A research report submitted to the Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Commerce (specialising in Taxation). Johannesburg, 2015 / The existing South African tax system only acknowledges debt financing through the deduction allowed for interest payments, as compared to equity financing where no such deduction is allowed for dividend payments. Taxpayers are prejudiced should they wish to use equity financing to fund a project or company. The deductibility of interest creates the incentive for taxpayers to use debt funding even when it may not be in the best interests of the company. This paper considers some of the complications of the different tax treatment of the returns on debt and equity. Alternative models including the comprehensive business income tax, an allowance for corporate equity and a deduction for dividends are considered in order to establish whether the taxation of the returns on debt and equity could be improved or simplified in South Africa. Key Words: debt, equity, hybrid instruments, tax deductibility, comprehensive business income tax, allowance for corporate equity, dividend deductibility, South Africa

AURAL REGENERATION by MYRNA LEE PRONCHUK Under the Direction of Craig Dongoski ABSTRACT The aim of this thesis is to survey the abstraction of the human experience obscuring the confines between form and expression, sound and visual, experience and imitation. In establishing multiple levels of communication, I began with gathering discarded found objects, which I repurposed through building hybrid musical sculptures. The act of mark making mapped out systems and direction, and escalated into a form of hybrid musical notation. Both forms of hybrids informed each other in its development process. When the hybrid instruments and notation were placed in an environment together with the elements of Digital Signal Processing (DSP), it created a natural progression for performance. The objects required interaction: to be hit, tapped, bowed and plucked, with their sounds processed through DSP, and projected back into the audience, who participated in creating interactivity. In producing mechanical musical instruments, along with mark making, installation and experimental sound recordings, a platform is established allowing for a dialogue between audio and visual elements, and human experience.

Desde a adoção das normas internacionais de relatórios financeiros (IFRS) no Brasil, em 2010, a discussão sobre a classificação de instrumentos financeiros entre instrumentos de dívida ou de patrimônio tem se intensificado. Quando a Lei 11.638/07 foi emitida, alterando a Lei das Sociedades por Ações de 1976, teve o condão de introduzir o padrão contábil internacional na contabilidade brasileira. Entretanto, muitos dos instrumentos e aspectos da legislação societária brasileira não foram alterados ou reavaliados à luz desse novo padrão. De um momento para o outro, empresas se viram obrigadas a classificar como dívida, valores antes classificados com patrimônio líquido, como foram os diversos casos de ações resgatáveis. A própria classificação das ações ordinárias e preferenciais como instrumentos de patrimônio líquido foi colocada em dúvida devido à previsão do chamado dividendo mínimo obrigatório. Nesse ínterim, companhias abertas brasileiras emitiram certos instrumentos financeiros, analisaram e os classificaram como instrumentos de patrimônio líquido. Entretanto, tiveram tal classificação questionada pela CVM e foram requeridas a refazer suas demonstrações financeiras. Mesmo internacionalmente essa classificação não é, muitas vezes, óbvia. As últimas discussões no âmbito internacional relacionados com a classificação de instrumentos financeiros como de dívida ou de patrimônio se concentraram em duas abordagens: a \"abordagem restrita do patrimônio líquido\" (Narrow Equity Approach) e a \"abordagem estrita do passivo\" (Strict Obligation Approach). Este trabalho tem como objetivo avaliar a classificação dos instrumentos financeiros patrimoniais previstos na legislação societária brasileira à luz das normas internacionais de relatórios financeiros. Primeiramente entendendo e avaliando os casos de determinação da CVM de refazimento das demonstrações financeiras de companhias em virtude de classificação considerada inadequada de certos instrumentos financeiros como de patrimônio líquido. Em seguida, avaliando a natureza dos instrumentos patrimoniais previstos na legislação societária brasileira, especialmente as ações com dividendos prioritários, e o impacto dessa prioridade nas demonstrações financeiras das companhias. Com base nos resultados do estudo, concluiu-se que os casos de refazimento estavam relacionados a uma tentativa de classificar instrumentos típicos de dívida como patrimoniais, a partir da alteração de certos termos, mas sem atender a todos os requisitos da norma contábil. Adicionalmente, para as companhias com ações preferenciais com dividendos prioritários, observamos que os instrumentos atendiam a classificação de patrimônio líquido e que a prioridade no recebimento trouxe benefícios de fato para os seus detentores. / Since the adoption of the International Financial Reporting Standards in Brazil, in 2010, the discussion on the classification of financial instruments between debt or equity instruments has intensified. When the law 11,638/07 was issued, changing the Brazilian Corporate Law of 1976, had