| Abstract [eng] |
This master's thesis analyzes the general and specific anti-avoidance rules (including exit taxation, rules for controlling foreign companies, and hybrid mismatches), their objectives, applications, and relationships in Lithuania, along with the main instruments used to implement these rules at both international and national levels. It is noted that close cooperation between different countries facilitates taxpayers in establishing and operating in multiple jurisdictions. However, in the context of direct taxation, tax systems are not harmonized or fully aligned, allowing taxpayers to exploit existing differences to gain tax advantages. This practice is frowned upon by the international community, as countries that impose higher tax rates or offer less favorable tax treatment lose significant amounts of budget revenue each year. The paper highlights that some of the most significant documents in the field of direct tax standardization are the OECD BEPS Action Plan and Directive (EU) 2016/1164, adopted in 2016, which Lithuania has gradually implemented by adding new anti-avoidance rules (one general and five specific) to its national tax legislation. An analysis of current case law, the works of legal scholars, and interpretations by the tax administration leads to the conclusion that the general rules apply to a wide range of cases but require tax administrators to prove instances of tax abuse. In contrast, the application of the specific rules analyzed in this paper does not necessitate such proof, making the application of specific rules more favorable to the tax administration. Accordingly, the general rules are not self-executing, unlike the specific rules, which impose clear requirements on taxpayers for their application. Finally, the intensity of the interpretation of the specific rules is noteworthy, as not all of them are subject to case law or the tax administrator's position, making the general rules clearer in this respect than the specific rules. |
