EU & Italian International Tax Law Blog

Article on the section LEGAL of Italian newspaper FINANZA & MERCATI

Marco Rossi — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:51:17 -0500

We provide below the link to an article on the U.S. Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program appeared on the section LEGAL of the Italian newspaper FINANZA & MERCATI:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/55738639/Finanza%26Mercati.pdf

IRS Announced Reopening of Tax Amnesty Program For Undisclosed Foreign Financial Accounts

Marco Rossi — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 21:08:24 -0500

On January 9, 2011 the Internal Revenue Service reopened the offshore voluntary disclosure program to help people hiding offshore accounts get current with their taxes and announced the collection of more than $4.4 billion so far from the two previous international programs.

The IRS reopened the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (OVDP) following continued strong interest from taxpayers and tax practitioners after the closure of the 2011 and 2009 programs. The third offshore program comes as the IRS continues working on a wide range of international tax issues and follows ongoing efforts with the Justice Department to pursue criminal prosecution of international tax evasion. This program will be open for an indefinite period until otherwise announced.

“Our focus on offshore tax evasion continues to produce strong, substantial results for the nation’s taxpayers,” said IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman. “We have billions of dollars in hand from our previous efforts, and we have more people wanting to come in and get right with the government. This new program makes good sense for taxpayers still hiding assets overseas and for the nation’s tax system.”

The program is similar to the 2011 program in many ways, but with a few key differences. Unlike last year, there is no set deadline for people to apply. However, the terms of the program could change at any time going forward. For example, the IRS may increase penalties in the program for all or some taxpayers or defined classes of taxpayers – or decide to end the program entirely at any point.

“As we’ve said all along, people need to come in and get right with us before we find you,” Shulman said. “We are following more leads and the risk for people who do not come in continues to increase.”

The third offshore effort comes as Shulman also announced today the IRS has collected $3.4 billion so far from people who participated in the 2009 offshore program, reflecting closures of about 95 percent of the cases from the 2009 program. On top of that, the IRS has collected an additional $1 billion from up front payments required under the 2011 program. That number will grow as the IRS processes the 2011 cases.

In all, the IRS has seen 33,000 voluntary disclosures from the 2009 and 2011 offshore initiatives. Since the 2011 program closed last September, hundreds of taxpayers have come forward to make voluntary disclosures. Those who have come in since the 2011 program closed last year will be able to be treated under the provisions of the new OVDP program.

The overall penalty structure for the new program is the same for 2011, except for taxpayers in the highest penalty category.

For the new program, the penalty framework requires individuals to pay a penalty of 27.5 percent of the highest aggregate balance in foreign bank accounts/entities or value of foreign assets during the eight full tax years prior to the disclosure. That is up from 25 percent in the 2011 program. Some taxpayers will be eligible for 5 or 12.5 percent penalties; these remain the same in the new program as in 2011.

Participants must file all original and amended tax returns and include payment for back-taxes and interest for up to eight years as well as paying accuracy-related and/or delinquency penalties.

Participants face a 27.5 percent penalty, but taxpayers in limited situations can qualify for a 5 percent penalty. Smaller offshore accounts will face a 12.5 percent penalty. People whose offshore accounts or assets did not surpass $75,000 in any calendar year covered by the new OVDP will qualify for this lower rate. As under the prior programs, taxpayers who feel that the penalty is disproportionate may opt instead to be examined.

The IRS recognizes that its success in offshore enforcement and in the disclosure programs has raised awareness related to tax filing obligations. This includes awareness by dual citizens and others who may be delinquent in filing, but owe no U.S. tax. The IRS is currently developing procedures by which these taxpayers may come into compliance with U.S. tax law. The IRS is also committed to educating all taxpayers so that they understand their U.S. tax responsibilities.

More details will be available within the next month on IRS.gov. In addition, the IRS will be updating key Frequently Asked Questions and providing additional specifics on the offshore program.

The IRS Issues Guidance on International Tax Reporting For U.S. Citizens or Dual Citizens Residing Outside of the United States

Marco Rossi — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 16:24:19 -0500

The Internal Revenue Service (U.S. tax administration) issued guidance (in the form of Fact Sheet FS 2011-13) on international tax reporting requirements for U.S. citizens or dual citizens residing outside of the United States.

