Spelling suggestions: "subject:"subsidiaritetsprincipen"" "subject:"subsidiaritetsprincipens""
1 |
En minimilön i EU - Rättsligt möjligt eller vad ska det vara bra för? / A minimum wage in the EU - Legally possible or what is it good for?Lundgren, Olivia January 2021 (has links)
No description available.
|
2 |
De nationella parlamenten och EU : En studie av motiverade yttranden inom ramen för subsidiaritetsgranskningenIngschöld, Johanna January 2016 (has links)
This essay studies the national parliaments' reasoned opinions at the early warning mechanism. The study aim to declare if there is any variation in which national parliaments who is active in the early warning mechanism, and if there is a variation in type of bills in the early warning mechanism. These study also wants to describe some variation in how the national parliaments argued in the reasoned opinions. The study gives an enhanced understanding of the importance and legitimacy of the early warning mechanism and the reasoned opinions. The result shows that there is a certain group of parliaments who are more active and these are with few exceptions EU 15 countries. The study also shows that there is some kind of bills that is more prevalent than others, there is however some variation. There is also a wide variation in the arguments raised in the reasoned opinions. The results indicate that the national parliaments varies greatly in managing the reasoned opinions and it gives a negatively impacton the early warning mechanism. / Studien granskar de nationella parlamentens motiverade yttranden inom ramen för EU:s subsidiaritetsgranskning. Studiens syfte är att beskriva en möjlig variation angående vilka nationella parlamenten som är aktiva inom subsidiaritetsgranskningen. Studiens syfte är även att beskriva variationen i vilka lagförslag som återfinns i subsidiaritetsgrankningen, samt om de nationella parlamenten varierar i argumentering i de motiverade yttrandena. Studien visar att det finns nationella parlament som är vanligare förekommande inom granskningen, samt att vissa typer av lagförslag föranleder fler yttranden än andra. Beträffande argumenteringen i de motiverade yttrandena fanns en stor variation.
|
3 |
Gemensam konsoliderad bolagsskattebas : En studie i subsidiaritet och proportionalitet / CCCTB : A study in subsidiarity and proportionalityKrieg Jönsson, Oscar January 2018 (has links)
This thesis aims to conclude however the 2016 proposal of the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) is compliant with the principles of subsidiarity or/and proportionality in regard to the functions of consolidation and allocation therein. This is done by, in order from major to minor, presenting the overall, international context of rules and structures wherein the proposal, if adopted, will enter into. The presentation contains, as said, a contextualization containing the primarily the judicial framework that surrounds the legislative process in the European Union. The principles central for this thesis, the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality is closely examined, in order to crystallize the model of judgement in regards to the compliance with these principles. Since the court of the European Union has been reluctant to deem legislative acts incompatible with the principles, and has given the legislator a wide area of discretion in assessing legislative acts compatibility with the former mentioned principles, the proposal in regards to the mentioned functions, doesn´t constitute a breach of the principles. Even though the proposal marks, what seems to be quite the infringement on what is usually perceived as the member states own affairs, this thesis shows that the proposal of the CCCTB is most likely compliant with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.
|
4 |
Den nya anti-missbruksbestämmelsen i moder- och dotterbolagsdirektivet : Konkret eller kontraproduktiv? / The new anti-abuse rule in the parent subsidiary-directive : Concrete or counterproductive?Lindefelt, Louise January 2016 (has links)
For some time now, the EU has worked on managing the tax issues that have spawned from companies establishing subsidiaries in various Member States. These tax issues have concerned that of double taxation leading to the conception of the Parent-Subsidiary Directive (2011/96/EU, the PSD). One of the main purposes of the PSD is to prevent double taxation. The PSD aimed to create a mutual taxation system for parent companies, with subsidiaries in other Member States, as it was deemed essential. However, it was a mutual taxation system with regards to dividends paid from subsidiaries to parent companies, which meant there were still discrepancies to be found – and, as it turned out, exploited by companies seeking to gain an illegitimate tax advantage. Consequently, the EU announced the ‘de minimis’ anti-abuse rule in the PSD, whereby adoption was mandatory, for all Member States, so long as a Member State’s current tax legislation does not meet the requirements set forth by the anti-abuse rule. One of the main purposes of the anti-abuse rule was to ensure an improved legal clarity and security as well as preventing the abuse of the provisions as established in the PSD. The idea behind the anti-abuse rule is, thereby, perceived as well meaning although remarks have been made, by various authorities, regarding the prevalent flaws the anti-abuse rule is plagued by. There have been remarks against the anti-abuse rule’s conception to begin