the effect of introducing international accounting standards in the Brazilian accounting environment. However, many of the instruments and aspects of Brazilian corporate legislation have not changed or reassessed in the light of this new standard. From one moment to the next, companies were required to reclassify amounts from equity to debt, as were the various cases of redeemable shares. Even the classification of ordinary and preferred shares as equity instruments was questioned due to the statutory minimum mandatory dividend. In the meantime, Brazilian listed companies have issued certain financial instruments, analyzed and classified them as equity instruments. However, they had such a classification questioned by the Brazilian Securities and Exchange Comission (CVM) and were required to restate their financial statements. Even internationally, this classification is not often obvious. The latest discussions in the international forum related to the classification of financial instruments as debt or equity focused on two approaches: the Narrow Equity Approach and the Strict Obligation Approach. This study aims to evaluate the classification of equity financial instruments as per the Brazilian corporate legislation in light of the International Financial Reporting Standards. Firstly, understanding and evaluating the cases of restatement of the financial statements of companies as determined by CVM due to misclassification of certain financial instruments as equity. Then, assessing the nature of equity instruments as per the Brazilian corporate legislation, especially the shares with priority dividends, and the impact of this priority in the financial statements of the company. Based on the results of the study, it was concluded that the restatements were related to the attempt of classifying typical debt instruments as equity, by amending certain of their terms, but not meeting all the requirements of the relevant accounting standard. Additionally, for companies with preferred shares with priority dividends, we observed that the instruments were classified as equity and that the priority has effectively brought benefits to these shareholders.

Desde a adoção das normas internacionais de relatórios financeiros (IFRS) no Brasil, em 2010, a discussão sobre a classificação de instrumentos financeiros entre instrumentos de dívida ou de patrimônio tem se intensificado. Quando a Lei 11.638/07 foi emitida, alterando a Lei das Sociedades por Ações de 1976, teve o condão de introduzir o padrão contábil internacional na contabilidade brasileira. Entretanto, muitos dos instrumentos e aspectos da legislação societária brasileira não foram alterados ou reavaliados à luz desse novo padrão. De um momento para o outro, empresas se viram obrigadas a classificar como dívida, valores antes classificados com patrimônio líquido, como foram os diversos casos de ações resgatáveis. A própria classificação das ações ordinárias e preferenciais como instrumentos de patrimônio líquido foi colocada em dúvida devido à previsão do chamado dividendo mínimo obrigatório. Nesse ínterim, companhias abertas brasileiras emitiram certos instrumentos financeiros, analisaram e os classificaram como instrumentos de patrimônio líquido. Entretanto, tiveram tal classificação questionada pela CVM e foram requeridas a refazer suas demonstrações financeiras. Mesmo internacionalmente essa classificação não é, muitas vezes, óbvia. As últimas discussões no âmbito internacional relacionados com a classificação de instrumentos financeiros como de dívida ou de patrimônio se concentraram em duas abordagens: a \"abordagem restrita do patrimônio líquido\" (Narrow Equity Approach) e a \"abordagem estrita do passivo\" (Strict Obligation Approach). Este trabalho tem como objetivo avaliar a classificação dos instrumentos financeiros patrimoniais previstos na legislação societária brasileira à luz das normas internacionais de relatórios financeiros. Primeiramente entendendo e avaliando os casos de determinação da CVM de refazimento das demonstrações financeiras de companhias em virtude de classificação considerada inadequada de certos instrumentos financeiros como de patrimônio líquido. Em seguida, avaliando a natureza dos instrumentos patrimoniais previstos na legislação societária brasileira, especialmente as ações com dividendos prioritários, e o impacto dessa prioridade nas demonstrações financeiras das companhias. Com base nos resultados do estudo, concluiu-se que os casos de refazimento estavam relacionados a uma tentativa de classificar instrumentos típicos de dívida como patrimoniais, a partir da alteração de certos termos, mas sem atender a todos os requisitos da norma contábil. Adicionalmente, para as companhias com ações preferenciais com dividendos prioritários, observamos que os instrumentos atendiam a classificação de patrimônio líquido e que a prioridade no recebimento trouxe benefícios de fato para os seus detentores. / Since the adoption of the International Financial Reporting Standards in Brazil, in 2010, the discussion on the classification of financial instruments between debt or equity instruments has intensified. When the law 11,638/07 was issued, changing the Brazilian Corporate Law of 1976, had the effect of introducing international accounting standards in the Brazilian accounting environment. However, many of the instruments and aspects of Brazilian corporate legislation