In essence, the Guidance provides that U.S. citizens or dual citizens living and working abroad with (1) no tax balance due on their U.S. income tax returns (due, for example, to foreign tax credits for foreign taxes paid on their unreported foreign income earned in a foreign country, which offsets any U.S. tax due on that income, or U.S. foreign earned income exclusion excluding from U.S. tax certain employment income earned outside of the U.S.) or (2) a tax balance due but where the failure to report foreign income and pay associated residual U.S. taxes on it was due to reasonable cause (lack of proper advice or knowledge about the duty to report and tax such income), can file delinquent or amended tax returns and rectify past mistakes and will not be assessed late filing or late payment payment penalties. In addition, there will be no penalties assessed on those same individuals with respect to late filings of their Foreign Bank Account Reports reporting foreign financial assets if their failure to file was also due to reasonable cause.

The Guidance includes two examples: one where the income tax return results in no balance due and the other where a balance is due, with an explanation of reasonable cause for failure to file resulting in no penalty for late filing of income tax return, late payment of income, or late filing of FBAR.

In general, in order to establish reasonable cause for failure to file or report foreign income, the taxpayer must show that the failure was not due to negligence and that “ordinary business care and prudence in meeting tax obligations” were exercised. The IRS will evaluate the facts and circumstances of each case and, depending on the taxpayer’s situation, a lack of knowledge or proper advice of U.S. filing obligations may constitute reasonable cause.

It should be noted by taxpayers covered by this guidance that, beginning with 2011, individuals with greater than $50,000 in foreign financial assets will need to include IRS Form 8938 with their individual tax returns. Form 8938 is due with the U.S. tax return within the same deadline and it is separate and in addition to the FBAR.

Italy's New Tax on Foreign Real Estate Property

Marco Rossi — Sun, 08 Jan 2012 08:39:43 -0500

Recent legislation enacted by the Italian government to improve Italy's budget and stem the sovereign debt crisis introduced a new tax on real estate properties located outside of Italy. The tax is charged at the rate of 0.76%, calculated on the purchase price of the property as appearing from the purchase documents or alternatively on the fair market value of the property. A tax credit is granted, reducing or offsetting the Italian tax due, for any property taxes paid to the country in which the property is located. Individual taxpayers residing in Italy for tax purposes are liable for the tax. This include foreign nationals who work and live in Italy and file Italian individual tax returns as Italian residents. Based on the language of the statute, properties owned or managed through offshore or foreign entities are not subject to the tax. Taxpayers who directly own rental or investment properties outside of Italy are encouraged to restructure their investment and own and actively manage those properties through a foreign owing or managing entity to avoid the application of the tax.

2012 New Self-Reporting Requirements For Foreign Financial Assets

Marco Rossi — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 23:07:13 -0500

Starting with the tax year 2011, the new IRS Form 8938 must be filed by all U.S. persons if total foreign financial assets exceeded $50,000 at any point during the year. Form 8938 will be in addition to the long-standing Treasury Department FBAR (Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts Report) required for financial assets abroad that exceed $10,000 and shall have to be filed together with the federal income tax return for the year.

Furthermore, Form 8621 (Passive Foreign Investment Company – PFIC) must now be filed every year for each separate PFIC investment where as previously it was only required to be filed in years that distributions were made from the PFIC investment. Finally, the statute of limitation for IRS audits of returns listing foreign sourced income has been extended to 6 years (previously 3 years).

Where non-compliance is “non-wilful,” failure to file form 8938 results in a minimum $10,000 penalty but may rise to as much as 40% of the value of the asset or account. This is in addition to the tax due and interest due. Non-compliance deemed “wilful” may result additionally in criminal prosecution.

While FATCA does not change the existing penalties resulting from failure to properly report such as the FBAR and Form 8621 (PFIC report), FATCA will result in a dramatically increased enforcement of these rules and therefore U.S. citizens and residents (including Americans living abroad and foreign nationals living in the U.S) should become familiar with the very significant penalties associated with these and other reporting requirements.

