skladu z načelom subsidiarnosti iz člena 5 Pogodbe o Evropski uniji.
This would result in a lack of coordination.
V skladu z načelom sorazmernosti iz navedenega člena ta direktiva ne presega tistega, kar je potrebno za dosego navedenega cilja.
That objective can rather, due to the cross-border nature of hybrid mismatches and the need to adopt solutions that function for the internal market as a whole, be better achieved at Union level.
Cilj te direktive je z določitvijo zahtevane ravni zaščite za notranji trg zgolj doseči nujno stopnjo usklajenosti v Uniji, ki je potrebna za dosego njenih ciljev.
The Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union.
Pri izvajanju te direktive bi morale države članice za ponazoritev ali kot razlago uporabiti relevantna pojasnila in primere iz poročila OECD o preprečevanju erozije davčne osnove in preusmerjanja dobička, kolikor so skladni z določbami te direktive in pravom Unije.
In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.
Pravila o hibridnih neskladjih iz člena 9(1) in (2) se bodo uporabljala le, če se v primeru, ki vključuje davčnega zavezanca, pojavi neskladje.
By setting the required level of protection for the internal market, this Directive only aims to achieve the essential degree of coordination within the Union that is necessary to achieve its objective.
Do neskladja ne bi smelo priti, kadar se za ureditev uporabi prilagoditev iz člena 9(5) ali 9a, pri čemer v skladu s tem ureditve, za katere se uporabi prilagoditev na podlagi teh delov direktive, ne bi smele biti predmet nobenih dodatnih prilagoditev v skladu s pravili o hibridnih neskladjih.
In implementing this Directive, Member States should use the applicable explanations and examples in the OECD BEPS report on Action 2 as a source of illustration or interpretation to the extent that they are consistent with the provisions of this Directive and with Union law.
Če določbe druge direktive, kot so določbe Direktive Sveta 2011/96/EU [4], vodijo do nevtralizacije neskladja pri davčnih izidih, se pravila o hibridnih neskladjih iz te direktive ne bi smela uporabljati.
The hybrid mismatch rules in Article 9(1) and (2) only apply to the extent that the situation involving a taxpayer gives rise to a mismatch outcome.
Komisija bi morala oceniti izvajanje te direktive pet let po začetku njene veljavnosti in o tem poročati Svetu.
No mismatch outcome should arise when an arrangement is subject to adjustment under Article 9(5) or 9a and, accordingly, arrangements that are subject to adjustment under those parts of this Directive should not be subject to any further adjustment under the hybrid mismatch rules.
Države članice bi morale Komisiji predložiti vse informacije, ki so potrebne za to oceno.
Where the provisions of another directive, such as those in Council Directive 2011/96/EU [4], lead to the neutralisation of the mismatch in tax outcomes, there should be no scope for the application of the hybrid mismatch rules provided for in this Directive.
Direktivo (EU) 2016/1164 bi bilo zato treba ustrezno spremeniti –
The Commission should evaluate the implementation of this Directive 5 years after its entry into force and report to the Council thereon.
SPREJEL NASLEDNJO DIREKTIVO:
Member States should communicate to the Commission all information necessary for this evaluation.
Člen 1
Directive (EU) 2016/1164 should therefore be amended accordingly,
Direktiva (EU) 2016/1164 se spremeni:
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
člen 1 se nadomesti z naslednjim:
Directive (EU) 2016/1164 is amended as follows:
Področje uporabe
Article 1 is replaced by the following:
Ta direktiva se uporablja za vse davčne zavezance, ki so zavezani za davek od dohodkov pravnih oseb v eni ali več državah članicah, vključno s stalnimi poslovnimi enotami subjektov, ki so za davčne namene rezidenti tretje države, v eni ali več državah članicah.