have not changed or reassessed in the light of this new standard. From one moment to the next, companies were required to reclassify amounts from equity to debt, as were the various cases of redeemable shares. Even the classification of ordinary and preferred shares as equity instruments was questioned due to the statutory minimum mandatory dividend. In the meantime, Brazilian listed companies have issued certain financial instruments, analyzed and classified them as equity instruments. However, they had such a classification questioned by the Brazilian Securities and Exchange Comission (CVM) and were required to restate their financial statements. Even internationally, this classification is not often obvious. The latest discussions in the international forum related to the classification of financial instruments as debt or equity focused on two approaches: the Narrow Equity Approach and the Strict Obligation Approach. This study aims to evaluate the classification of equity financial instruments as per the Brazilian corporate legislation in light of the International Financial Reporting Standards. Firstly, understanding and evaluating the cases of restatement of the financial statements of companies as determined by CVM due to misclassification of certain financial instruments as equity. Then, assessing the nature of equity instruments as per the Brazilian corporate legislation, especially the shares with priority dividends, and the impact of this priority in the financial statements of the company. Based on the results of the study, it was concluded that the restatements were related to the attempt of classifying typical debt instruments as equity, by amending certain of their terms, but not meeting all the requirements of the relevant accounting standard. Additionally, for companies with preferred shares with priority dividends, we observed that the instruments were classified as equity and that the priority has effectively brought benefits to these shareholders.

Submitted by Bruno Santana (brunorafaelsantana@yahoo.com.br) on 2013-03-04T22:06:09Z No. of bitstreams: 1 MPFEBruno Santana final.pdf: 947205 bytes, checksum: 6a2e0e761798cb1d0be840f79837ee82 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Suzinei Teles Garcia Garcia (suzinei.garcia@fgv.br) on 2013-03-05T13:25:03Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 MPFEBruno Santana final.pdf: 947205 bytes, checksum: 6a2e0e761798cb1d0be840f79837ee82 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2013-03-05T13:27:36Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 MPFEBruno Santana final.pdf: 947205 bytes, checksum: 6a2e0e761798cb1d0be840f79837ee82 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2013-02-04 / Esta dissertação busca identificar a utilização de operações off-balance e instrumentos híbridos pelas empresas brasileiras. Seu objetivo é, além da utilização, verificar se o índice de transnacionalidade e o rating de crédito influenciam na decisão de utilizar ou não tais operações e instrumentos. Para isso, foram observadas as demonstrações financeiras e ratings das empresas participantes do índice IBrX-100 no período dos últimos três anos (2009, 2010 e 2011). Já para considerar o efeito da utilização das operações e instrumentos em razão do quão internacionalizadas são as empresas, este trabalho utiliza como critério a participação das empresas no ranking das transnacionais brasileiras no mesmo período acima citado. A análise revela que as empresas brasileiras mais internacionalizadas são mais sofisticadas que as menos internacionalizas e consequentemente se utilizam mais de instrumentos híbridos e operações off-balance. Ainda nesta linha, quando se divide as empresas por quartil, se chega ao resultado esperado que quanto mais internacionalizada a empresa, mais ela se utiliza destas operações e instrumentos. Além disso, também conclui que o rating influencia na utilização destes instrumentos e operações; quanto pior, mais a empresa se utiliza. Isso ocorre quando a métrica é o rating nacional, e não foram encontradas fortes evidências em relação ao rating estrangeiro. / This dissertation aims to identify the Brazilian companies’ use of off-balance sheet transactions and hybrid instruments. Its main objective is to verify if the transnationality index and the credit rating have any effects over the decision of the companies to make use or not of the mentioned transactions and instruments. For this purpose, we observe financial statements and credit ratings of the companies included in the IBrX-100 index in the last three years (2009, 2010 e 2011). In order to consider the effects of the utilization of the transactions and instruments by the most internationalized companies, we use as a criteria the participation of the companies in the Brazilian transnational companies ranking in the same period aforementioned. The results show that the more internationalized the more sophisticated is a Brazilian company and, as a consequence, these companies use more hybrid instruments and off-balance sheet transactions than the less internationalized companies. The same conclusion is obtained when the companies are divided by quartiles: the more internationalized the company, the more it uses these transactions and instruments. In addition, the results show that the worst the credit rating of a given company, the more it uses these transactions and instruments.

