Tax Treaty Case Law around the Globe 2014
1. Aufl. 2015
Besitzen Sie diesen Inhalt bereits,
melden Sie sich an.
oder schalten Sie Ihr Produkt zur digitalen Nutzung frei.
Part One Tax Treaty Interpretation and Permanent Establishment
S. 1Chapter 1 Spain: Are Activities in Vessels, Geographically Concentrated Areas and Director's Homes PEs?
Adolfo Martín Jiménez
1.1. Introduction
In the judgment of the Audiencia Nacional (AN) of , 169/2010, the main issue was whether an Estonian company (M) had a permanent establishment (PE) in Spain. The controversy refers to tax years (2000-2001) in which the tax treaty between Spain and Estonia was not in force (the treaty entered into force on 28 December 2004 and was applicable as of 1 January 2005). The fact that the case refers to tax years prior to the applicability of the tax convention is not very relevant since the domestic definition of "permanent establishment" was modelled on article 5 of the OECD Model and the Spanish tax authorities as well as courts usually take into account the OECD's materials to interpret not only the PE concept in tax treaties but also the domestic definition., This was certainly the case in the judgment by the AN of . As a consequence, the decision by the AN would have probably been the same if the factual pattern of the case referred to years covered by the S...