Opinion Statement ECJ-TF 1/2022 on the CJEU Decision of 25 November 2021 in case C-437/19, état luxembourgeois v L, on the conditions for information requests and taxpayer remedies

João Félix Pinto Nogueira; Francisco Alfredo Garcia Prats; Werner C. Haslehner; Volker Heydt; Eric Kemmeren; Georg Kofler; Michael Lang; Christiana HJI Panayi; Emmanuel Raingeard de la Blétière; Stella Raventos-Calvo; Isabelle Richelle; Alexander Rust; Rupert Shiers

doi:10.2139/ssrn.4017710

Opinion Statement ECJ-TF 1/2022 on the CJEU Decision of 25 November 2021 in case C-437/19, état luxembourgeois v L, on the conditions for information requests and taxpayer remedies

João Félix Pinto Nogueira
, Francisco Alfredo Garcia Prats
, Werner C. Haslehner
, Volker Heydt
, Eric Kemmeren
, Georg Kofler
, Michael Lang
, Christiana HJI Panayi
, Emmanuel Raingeard de la Blétière
, Stella Raventos-Calvo
, Isabelle Richelle
, Alexander Rust
, Rupert Shiers

Resultado de pesquisa: ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.workingpaper.preprint???

46 Transferências (Pure)

Resumo

The CFE Tax Advisers Europe welcomes the judgment of the Court as it provides further clarification on the legal protection of the information holders afforded by Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in cases of cross-border exchange of information. Article 47 of the Charter guarantees that national courts can review the cross-border information request in order to assess its legality and also that the information holder must be able to ascertain the reasons upon which the order they receive is based. Moreover, the CFE Tax Advisers Europe welcomes the illumination regarding the concept of “foreseeable relevance”, but also notes that additional clarification will be needed to distinguish permissible group requests from illegal “fishing expeditions”.

Idioma original	English
Editora	SSRN
Páginas	1-8
Número de páginas	8
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4017710
Estado da publicação	Publicado - 22 mar. 2022

ODS da ONU

Este resultado contribui para o(s) seguinte(s) Objetivo(s) de Desenvolvimento Sustentável

ODS 17 Parcerias para os objetivos

Acesso ao documento

10.2139/ssrn.4017710Licença: Unspecified

53410356Final published version, 352 KBLicença: Unspecified

http://hdl.handle.net/10400.14/39199Licença: Unspecified

Impressão digital

Mergulhe nos tópicos de investigação de “Opinion Statement ECJ-TF 1/2022 on the CJEU Decision of 25 November 2021 in case C-437/19, état luxembourgeois v L, on the conditions for information requests and taxpayer remedies“. Em conjunto formam uma impressão digital única.

CEID-CRCFL: Católica Research Centre for the Future of Law
Pais, S. O. (Professor Associado), Costa, A. C. R. (Professor Auxiliar Convidado), Afonso, A. (Professor Auxiliar), Ribeiro, A. T. (PI), Martins, A. A. (Professor Auxiliar Convidado), Guedes, A. (Professor Associado), Sousa, A. F. D. (Professor Auxiliar), Triunfante, A. (Professor Auxiliar), Botelho, C. S. (Professor Auxiliar), Fraipont, C. D. (Estudante), Tavares, E. (Estudante), Ferreira, A. S. (Estudante), Antunes, A. F. M. (PI), Fonseca, A. (PI), Abrantes, A. M. (Estudante), Amaro, A. E. L. (Bolseiro), Cortês, A. U. (Professor Associado), Rocha, A. (Professor Auxiliar), Baldé, A. (Estudante), Sardinha, C. (Professor Auxiliar), Lucena, C. (Estudante), Sequeira, E. V. D. (Professor Auxiliar), Ferreira-Pinto, F. A. (Professor Auxiliar), Calvão, F. (Professor Associado), Alves, F. C. (Docente Assistente Convidado), Ribeiro, G. A. (Professor Auxiliar), Matias, G. (Professor Auxiliar), Ferreira, H. P. (Estudante), Salinas, H. (Professor Auxiliar), Antunes, H. S. (Professor Associado), Sousa, I. P. D. (Docente Assistente Convidado), Costa, I. G. (Estudante), Duarte, I. T. (Bolseiro), Dalhuisen, J. (Professor Visitante), Geng, J. (Estudante), Vasconcelos, J. (Professor Associado), Gomes, J. S. (Estudante), Lopes, J. F. (Estudante), Silva, J. P. D. (Professor Auxiliar), Lopes, J. A. (Professor Associado), Moutinho, J. L. (Professor Associado), Antunes, J. E. (Professor Associado), Proença, J. C. B. (Professor Associado Convidado), Estaca, J. (Estudante), Domingos, J. L. (Estudante), Cunha, J. D. D. (Professor Associado), Rodrigues, J. (Estudante), Taborda, J. (Estudante), Araújo, L. (Estudante), Fábrica, L. (Professor Auxiliar), Naia, L. R. (Bolseiro), Campos, M. F. (Professor Associado), Queiroz, B. M. (Professor Auxiliar), Cunha, M. D. C. (Professor Associado), Baptista, D. (Professor Auxiliar), Ribeiro, M. D. F. (Professor Associado), Ferreira, M. E. (Professor Auxiliar), Quadros, I. (Professor Auxiliar), Tavares, M. I. (Professor Auxiliar), Campos, I. M. (Professor Auxiliar), Martins, M. D. (Professor Auxiliar), Faria, M. P. R. D. (Professor Associado), Xavier, R. (Professor Catedrático), Faria, R. L. D. (Professor Auxiliar), Rocha, V. (Professor Auxiliar), Almeida, M. A. D. (Professor Catedrático), Domingos, M. P. (Bolseiro), Rosas, M. (Docente Assistente Convidado), Portocarrero, M. (Professor Auxiliar), Rouxinol, M. (Professor Auxiliar), Alija, N. (Estudante), Silva, N. S. E. (Professor Auxiliar Convidado), Martins, P. F. (Professor Auxiliar), Pichel, P. (Docente Assistente Convidado), Cunha, P. O. (Professor Associado), Albuquerque, P. P. D. (Professor Catedrático), Marques, P. G. (Professor Auxiliar), Machete, P. (Professor Associado), Gomes, P. C. (Professor Auxiliar Convidado), Freitas, P. (Professor Auxiliar), Carvalho, R. (Professor Associado), Moreira, R. R. (Bolseiro), Andrade, R. (Docente Assistente Convidado), Morais, R. D. (Professor Catedrático), Medeiros, R. (Professor Catedrático), Duarte, R. P. (Professor Catedrático), Carvalho, C. D. O. (Professor Associado), Tavares, S. (Professor Auxiliar), Vasques, S. (Professor Associado), Venda, S. B. E. (Estudante), Maltez, S. (Bolseiro), Rendas, T. (Professor Auxiliar Convidado), Tavares, T. (Professor Auxiliar), Ventura, V. (Estudante) & Nogueira, J. F. P. (Professor Auxiliar)
1/01/20 → 31/12/25
Projeto

