지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This paper analyzes German tax system of corporate restructuring and corporate demerger by case law, focusing on Company Split-Up (Betriebsaufspaltung). The Company Split-Up used to refer to the untypical division - in a particular way of letting essential assets - of a company formerly operated as a single business into two separateand independent legal entities: a possession company (formerly original company) and operating company. This Company Split-Up is often used to avoid the unlimited liability and the taxable realization of unrealized gain.
According to decisions of the German Federal Tax Court (BFH), the Company Split-Up means the lease of entire business or letting a part of it without any change in its interest, but from the functional standpoint, an essential asset to the operating company is treated as his own business activity. Therefore, the profits derived from the lease or letting are sufficient to be deemed as not an income from the lease of property, but a business income. It is assumed that the lease of real estate is almost always qualified as essential assets.
The realization of unrealized gain does not occur until the end of Company Split-Up. This would raise serious tax issues and it may bring a situation that a possession company must sell its essential assets or even the possession company itself. To avoid this problem, the German Federal Tax Court utilizes the system of the German tax credit on the ground of equity, namely the divergent assessment of taxes on the equitable ground, according to Section 163 and 227 of the Fiscal Code of Germany. However, we could also find its systematic errors that arose from exceeding the constitutional limit of legal interpretation and judicial lawmaking.
According to decisions of the German Federal Tax Court (BFH), the Company Split-Up means the lease of entire business or letting a part of it without any change in its interest, but from the functional standpoint, an essential asset to the operating company is treated as his own business activity. Therefore, the profits derived from the lease or letting are sufficient to be deemed as not an income from the lease of property, but a business income. It is assumed that the lease of real estate is almost always qualified as essential assets.
The realization of unrealized gain does not occur until the end of Company Split-Up. This would raise serious tax issues and it may bring a situation that a possession company must sell its essential assets or even the possession company itself. To avoid this problem, the German Federal Tax Court utilizes the system of the German tax credit on the ground of equity, namely the divergent assessment of taxes on the equitable ground, according to Section 163 and 227 of the Fiscal Code of Germany. However, we could also find its systematic errors that arose from exceeding the constitutional limit of legal interpretation and judicial lawmaking.
목차
<국문초록>
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 독일의 기업분할세제에 대한 개관
Ⅲ. 영업분할(Betriebsaufspaltung)에 대한 과세
Ⅳ. 영업분할의 종료에 따른 과세
Ⅴ. 요약 및 시사점
<참고문헌>
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
The Limitations of Tax Law Interpretation in Germany
Sebastian Muelle
,
-F
,
anken
조세학술논집
2014
.06
The Taxation of Foreign Passive Income for Groups of Companies in Korea
Kyung Geun Lee
,
Hyejung Byun
조세학술논집
2014
.02
개정 법인세법의 會社分割 稅制관련 검토
김성균
중앙법학
2010
.12
개정 법인세법의 합병(合倂) 세제(稅制) 관련 검토
김성균
중앙법학
2010
.09
Quentin Skinner’s Peculiar Positivism : Speech Act Theory as a Lakatosian Research Programme
Benjamin C. Thompson
정치사상연구
2014
.11
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2015-320-002821474