Trust and family and succession planning

Marco Rossi — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 07:50:29 -0500

Trusts are very important tools for family and succession planning. Italy enacted specific provisions on the tax treatment of trusts for income tax and indirect (transfer) tax purposes. However, Italy does not have specific legislation on trusts, and trusts for Italian clients or Italian assets must be formed and operated in accordance with the legislation of a foreign country that contemplates rules on trusts. Among the most reliable and sophisticated legislations on trusts are those of the States of the United States, including Delaware and New York. Every time the settler, beneficiaries and trust assets sit in different countries (Italy and abroad) the coordination of the tax treatment in Italy and in the foreign country poses daunting issues but also offers interesting planning opportunities. Below we refer you to a recent article appeared on Italia-Oggi in which we provide our perspective on our experience in forming and managing trusts for Italian clients:

http://www.lawrossi.com/images/stories/docs/Italia_Oggi_Trust.pdf

Trust e pianificazione familiare e successoria

Marco Rossi — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 07:39:45 -0500

Il trust è uno strumento molto importante per un'efficace pianificazione familiare e successoria. L'Italia ha adottato una specifica normativa fiscale sul trust ai fini delle imposte dirette ed indirette, ma non ha una legislazione civilistica in materia e i trust per clienti italiani devono necessariamente essere costituiti in base alla normativa di uno stato estero che contempli questo istituto. Tra le varie legislazioni si segnalano, per affidabilità e grado di elaborazione, quelle degli stati degli USA, tra cui Delaware e New York. Ogni qualvolta costituente, beneficiari e beni del trust si trovano in stati diversi (in Italia e all'estero), il coordinamento tra il trattamento fiscale del trust in Italia e quello applicabile nel paese estero richiede particolare attenzione nella messa a punto di questo strumento, ma nel contempo offre formidabili opportunità di pianificazione. Segnaliamo di seguito un recente interessante articolo in materia apparso su Italia-Oggi, con un nostro contributo e punto di vista relativo alla nostra esperienza in materia di costituzione e gestione di trust USA per nostri clienti:

http://www.lawrossi.com/images/stories/docs/Italia_Oggi_Trust.pdf

Interview with MQR&A on Italian financial newspaper Italia Oggi

Marco Rossi — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 11:30:28 -0500

An interview on Marco Q Rossi & Associati has been published today on the Italian financial newspaper ITALIA OGGI. We attach below the file with the full account: www.lawrossi.com/images/stories/docs/MQR_Italia_Oggi.pdf

Obblighi di Reporting per Investimenti Esteri: La Saga Continua

Marco Rossi — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 08:52:55 -0500

Secondo quanto riportato di recente su Bloomberg, diverse banche svizzere sarebbero in procinto di siglare un accordo con il fisco americano a chiusura di un contenzioso in materia di evasione fiscale. In forza dell'accordo le banche si disporrebbero a pagare una somma in via transattiva e fornire al fisco americano le informazioni sui propri clienti cittadini o residenti americani. L'accordo chiuderebbe una procedura civile avviata nei confronti di 11 banche svizzere responsabili, a detta del fisco americano, di avere aiutato i contribuenti americani a evadere le imposte. In base alla normativa fiscale USA, coloro che sono soggetti ad imposta sui redditi negli USA - tra cui cittadini americani residenti in Italia, tassati in base alla cittadinanza, e cittadini italiani residenti negli Stati Uniti, tassati in base alla residenza - sono tenuti a dichiarare conti e investimenti detenuti al di fuori degli USA mediante un apposito modulo (Foreign Bank Account Report, in acronimo FBAR) equivalente in sostanza al modulo RW del Modello Unico italiano, e a dichiarare i redditi derivanti dai predetti conti ed investimenti. Eventuali imposte estere danno diritto ad un credito di imposta ad eliminazione della doppia imposizione. Negli ultimi tre anni gli Stati Uniti hanno adottato due programmi di incentivazione a riportare conti e depositi esteri con somme non dichiarate beneficiando di sconti sulle sanzioni dovute. Anche a prescindere da questi programmi, il sistema fiscale USA consente in generale di presentare dichiarazioni tardive che correggono errori o mancanze pregresse e in caso di buona fede è possibile evitare sanzioni. L'attenzione dell'amministrazione fiscale e la pressione sulle banche estere sono molto forti e si sta registrando un trend sempre più marcato verso forme di trasparenza e rilascio di informazioni a fini fiscali che stanno inducendo molti contribuenti a mettersi in regola con il fisco.