‘Article 1
Člen 9a se uporablja tudi za vse subjekte, ki jih država članica obravnava kot pregledne za davčne namene“;
Scope
člen 2 se spremeni:
This Directive applies to all taxpayers that are subject to corporate tax in one or more Member States, including permanent establishments in one or more Member States of entities resident for tax purposes in a third country.
v točki (4) se zadnji pododstavek nadomesti z naslednjim:
Article 9a also applies to all entities that are treated as transparent for tax purposes by a Member State.’;
„Za namene členov 9 in 9a:
Article 2 is amended as follows:
kadar se pojavi neskladje kakor je opisano v točkah (b), (c), (d), (e) ali (g) prvega pododstavka točke (9) tega člena ali kadar se zahteva prilagoditev v skladu s členom 9(3) ali členom 9a, je opredelitev povezanega podjetja prilagojena tako, da se zahteva po 25 odstotni udeležbi nadomesti z zahtevo po 50 odstotni udeležbi;
in point (4), the last subparagraph is replaced by the following:
oseba, ki deluje skupaj z drugo osebo v zvezi z glasovalnimi pravicami ali lastništvom kapitala subjekta, se obravnava kot udeležena pri vseh glasovalnih pravicah ali lastništvu kapitala tega subjekta, ki jih ima druga oseba;
‘For the purposes of Articles 9 and 9a:
povezano podjetje pomeni tudi subjekt, ki je del iste konsolidirane skupine za namene finančnega računovodstva kot davčni zavezanec, podjetje, v katerem ima davčni zavezanec znaten vpliv na upravljanje, ali podjetje, ki ima znaten vpliv na upravljanje davčnega zavezanca.“;
Where the mismatch outcome arises under points (b), (c), (d), (e) or (g) of the first subparagraph of point (9) of this Article or where an adjustment is required under Article 9(3) or Article 9a, the definition of associated enterprise is modified so that the 25 per cent requirement is replaced by a 50 per cent requirement;
točka (9) se nadomesti z naslednjim:
a person who acts together with another person in respect of the voting rights or capital ownership of an entity shall be treated as holding a participation in all of the voting rights or capital ownership of that entity that are held by the other person;
‚hibridno neskladje‘ pomeni primer, ki vključuje davčnega zavezanca ali – v zvezi s členom 9(3) – subjekt in pri katerem:
an associated enterprise also means an entity that is part of the same consolidated group for financial accounting purposes as the taxpayer, an enterprise in which the taxpayer has a significant influence in the management or an enterprise that has a significant influence in the management of the taxpayer.’;
zaradi plačila na podlagi finančnega instrumenta pride do odbitka brez vključitve ter:
point (9) is replaced by the following:
tako plačilo ni vključeno v dohodek v razumnem času in
“hybrid mismatch” means a situation involving a taxpayer or, with respect to Article 9(3), an entity where:
je neskladje mogoče pripisati različnim opredelitvam instrumenta ali plačila, izvedenega v skladu z njim.
a payment under a financial instrument gives rise to a deduction without inclusion outcome and:
V prvem pododstavku se šteje, da je plačilo na podlagi finančnega instrumenta vključeno v dohodek v razumnem času, kadar:
such payment is not included within a reasonable period of time; and
jurisdikcija prejemnika plačila plačilo vključi v davčnem obdobju, ki se začne v 12 mesecih po koncu davčnega obdobja plačnika, ali
the mismatch outcome is attributable to differences in the characterisation of the instrument or the payment made under it.
