| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font
First page > Show document

Show document Help

Title:DOPUSTNOST ČEZMEJNEGA PRENOSA SEDEŽA TER RAZDRUŽITVE STATUTARNEGA IN DEJANSKEGA SEDEŽA DRUŽBE V EVROPSKI UNIJI
Authors:ID Prostor, Jerneja (Author)
ID Kocbek, Marijan (Mentor) More about this mentor... New window
Files:.pdf MAG_Prostor_Jerneja_2013.pdf (1,25 MB)
MD5: 88607EDA56BAFB6D278BBA4E55C77185
PID: 20.500.12556/dkum/691a2a60-9ec9-432f-89c0-112313337562
 
Language:Slovenian
Work type:Master's thesis
Typology:2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization:PF - Faculty of Law
Abstract:V magistrski nalogi avtorica najprej obravnava odločbe Sodišča EU, ki so pomembne z vidika uresničevanja pravice do svobodnega ustanavljanja po pravu EU, natančneje z vidika čezmejnega prenosa sedeža družbe. Ob tem večji poudarek nameni sodni odločbi v zadevi Cartesio, pri čemer so podrobneje predstavljeni tako sklepni predlogi generalnega pravobranilca v tej zadevi, kot tudi odločitev Sodišča EU. Avtorica se v bistvenem strinja s sklepnimi predlogi generalnega pravobranilca, vendar jih Sodišče EU ni povzelo v svojo odločitev, zato je do nje zavzeto nekoliko kritično stališče. Že v dispoziciji magistrskega dela je avtorica postavila tezo, da je treba čezmejni prenos statutarnega (in dejanskega) sedeža družbe v skladu s stališči Sodišča EU v zadevi Cartesio dopuščati zgolj na podlagi določb PDEU o svobodi ustanavljanja. Julija 2012 je Sodišče EU to tezo potrdilo z odločitvijo v zadevi VALE. V magistrski nalogi je zato podrobneje analizirana tudi odločitev Sodišča EU v tej zadevi, na podlagi vseh obravnavanih sodb pa so strnjeni zaključki o dopustnosti čezmejnega prenosa sedeža družbe v EU. Analizirani so različni položaji glede na to, ali gre za priselitev dejanskega in/ali statutarnega sedeža družbe v državo članico gostiteljico ali za izselitev dejanskega in/ali statutarnega sedeža družbe iz matične države članice. Pri tem je zelo pomembno, ali država članica gostiteljica oziroma matična država članica sprejema teorijo dejanskega sedeža ali teorijo ustanovitve. Zaključki se nanašajo tako na trenutno stanje v nacionalnih zakonodajah držav članic EU kot tudi na morebitno normativno ureditev te problematike v Štirinajsti direktivi. Za sprejem tega akta si pravna stroka prizadeva že vrsto let, vendar je Evropska komisija kot predlagatelj šele za leto 2013 napovedala ponovno proučitev stanja na tem področju. Pri urejanju čezmejnega prenosa statutarnega sedeža družbe na ravni EU se kot najbolj sporno ocenjuje vprašanje načela teritorialne skladnosti sedeža družbe. Sodišče EU v svojih odločitvah namreč od njega odstopa, sprejeto pa je med drugim v Uredbi SE. Ta je v magistrskem delu obravnavana zaradi edinstvene normativne ureditve čezmejnega prenosa sedeža gospodarske družbe na ravni EU. Posebno pozornost je avtorica namenila obravnavi davčnopravnih vprašanj v zvezi s čezmejnim prenosom sedeža družbe v EU. V magistrskem delu je analizirana sodna praksa Sodišča EU v zvezi z obdavčitvijo premoženja, ki ga družba s čezmejnim prenosom sedeža prenese v državo članico gostiteljico. Prav tako je raziskana normativna davčnopravna ureditev prenosa rezidenstva družbe v drugo državo članico ob primerljivih položajih (prenosu sedeža SE, čezmejnih združitvah in delitvah), ko družba v matični državi članici ohrani poslovno enoto. Na podlagi zaključkov sodne prakse Sodišča EU in omenjene davčnopravne normativne ureditve je avtorica v magistrskem delu oblikovala smernice, ki naj bi jih matične države članice upoštevale pri: (1) obdavčenju prenosa premoženja družbe v drugo državo članico ob čezmejnem prenosu sedeža družbe in (2) davčni obravnavi poslovne enote družbe, ki po čezmejnem prenosu sedeža ostane na ozemlju matične države članice. Ta stališča bi bilo treba upoštevati tudi ob snovanju sprememb Direktive 2009/133 zaradi morebitnega sprejema Štirinajste direktive, s čimer bi bila odpravljena pravna negotovost, ki sedaj spremlja družbe s težnjo po čezmejnem prenosu sedeža v EU.
Keywords:svoboda ustanavljanja, čezmejni prenos dejanskega sedeža družbe, čezmejni prenos statutarnega sedeža družbe, Cartesio, National Grid Indus, VALE, SE, Štirinajsta direktiva, obdavčitev
Place of publishing:Maribor
Publisher:[J. Prostor]
Year of publishing:2013
PID:20.500.12556/DKUM-39908 New window
UDC:347.72(043.2)
COBISS.SI-ID:4503851 New window
NUK URN:URN:SI:UM:DK:EWK3F2HS
Publication date in DKUM:19.03.2013
Views:4003
Downloads:960
Metadata:XML DC-XML DC-RDF
Categories:PF
:
PROSTOR, Jerneja, 2013, DOPUSTNOST ČEZMEJNEGA PRENOSA SEDEŽA TER RAZDRUŽITVE STATUTARNEGA IN DEJANSKEGA SEDEŽA DRUŽBE V EVROPSKI UNIJI [online]. Master’s thesis. Maribor : J. Prostor. [Accessed 4 April 2025]. Retrieved from: https://dk.um.si/IzpisGradiva.php?lang=eng&id=39908
Copy citation
  