Imprese italiane con clienti e contratti negli USA: rischi e potenziali oneri fiscali

Marco Rossi — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 11:13:33 -0500

Riteniamo utile segnalare una serie di situazioni che stiamo seguendo sempre più frequentemente per conto dei nostri clienti. Le imprese italiane che vendono beni e servizi a clienti americani devono porre particolare attenzione agli eventuali obblighi e oneri fiscali cui potrebbero essere soggette negli USA, anche quando non hanno una società controllata, filiale o sede secondaria sul territorio degli Stati Uniti. Infatti, salvo i casi di pura esportazione di beni senza alcun ulteriore contatto con gli USA, è altamente probabile che vi siano situazioni tali da generare tali oneri e che eventuali distrazioni possono anche essere costose.

Ci riferiamo, in particolare e a titolo esemplificativo, a casi in cui l'impresa deposita i propri beni in un magazzino negli Stati Uniti, eventualmente anche messo a disposizione da terzi, dispone di un agente o distributore americano, oppure insieme ai prodotti fornisce anche servizi di installazione, assistenza post vendita o riparazione tramite proprio personale negli USA. In questi casi, l'impresa potrebbe essere considerata "fare business negli USA" (engaged in a trade or business o in acronimo ETB) ed è quindi soggetta ad imposta negli USA sull'utile derivante dalla fornitura o dal contratto con il proprio cliente americano (effectively connected income o in acronimo ECI) in base alla normativa fiscale americana interna.

La convenzione contro le doppie imposizioni tra Italia e Stati Uniti potrebbe esentare da imposta, ove non si disponga negli USA di una struttura organizzativa di natura tale da costituire una stabile organizzazione, ma tecnicamente al fine di fruire dell'esenzione occorre presentare comunque una dichiarazione dei redditi negli USA insieme ad un modulo con cui si invoca l'applicazione del trattato illustrandone le ragioni.

Nel caso in cui non si presenti la dichiarazione, secondo la suddetta procedura, e in un secondo tempo magari a seguito di un accertamento (che potrebbe partire anche da una verifica presso il proprio cliente americano) risulti che si disponeva invece di una stabile organizzazione, e che quindi l'esenzione del trattato non era applicabile, si viene tassati sull'importo lordo del corrispettivo ricevuto senza alcun diritto a deduzioni per spese e costi e con conseguente notevole aggravio di imposta.

Tali situazioni stanno diventando sempre più frequenti da quanto il fisco americano ha iniziato a verificare sistematicamente che le imprese americane che ricevono beni o servizi da soggetti esteri abbiano richiesto ed ottenuto l'apposito certificato (form W8-ECI) con cui l'impresa estera dichiara che provvederà per suo conto al pagamento di eventuali imposte dovute negli USA, in mancanza del quale esse sarebbero tenute a effettuare una ritenuta alla fonte del 30% sul corrispettivo dovuto.

L'impresa americana acquisito il certificato lo deposita presso l'ufficio imposte americano insieme alla sua dichiarazione dei redditi annuale, e di conseguenza il fisco americano è in grado di conoscere e monitorare le varie situazioni ed effettuare gli eventuali controlli. In caso di corretta gestione della situazione, eventuali imposte dovute e pagate negli USA sono accreditabili in Italia ad eliminazione della doppia imposizione.

Il nostro consiglio è di verificare se in relazione ai propri contratti in essere con clienti americani possano profilarsi situazioni del tipo di quelle descritte sopra e sia necessario o opportuno intervenire per assicurarsi la corretta gestione dei profili fiscali USA e di riflesso italiani ed evitare rischi o inutili aggravi di imposta.

MQR&A Presents at Unindustria Bologna on June 8

Marco Rossi — Sun, 05 Jun 2011 20:46:03 -0500

On June 8, 2011 at Unindustria Bologna MQR&A will present on on the topic: "Legal, corporate and tax considerations for opening a business in the United States". The presentation will be divided in two sections. The first section will cover the best practices and a check list for the legal, corporate and tax aspects relating to the establishment of business operations in the US. The second section will discuss the framework for Italian enterprises entering the U.S. market from a business, strategic and planning standpoint. We attach an invitation to the presentation, together with the slides that will be discussed at the event for the part I and part II of the presentation.