je razumno pričakovati, da bo jurisdikcija prejemnika plačila plačilo vključila v prihodnjem davčnem obdobju, pri čemer so pogoji plačila takšni, kot bi se pričakovalo, da bi se o njih dogovorila neodvisna podjetja;
For the purposes of the first subparagraph, a payment under a financial instrument shall be treated as included in income within a reasonable period of time where:
zaradi plačila hibridnemu subjektu pride do odbitka brez vključitve in je to neskladje posledica različne razporeditve plačil, izplačanih hibridnemu subjektu v skladu z zakonodajo jurisdikcije, kjer ima hibridni subjekt sedež ali je registriran, in jurisdikcije posameznika, udeleženega v tem hibridnem subjektu;
the payment is included by the jurisdiction of the payee in a tax period that commences within 12 months of the end of the payer's tax period; or
zaradi plačila subjektu z eno ali več stalnimi poslovnimi enotami pride do odbitka brez vključitve in je to neskladje posledica različne razporeditve plačil med sedežem in stalno poslovno enoto ali med dvema ali več stalnimi poslovnimi enotami istega subjekta v skladu z zakonodajo jurisdikcij, kjer subjekt deluje;
it is reasonable to expect that the payment will be included by the jurisdiction of the payee in a future tax period and the terms of payment are those that would be expected to be agreed between independent enterprises;
zaradi plačila pride do odbitka brez vključitve, ki je posledica plačila neupoštevani stalni poslovni enoti;
a payment to a hybrid entity gives rise to a deduction without inclusion and that mismatch outcome is the result of differences in the allocation of payments made to the hybrid entity under the laws of the jurisdiction where the hybrid entity is established or registered and the jurisdiction of any person with a participation in that hybrid entity;
zaradi plačila hibridnega subjekta pride do odbitka brez vključitve in je to neskladje posledica dejstva, da se plačilo ne upošteva v skladu z zakonodajo jurisdikcije prejemnika plačila;
a payment to an entity with one or more permanent establishments gives rise to a deduction without inclusion and that mismatch outcome is the result of differences in the allocation of payments between the head office and permanent establishment or between two or more permanent establishments of the same entity under the laws of the jurisdictions where the entity operates;
zaradi domnevnega plačila med sedežem in stalno poslovno enoto ali med dvema ali več stalnimi poslovnimi enotami pride do odbitka brez vključitve in je to neskladje posledica dejstva, da se plačilo ne upošteva v skladu z zakonodajo jurisdikcije prejemnika plačila, ali
a payment gives rise to a deduction without inclusion as a result of a payment to a disregarded permanent establishment;
pride do dvojnega odbitka.
a payment by a hybrid entity gives rise to a deduction without inclusion and that mismatch is the result of the fact that the payment is disregarded under the laws of the payee jurisdiction;
Za namene te točke (9):
a deemed payment between the head office and permanent establishment or between two or more permanent establishments gives rise to a deduction without inclusion and that mismatch is the result of the fact that the payment is disregarded under the laws of the payee jurisdiction; or
znesek, ki ustreza osnovnemu donosu prenesenega finančnega instrumenta, ne povzroči hibridnega neskladja iz točke (a) prvega pododstavka, kadar finančni trgovec izvede plačilo pri tržnem hibridnem prenosu, če mora finančni trgovec v skladu z jurisdikcijo plačnika vključiti vse prihodke, prejete v zvezi s prenesenim finančnim instrumentom;
a double deduction outcome occurs.
se hibridno neskladje v skladu z navedenimi točkami (e), (f) ali (g) prvega pododstavka pojavi le, če je v skladu z jurisdikcijo plačnika odbitek mogoče pobotati z zneskom, ki ni dvojna vključitev dohodka;
For the purposes of this point (9):
se neskladje obravnava kot hibridno neskladje le, če se pojavi med povezanimi podjetji, med davčnim zavezancem in povezanim podjetjem, med sedežem in stalno poslovno enoto, med dvema ali več stalnimi poslovnimi enotami istega subjekta ali v strukturirani ureditvi.
a payment representing the underlying return on a transferred financial instrument shall not give rise to a hybrid mismatch under point (a) of the first subparagraph where the payment is made by a financial trader under an on-market hybrid transfer provided the payer jurisdiction requires the financial trader to include as income all amounts received in relation to the transferred financial instrument;
V tej točki (9) ter členih 9, 9a in 9b:
a hybrid mismatch shall only arise under points (e), (f) or (g) of the first subparagraph to the extent that the payer jurisdiction allows the deduction to be set off against an amount that is not dual-inclusion income;
‚neskladje‘ pomeni dvojni odbitek ali odbitek brez vključitve;