Average score:
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
(0 votes)
Your score:Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:Bookmark and Share


Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Secondary language

Language:English
Title:The Admissibility of the Cross-border Transfer of the Company’s Seat and the Separation of the Registered Office and the Real Seat in EU
Abstract:In this master thesis the authoress at first analyses the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU, which is important as regards freedom of establishment, more precisely the cross-border transfer of company’s seat. The Cartesio case has been analysed in greater detail, thereby the authoress discusses the opinion of Advocate General, which is in several points covered with her view. Otherwise the authoress has been critical to the judgement in Cartesio case, since it rejected the opinion of the Advocate General. The disposition of the thesis suggested the admissibility of cross-border transfer of company’s registered office (with its real seat) in line with the judgement in Cartesio case solely on the basis of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. In July 2012 the Court of Justice of the EU confirmed this thesis with its judgement in VALE case. Therefore this case has also been analysed in greater detail, while the authoress researching this case and in the light of the relevant case law draws the conclusions regarding the admissibility of cross-border transfer of company’s seat. Different views has been discussed, depending on the immigration of the company’s real seat and/or the company’s registered office to the host Member State or the emigration of the company’s real seat and/or the company’s registered office from the Member State of origin. It is of great importance whether the host Member State or the Member State of origin accepts the real seat theory or the incorporation theory. The conclusions concern the current state in national regulations of the Member States and the possible future steps regarding the adoption of the Fourteenth Directive. Legal science has been recommending the adoption of this directive for several years, nevertheless the European Commission as the proposer yet in 2013 announced the reassessment of these initiatives. The principle of territorial coincide of the company’s seat is considered to be the most controversial issue in regulating the cross-border transfer of company’s registered office. It has not been followed in the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU, although it is accepted in the SE Regulation. This regulation has been dealt with in the master thesis for its unique regulatory framework for cross-border transfer of company’s registered office at the EU level. The special attention in this master thesis has been given to taxation issues regarding cross-border transfer of the company’s seat in EU. The case law of the Court of Justice of the EU which is important for the taxation of the transferred assets occured with the transfere of the company’s seat to a host Member State has been analysed. The regulatory framework of the taxation of the transfer of the company’s residency to another Member State at comparable situations (transfer of the SE’s seat, cross-border mergers and divisions), when the company maintain its place of business in the Member State of origin, has been researched as well. Based on the findings of the relevant case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU and the above mentioned comparable taxation regulation the authoress suggests some guidelines that Member States of origin should consider in: (1) taxation of the transferred assets to another Member State occurred with the cross-border transfer of the company’s seat and (2) tax treatment of the company’s place of business, which is maintained in the Member State of origin after the cross-border transfer of the company’s seat. These views should be taken into account while drawing up amendments to Directive 2009/133 followed by the possible adoption of the Fourteenth Directive, which would eliminate the legal uncertainty that currently affects companies with the tendency for cross-border transfer of the seat in EU.
Keywords:freedom of establishment, cross-border transfer of real seat, cross-border transfer of registered office, Cartesio, National Grid Indus, VALE, SE, Fourteenth Directive, taxation


Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)
0 - 0 / 0
 
There are no comments!

Back
Logos of partners University of Maribor University of Ljubljana University of Primorska University of Nova Gorica