European Commission Blesses Italy's Anti-Inversion Rules

Marco Rossi — Mon, 30 May 2011 17:58:23 -0500

Italy's Tax Code determines the tax residency of a company on the basis of one of three alternative tests: place of legal seat, place of management and principal place of business. As a result, an Italian or foreign company that is effectively managed from Italy is treated as an Italian company for Italian tax purposes and it is subject to tax in Italy on its worldwide income.

In order to prevent abusive practices consisting in putting an Italian company owned or controlled by Italian shareholders under the umbrella of a foreign holding company established in a tax favorable jurisdiction, Italy enacted special anti abuse provisions according to which a foreign company owning or controlling an Italian company is presumed to have its tax residency in Italy if one of two alternative tests are met: Italian shareholders control the foreign company, or the majority of the company's board members are Italian nationals. Taxpayers can rebut the presumption by providing clear and convincing evidence that the foreign company is effectively managed outside of Italy.

The Italian association of certified public accountants filed a petition with the European Commission arguing that Italian anti inversion rules violate the basic principles of EU law on freedom of establishment and free movement of capital. While acknowledging that Italian provisions intend to prevent tax abusive practices, the Italian association argued that Italian law violates the proportionality principle in enforcing far reaching provisions that extend also to bona fide cases.

The European Commission refused to take any action, taking the position that Italian law is designed to combat tax evasion and is narrowly drafted to target only clear abuses while it permits bona fide taxpayers to present their case and rebut the tax residency presumption.

MQR&A's New Web Site is On-line

Marco Rossi — Mon, 30 May 2011 17:22:37 -0500

We would like to inform all our clients, contacts and friends that our new web site is now on line. The new web site encompasses all previous information about our services and areas on practice in a more professional, nice looking and user friendly format. The "News" section on the web site will work in tandem with our blog. We hope you will find our web site informative and useful and look forward to receiving your valuable comments and feedback.

IRS Launches a New Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program

Marco Rossi — Sat, 12 Feb 2011 15:31:18 -0500

The IRS issued press release IR-2011-14 (Feb. 8, 2011) which announces the opening of a new program for the voluntary disclosure of foreign bank accounts with filing of back taxes and delinquent foreign bank account reports for the past eight years. The press release summarizes the highlights of the program and also links to a more detailed Q&A. The press release can be found here and the Q&A could be found here. As suggested by the IRS previously, the new program has stiffer penalty rules. OVDI requires individuals to pay a penalty of 25% of the amount in the foreign bank accounts in the year with the highest aggregate account balance covering the 2003 to 2010 time period. There are reduced penalties for some eligible taxpayer of 5 or 12.5%. Taxpayers will also have to pay back-taxes and interest for up to 8 years. All of this is obviously more stringent compared to the 2009 program’s 20% penalty and 6 year look-back (2003-2008). Taxpayers will have to enroll in the program by August 31st in order to be able to benefit from the potential avoidance of criminal liability and higher civil penalties. U.S. resident taxpayers with assets in Italy or other foreign countries, and U.S. citizens residing abroad and in Italy should pay attention to the new program, which may offer opportunities to rectify previous mistakes or omissions and be back in compliance with substantially reduced penalties.

Italian Supreme Court Confirms Validity of Merger Leveraged Buyout

Marco Rossi — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 08:22:11 -0500

The Italian Supreme Court with judgment n. 1372 of January 21, 2011 confirmed that a merger leveraged buyout is not abusive in itself and can be respected for tax purposes. In the transaction under scrutiny, a company member of a group obtained a loan from a third party and purchased 100 per cent of the stock of another company member of the same group. Immediately after the acquisition and as part of the overall plan, the acquired company merged into the acquiring company. As a result, the acquiring company was able to use its acquisition interest expenses to offset the income of the target. Historically, leveraged buyout transaction had been challenged as elusive and tax deductions had been rejected by the tax administration. The Supreme Court's decision is important in the process of recognizing the general legitimacy of leveraged buyout arrangements in the Italian tax system.