Uppsatsens syfte är att utreda hur EU:s förändringar i moder/dotterbolagsdirektivet kommer att påverka svensk lagstiftning i form av IL och SFL. Förändringarna i direktivet har gjorts för att förhindra bolagens användande av s.k. hybridlån för att uppnå dubbel icke-beskattning i medlemsstater. Utöver den här förändringen har det även infogats gemensamma skatteflyktbestämmelser i direktivet, bestämmelser som samtliga medlemsstater måste följa. Sverige har sedan tidigare implementerat moder/dotterbolagsdirektivet i svensk lagstiftning och har även en lag mot skatteflykt. Skatteflykt är idag ett erkänt problem inom EU och de olika medlemsstaternas nationella lagstiftningar skiljer sig åt mellan varandra, därför har det ansetts nödvändigt att försöka skapa en gemenskap mellan medlemsstaternas lagstiftningar. För att uppfylla uppsatsens syfte har vi utrett de antagna förslagen från EU och gjort jämförelser med svensk lagstiftning, i syfte att se hur den svenska lagstiftningen kommer att påverkas av de ändrade reglerna i moder/dotterbolagsdirektivet. Tanken är inte att föreslå en lydelse av reglerna i svensk lagstiftning, utan enbart att utreda hur IL och SFL kommer att påverkas när direktivets ändringar implementeras innan slutet av år 2015. Slutsatsen enligt vår mening blir att Sverige troligtvis inte kommer behöva ändra den svenska generalklausulen då den redan täcker men även går längre än det som den gemensamma skatteflyktsklausulen vill uppnå. Vi anser att Sverige rimligen borde implementera reglerna som motverkar dubbel icke-beskattning och att detta rimligen bör införas i IL. Vi anser även att det är väldigt viktigt att den implementerade bestämmelsen är så tydlig som möjligt i sin lydelse. / The purpose of the thesis is to examine how EU’s changes in the Parent-Subsidiary Directive will affect Swedish legislation in the form of the Income Tax Act and the Tax Evasion Act. The changes in the directive have been made to prevent the companies from using so-called hybrid loans to achieve double non-taxation in the Member States. In addition to this change, a general anti-abuse rule has also been implemented into the Directive, a rule that all Member States must implement. Sweden has already implemented the Parent-Subsidiary Directive into Swedish law and has also a law against tax evasion. Tax evasion is a recognized problem within the EU and the different national legislations between the Member States differ from each other and therefor it has been considered necessary to try to create a connection between the Member States' legislation. To fulfill the purpose of the thesis, it has been necessary to examine the changes made by the EU and make a comparison with the Swedish legislation, in order to see how the Swedish legislation will be affected by the changed rules of the Parent-Subsidiary Directive. The idea is not to propose a complete amendment to the rules in the Swedish law, but only to investigate how the Income Tax Act and Tax Evasion Act will be affected when the changes in the directive are implemented. The conclusion, according to us, is that Sweden will probably not need to change the Swedish general tax evasion clause because it already covers and also goes further than what the general anti-abuse rule in the Directive wants to achieve. We believe that Sweden probably should implement the rules that prevent double non-taxation, and that this should be inserted in the Income Tax Act. We also believe that it is very important that the implemented provision is as clear as possible in its wording.

