| Abstract [eng] |
The Master's thesis analyses the new EU draft directive proposals (BEFIT and Unshell) and the OECD-G20 BEPS 2.0 Pillar 1 project by examining legal doctrine, EU Commission and Parliament reports, media reports, other EU legislation, including adopted directives and pending directive proposals, OECD sources and political and economic trends, and some EU jurisprudence. It also focuses on national corporate tax regulation, the historical development of direct tax harmonisation, EU competence issues in the field of direct tax harmonisation, and the impact of political trends on new draft legislation. The main problem of the Master's thesis is the inconsistency of the rules of the new proposals with the desired orientations due to the desire of the states to tilt the rules of the projects in their favour in the new era of corporate taxation. The proposals aimed at harmonising the corporate tax base (Pillar 1 and BEFIT) create tensions, especially between the rules on the redistribution of corporation tax, so that the aim and direction of the project is relegated to a secondary role in the attempt to find a common low point (the current Pillar 1 rules do not cover the majority of companies in the digital economy), or the lowest common point cannot be reached at all due to the existence of red lines that can be maintained by states because of their political weight (in the case of BEFIT, the right of veto is vested in each member state, because it consolidates in primary EU law). In contrast, the situation with the Unshell project is milder, as there is almost no conflict of interest between EU Member States on the purpose of the project, but loopholes in the legislative rules prevent the project from being implemented, so with the improvement of the Unshell rules, it is likely that the project will go ahead. |