New Bill Aimed At Introducing Flat Tax on Italian Real Estate Income

Marco Rossi — Wed, 02 Feb 2011 20:03:19 -0500

Article 2 of the bill on tax federalism under discussion in Parliament would introduce new provisions on taxation of Italian real estate income for individual taxpayers. Under current law, real estate income (both foreign and domestic) is reported on individual taxpayer's annual income tax return and is taxed as ordinary income at graduated rates. Under the new provisions, domestic real estate income would be subject to withholding tax at the flat rate of 20 per cent. The withholding tax would be a final tax. As the bill is currently drafted, the new flat tax would not apply to foreign source real estate income, which would still be part of total income subject to tax on a net basis. To the extent that the different taxation system leads to a harsher taxation of foreign real estate income compared to domestic real estate income, the new provisions could be challenged as invalid under the non discrimination and freedom of movement of capital principles of EU tax law. For foreign investors in Italian real estate, the new provisions would be beneficial because they would grant a lower tax rate under domestic law - the new flat 20 percent tax - than the tax rate currently commonly granted under tax treaties - 30 per cent.

Italian Tax Agency Extends Scope of CFC Rules

Marco Rossi — Sat, 29 Jan 2011 14:42:01 -0500

Three of the answers provided by the Italian Tax Administration to questions from taxpayers set forth in the annual tax forum for 2011 could potentially expand the scope of the Italian CFC rules and pose new challenges on Italian multinationals.

The first answer deals with the active trade of business exception to the CFC rules. The Italian tax administration in the past adopted the interpretation according to which the exception applies when most of the customers and suppliers are located in the same country in which the CFC is organized. With reference to a manufacturing CFC, according to the administration the fact that the production activities are predominantly located in the same country of the CFC is one factor, but not necessarily the sole or decisive one, that should be considered to grant the exception.

The second answer deals with the passive income test established for the application of the CFC rules to controlled foreign companies organized in non black listed jurisdictions.The administration explained that income from services performed to related parties, including contract manufacturing services, count as passive income to trigger the application of the rules.

Finally, the third answer, still dealing with the passive income test referred to above, explained that also income earned by a trading CFC from related party purchases or sales of tangible property is passive income for the purposes of the application of the CFC rules.

Italian multinationals should revise their international tax planning for their foreign subsidiaries to take into account the potential broadening of the CFC rules in accordance with the interpretation provided by the tax administration.

L'Agenzia allarga i confini della normativa sulle CFC

Marco Rossi — Fri, 28 Jan 2011 07:50:34 -0500

L'Agenzia delle Entrate, in sede di risposta ai quesiti dei contribuenti nell'ambito dell'iniziativa Telefisco 2011, ha fornito tre risposte in materia di normativa sulle società controllate estere ("controlled foreign companies" o "CFC") che potrebbero richiedere una completa rivisitazione della gestione fiscale dei rapporti infra gruppo delle imprese italiane multinazionali od operanti su mercati esteri.

1) La prima risposta riguarda l'applicazione dell'esimente dello svolgimento di attività economica effettiva nel paese di organizzazione della CFC. L'Agenzia aveva chiarito, con la Circolare 51 del 2010, che ai fini dell'applicazione della causa di esclusione occorre che la CFC abbia la prevalenza dei propri fornitori e clienti nel paese in cui essa è costituita.Con la risposta a Telefisco 2011, facendo riferimento a una CFC che svolge attività di produzione, l'Agenzia ha affermato che il fatto che l'attività di produzione sia prevalentemente localizzata nel paese di organizzazione della CFC è un elemento, tra gli altri, ma di per sé solo non decisivo, da prendere in esame per valutare l'applicabilità della causa di escusione.

2) La seconda risposta riguarda l'applicazione del passive income test ai fini dell'estensione della normativa CFC alle controllate estere organizzate in paesi non black list. A questo proposito, l'Agenzia ha affermato che il reddito derivante dalla prestazione di servizi infragruppo, ivi compresi servizi di lavorazione di merci per conto della casa madre (quali quelli prestati nell'ambito di rapporti di contract manufacturing) rientrano nel novero del passive income che fa potenzialmente scattare l'applicazione della normativa CFC.