with, as it goes against the general principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. Furthermore, there have been remarks regarding the vagueness of the prerequisites and wording in the anti-abuse rule, contrary to the main purposes of the anti-abuse rule as established by the EU. In this study, the author will examine whether or not the criticism is justified, primarily by focusing on the possibilities of concretising the wording in the anti-abuse rule. This will be achieved by examining six Member States to determine how their respective adoption has fared. Also, the anti-abuse rule’s contribution to legal clarity and security will be determined, to discern whether or not the anti-abuse rule functions in accordance with its main purpose. The author has found that the anti-abuse rule is indeed in accordance with the general principles of subsidiarity and proportionality given the proven inability of the individual Member States to devise a common solution to the aforementioned tax issues, as well as the fact that the extent of the measure is appropriate, considering the issue at hand. Furthermore, six Member States have been examined, to determine how their respective adoption of the anti-abuse rule have fared. Three Member States have chosen to adopt the anti-abuse rule whereas the remaining three have chosen to refrain on the grounds that it has been deemed superfluous, seeing as their current legislation already meets the minimum requirements as established in the provisions of the anti-abuse rule. The Member States that have chosen to implement the anti-abuse rule have done so by adopting the vague wording verbatim, giving credence to the notion that they refrained from interpreting and/or rephrasing the wording as it is perceived as not only vague but also occasionally abstract, thus difficult to concretise. Not only does this mean that the anti-abuse rule should be regarded as that of inferior standard, as far as legal clarity and security go, but also that it lacks transparency and should thereby be regarded as nigh counterproductive. / EU har sedan länge arbetat med att hantera de beskattningsfrågor som uppkommer i takt med att bolag etablerar dotterbolag i en annan medlemsstat. Dessa frågor berör exempelvis dubbelbeskattning varpå EU upprättade Moder- och Dotterbolagsdirektivet (2011/96/EU, nedan benämnt PSD) som avsåg hjälpa bolag undslippa denna problematik. Direktivet tog sikte på att skapa gemensamt beskattningssystem för moderbolag och dotterbolag hemmahörande i olika medlemsstater – då det ansågs viktigt med enhetliga beskattningsregler inom EU. Det ska observeras att denna enhetlighet enbart sträcker sig till vinstutdelning som lämnas från dotterbolag till moderbolag i en annan medlemsstat, vilket innebar att olikheter fortfarande förelåg i övriga beskattningsfrågor. Detta ledde sedermera till att multinationella bolag kunde utnyttja medlemsstaternas olikheter genom att företa arrangemang som resulterade i en otillbörlig skattefördel. Företagandet av sådana arrangemang ledde till att EU valde att upprätta en de minimis-bestämmelse i PSD som var obligatorisk för samtliga medlemsstater att implementera, givet att deras nationella lagstiftningar inte redan uppfyllde bestämmelsens minimikrav. Denna bestämmelse kom sedermera att benämnas anti-missbruksbestämmelsen och ämnade tillföra en högre grad klarhet och säkerhet för att tydligare belysa de arrangemang som anses godtagbara och som inte ämnade missbruka PSD:s bestämmelser, där syftet bakom missbruket av PSD var att anskaffa skattefördelar. Tanken bakom anti-missbruksbestämmelsen är således godartad men likväl är bestämmelsen inte utan brister, samtidigt som den ifrågasätts från olika instanser. Det har påpekats att bestämmelsen inte bör ha upprättats, till att börja med, då den strider mot subsidiaritets- och proportionalitetsprincipen, som är fördragsstadgade. Vidare har det påpekats att rekvisiten i anti-missbruksbestämmelsen är otydliga och tillför således inte den klarhet och säkerhet enligt EU:s syfte. Syftet med denna uppsats är att undersöka huruvida den nya anti-missbruksbestämmelsens ordalydelse kan konkretiseras, vilket görs efter att ha klarlagt hur sex utvalda medlemsstater gått till väga med implementeringen av nämnd bestämmelse. Slutligen utreds huruvida anti-missbruksbestämmelsens bidrag till klarhet och säkerhet görs i enlighet med dess syfte. Författaren har i denna uppsats kommit fram till att anti-missbruksbestämmelsen är förenlig med såväl subsidiaritetsprincipen som proportionalitetsprincipen, då medlemsstaterna, till dags dato, inte förmått hitta en lösning utan EU:s involverande samtidigt som EU:s ingripande står i proportion till målet med åtgärden. Det har funnits att medlemsstaterna som implementerat anti-missbruksbestämmelsen har avstått från att tolka och anpassa anti-missbruksbestämmelsen varför bestämmelsens vaga ordalydelse återfinns i respektive lands lagbestämmelser. Anledningen bakom varför de avstått från att tolka bestämmelsen anser författaren bero på att bestämmelsen är vag, stundtals abstrakt, med anledning av de rekvisit som begagnas. Detta medför att bestämmelsen blir svår att konkretisera, varför det kan anses att en av EU:s målsättningar – att bidra till ökad klarhet och säkerhet – inte kan anses uppfyllt. Vidare har anti-missbruksbestämmelsen lett till en minskad förutsebarhet och rättssäkerhet, varför bestämmelsen inte bara bör anses undermålig utan även nära inpå kontraproduktiv.
|
Page generated in 0.0488 seconds