| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 778.38 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
A jurisprudência arbitral do Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa [CAAD] respeitante à aplicação da cláusula geral antiabuso, divulgada publicamente nos últimos anos, constitui um importante contributo para o estudo e compreensão deste complexo mecanismo jurídico-tributário, num tempo de redobrada atenção às consequências do planeamento fiscal abusivo. A existência de algumas decisões contraditórias, relativamente ao habitual sentido decisório seguido em dois tipos de situações de planeamento fiscal abusivo, submetidos ao seu escrutínio arbitral, introduz um significativo fator de insegurança jurídica na análise desta problemática, porquanto, se trata da mesma matriz elisiva que subjaz à estrutura jurídica realizada, e as mesmas vantagens fiscais obtidas nuns e noutros casos. O presente estudo tenta dilucidar quais as razões que possam determinar a existência de algumas decisões arbitrais em total oposição com a corrente decisória maioritária, e, assim, perceber os motivos em que assenta a generalizada censura arbitral à aplicação deste poderoso mecanismo de combate ao planeamento fiscal abusivo.
CAAD's arbitration jurisprudence on the application of the general anti-abuse rule published in recent years, constitutes an important contribution to the study and understanding of this complex legal-tax mechanism, in a time of increased attention to the consequences of abusive tax planning. The existence of some contradictory decisions, regarding the usual decision-making process followed in two types of abusive tax planning submitted to its arbitration scrutiny, introduces a significant factor of legal uncertainty in the analysis of this problematic, since it is the same abusive matrix that underlies the juridical structure realized and the tax advantages obtained elsewhere and in other cases. The present study tries to elucidate the reasons that may determine the existence of some arbitration decisions in total opposition to the majority decision-making process, and thus, to understand the reasons for the widespread arbitration censorship to the application of this powerful mechanism to combat abusive tax planning.
CAAD's arbitration jurisprudence on the application of the general anti-abuse rule published in recent years, constitutes an important contribution to the study and understanding of this complex legal-tax mechanism, in a time of increased attention to the consequences of abusive tax planning. The existence of some contradictory decisions, regarding the usual decision-making process followed in two types of abusive tax planning submitted to its arbitration scrutiny, introduces a significant factor of legal uncertainty in the analysis of this problematic, since it is the same abusive matrix that underlies the juridical structure realized and the tax advantages obtained elsewhere and in other cases. The present study tries to elucidate the reasons that may determine the existence of some arbitration decisions in total opposition to the majority decision-making process, and thus, to understand the reasons for the widespread arbitration censorship to the application of this powerful mechanism to combat abusive tax planning.
Description
Mestrado em Fiscalidade
Keywords
Cláusula geral antiabuso [CGAA] Planeamento fiscal abusivo Artigo 38 / 2 LGT CAAD Elisão fiscal General anti abuse rule [GAAR] Abusive tax planning Tax avoidance AT 38 / 2 LGT rule of law