3) La terza risposta riguarda l'applicazione del passive income test alle controllate estere che svolgono attività di trading, ovvero acquisto e vendita di prodotti della casa madre o del gruppo italiano, A questo proposito, l'Agenzia, adottando un'interpretazione "sostanzialistica", che assimila in sostanza quest'attività alla prestazione di servizi di vendita di prodotti per conto della casa madre dietro commissione (pari al margine di profitto che resta in capo alla controllata estera), ha affermato che anche il reddito derivante da attività di trading rientra nel novero del passive income che fa scattare l'applicazione della normativa CFC.

In conseguenza delle risposte dell'Agenzia molte imprese italiane con controllate estere che svolgono servizi di trading o lavorazione di prodotti per il gruppo devono seriamente valutare se fare istanza di interpello ai fini della disapplicazione della normativa CFC, in mancanza della quale la normativa CFC potrebbe applicarsi in via automatica con pesanti conseguenze in tema di recupero di reddito imponibile ed applicazione di maggiori imposte e conseguenti sanzioni in Italia.

Si può ottenere la disapplicazione della normativa CFC qualora si dimostri in sede di interpello che meno del 50% del reddito della controllata estera è passive income oppure che il passive income è soggetto ad un'imposta efttiva estera non inferiore al 50% della corrispondente imposta italiana.

Anche la nuda proprietà nel modulo RW

Marco Rossi — Tue, 25 Jan 2011 08:03:37 -0500

Con la Risoluzione n. 142/E del 30 dicembre 2010 l'Agenzia delle Entrate ha chiarito che anche il diritto di nuda proprietà, relativo ad attività estere di natura finanziaria ed altri ed investimenti esteri attraverso cui possono essere conseguiti redditi di fonte estera imponibili in Italia, va riportato nel modulo RW della dichiarazione dei redditi.

A sostegno del proprio chiarimento, l'Agenzia ha richiamato la Circolare 45/E del 13 Settembre 2010 in cui, con interpretazione innovativa rispetto al regime precedente, si è ritenuto che le attività estere di natura finanziaria e gli altri investimenti esteri suscettibili di produrre redditi di fonte estera imponibili in Italia debbano essere riportati sul modulo RW, non soltanto quando essi effettivamente producono redditi imponibili in Italia, ma anche nell'ipotesi in cui la produzione dei predetti redditi sia soltanto astratta o potenziale. Questo è il caso, evidentemente, del diritto di nuda proprietà, che potrebbe essere ceduto a terzi separatamente dal diritto di usufrutto, e generare in questo modo una plusvalenza imponibile, oppure espandersi al momento dell'estinzione del diritto di usufrutto con possibilità di cessione o locazione dell'intero bene a terzi.

Il diritto di nuda proprietà va dichiarato in base al costo storico ad esso attribuito nell'atto costitutivo del medesimo, senza necessità di aggiornamento annuale. La risoluzione non precisa ma in caso di acquisto del diritto per successione per causa di morte, è ragionevole ritenere che si debba guardare al costo di acquisto del bene nella sua totalità, in capo al de cuius, ed attribuirne una quota proporzionale al diritto di nuda proprietà in ipotesi trasferito separatamente al diritto di usufrutto.

Il titolare del diritto di usufrutto per parte sua deve riportare sul modulo RW il valore del proprio diritto sussistente sul medesimo bene.

Update on Italian Transfer Pricing Documentation Filing

Marco Rossi — Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:26:37 -0500

By December 28, 2010 the tax administration received 1,300 transfer pricing documentation filings. Italy has introduced transfer pricing documentation requirements and Dec. 28 was the first deadline for taxpayers to notify that they have adopted transfer pricing documentation for past tax years. The notice for the year 2010 shall be due with the regular deadline for filing the annual corporate income tax return. Of the 1,300 filings, 500 came from foreign enterprises with Italian business operations and 340 were "major taxpayers" (companies with total revenue in excess of 100 million). The total number of "major taxpayers" operating in Italy is 4,000 and an estimated 60 percent is involved in transfer pricing issues. The tax administration considers the initial response to the new law a reasonable success and expects an increasing compliance from taxpayers. Fling the transfer pricing documentation notice protects from penalties both civil and criminal in case of transfer pricing audits and adjustments.