Back

13 December 2005 — Publication

National tax legislations on CFCs imposes upon a company resident in a member state a tax charge for the profits of its subsidiaries which are resident in another member state and subject to a lower level of taxation. Ahead of the hearing of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the Cadbury-Schweppes case, due to take place on 13 December 2005, FEE has published a number of observations regarding Controlled Foreign Company (CFC) legislation in Europe. FEE questions whether such legislations are consistent with the principles of articles 43, 49 and 56 of the EC Treaty. The publication is available in electronic format only. Observations on ECJ Pending Case C –196/04

National tax legislations on CFCs imposes upon a company resident in a member state a tax charge for the profits of its subsidiaries which are resident in another member state and subject to a lower level of taxation. Ahead of the hearing of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the Cadbury-Schweppes case, due to take place on 13 December 2005, FEE has published a number of observations regarding Controlled Foreign Company (CFC) legislation in Europe. FEE questions whether such legislations are consistent with the principles of articles 43, 49 and 56 of the EC Treaty. The publication is available in electronic format only. Observations on ECJ Pending Case C –196/04

National tax legislations on CFCs imposes upon a company resident in a member state a tax charge for the profits of its subsidiaries which are resident in another member state and subject to a lower level of taxation.

Ahead of the hearing of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the Cadbury-Schweppes case, due to take place on 13 December 2005, FEE has published a number of observations regarding Controlled Foreign Company (CFC) legislation in Europe.

FEE questions whether such legislations are consistent with the principles of articles 43, 49 and 56 of the EC Treaty.

The publication is available in electronic format only.

Observations on ECJ Pending Case C –196/04