Submitted by David de Almeida (david@almeidafroner.com.br) on 2018-03-23T17:06:44Z No. of bitstreams: 1 fgv-mestrado-profissional-David-TCC-versão-final-editada.pdf: 646372 bytes, checksum: ddda42bdfa2dcf2064ec69d2009cc4cd (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Thais Oliveira (thais.oliveira@fgv.br) on 2018-03-26T23:13:37Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 fgv-mestrado-profissional-David-TCC-versão-final-editada.pdf: 646372 bytes, checksum: ddda42bdfa2dcf2064ec69d2009cc4cd (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Suzane Guimarães (suzane.guimaraes@fgv.br) on 2018-03-27T14:08:35Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 fgv-mestrado-profissional-David-TCC-versão-final-editada.pdf: 646372 bytes, checksum: ddda42bdfa2dcf2064ec69d2009cc4cd (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-03-27T14:08:35Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 fgv-mestrado-profissional-David-TCC-versão-final-editada.pdf: 646372 bytes, checksum: ddda42bdfa2dcf2064ec69d2009cc4cd (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-03-13 / Após a introdução do International Financial Reporting Standards ('IFRS') no Brasil por meio da Lei nº 11.638/2007, a discussão acerca da classificação contábil dos instrumentos financeiros híbridos como dívida ou patrimônio se intensificou. Isso porque a introdução do IFRS no Brasil não foi acompanhada da alteração ou reavaliação dos instrumentos financeiros previstos na Lei das Sociedades por Ações (Lei 6.404/1976). Nesse ínterim, sociedades empresarias foram obrigadas a contabilizar no passivo valores anteriormente contabilizados no patrimônio líquido. No caso das companhias abertas, a CVM requereu a reelaboração das demonstrações financeiras de 5 (cinco) sociedades cujos instrumentos financeiros híbridos foram classificados no patrimônio líquido, ao invés do passivo. A prática tributária não se mantém ao largo dessa discussão. Não obstante a publicação da Lei 12.973/2014, que, em tese, neutralizou os efeitos tributários dos novos métodos e critérios contábeis, a reelaboração da demonstração financeira por determinação da CVM traz consequências tributárias não reguladas pelo legislador, tais como alteração do lucro líquido, limite de subcapitalização e método de equivalência patrimonial. Diante da utilização pelo direito tributário de institutos, conceitos e formas de direito privado, tais como lucro e patrimônio líquido, o que se propõe a analisar são os efeitos tributários decorrentes da reelaboração da demonstração financeira determinada pela CVM. / After the establishment of the International Financial Reporting Standards ('IFRS') in Brazil by means of Law nº 11.638/2007, the discussion about the accounting classification of financial hybrid instruments as debt or equity was intensified considering that this establishment was not followed by amendment or reassessment of financial instruments provided by the Business Corporation Law (Law nº 6.404/1976). In the meantime, business enterprises were obliged to record under liabilities numbers previously recorded under shareholders´ equity. In the case of listed companies, the Securities and Exchange Commission ('CVM') required the re-elaboration of financial statements from 5 (five) corporations which financial hybrid instruments were classified under shareholders´ equity and not under liabilities. The tax practice does not distance itself from this discussion. Despite the publication of Law nº 12.973/2014, that, in theory, neutralized the tax effects of the new methodology and accounting criteria, the re-elaboration of financial statements determined by the Securities and Exchange Commission ('CVM') has tax consequences not regulated by the legislator, such as net profit change, undercapitalization limit and equity method. Considering the use by tax law of standards, concepts and forms from private law, such as profit and shareholder´s equity, what is proposed to be analyzed are the tax effects generated by the re-elaboration of financial statements determined by the Securities and Exchange Commission ('CVM').