Opinion Statement ECJ-TF 1/2022 on the ECJ decision of 25 November 2021 in État Luxembourgeois v. L (Case C-437/19) on the conditions for information requests and taxpayer remedies
Kofler, G., Prats, A. G., Haslehner, W., Heydt, V., Kemmeren, E., Lang, M., Nogueira, J., Panayi, C. H. J. I., Raventós-Calvo, S., Richelle, I., Rust, A. & Shiers, R., mai. 2022, Em: European Taxation. 2022, 5, p. 219-223 5 p.
Resultado de pesquisa › revisão de pares

Citação

Nogueira, J. F. P., Prats, F. A. G., Haslehner, W. C., Heydt, V., Kemmeren, E., Kofler, G., Lang, M., Panayi, C. HJI., Blétière, E. R. D. L., Raventos-Calvo, S., Richelle, I., Rust, A., & Shiers, R. (2022). Opinion Statement ECJ-TF 1/2022 on the CJEU Decision of 25 November 2021 in case C-437/19, état luxembourgeois v L, on the conditions for information requests and taxpayer remedies. (pp. 1-8). SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4017710

@techreport{71084455062c418397a3fa5fc8477c02,

title = "Opinion Statement ECJ-TF 1/2022 on the CJEU Decision of 25 November 2021 in case C-437/19, {\'e}tat luxembourgeois v L, on the conditions for information requests and taxpayer remedies",

abstract = "The CFE Tax Advisers Europe welcomes the judgment of the Court as it provides further clarification on the legal protection of the information holders afforded by Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in cases of cross-border exchange of information. Article 47 of the Charter guarantees that national courts can review the cross-border information request in order to assess its legality and also that the information holder must be able to ascertain the reasons upon which the order they receive is based. Moreover, the CFE Tax Advisers Europe welcomes the illumination regarding the concept of “foreseeable relevance”, but also notes that additional clarification will be needed to distinguish permissible group requests from illegal “fishing expeditions”.",

keywords = "Taxation, Tax law, European taxation, Exchange of information, OECD",

author = "Nogueira, \{Jo{\~a}o F{\'e}lix Pinto\} and Prats, \{Francisco Alfredo Garcia\} and Haslehner, \{Werner C.\} and Volker Heydt and Eric Kemmeren and Georg Kofler and Michael Lang and Panayi, \{Christiana HJI\} and Bl{\'e}ti{\`e}re, \{Emmanuel Raingeard de la\} and Stella Raventos-Calvo and Isabelle Richelle and Alexander Rust and Rupert Shiers",

year = "2022",

month = mar,

day = "22",

doi = "10.2139/ssrn.4017710",

language = "English",

pages = "1--8",

publisher = "SSRN",

type = "WorkingPaper",

institution = "SSRN",

}

Nogueira, JFP, Prats, FAG, Haslehner, WC, Heydt, V, Kemmeren, E, Kofler, G, Lang, M, Panayi, CHJI, Blétière, ERDL, Raventos-Calvo, S, Richelle, I, Rust, A & Shiers, R 2022 'Opinion Statement ECJ-TF 1/2022 on the CJEU Decision of 25 November 2021 in case C-437/19, état luxembourgeois v L, on the conditions for information requests and taxpayer remedies' SSRN, pp. 1-8. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4017710

Opinion Statement ECJ-TF 1/2022 on the CJEU Decision of 25 November 2021 in case C-437/19, état luxembourgeois v L, on the conditions for information requests and taxpayer remedies. / Nogueira, João Félix Pinto; Prats, Francisco Alfredo Garcia; Haslehner, Werner C. et al.
SSRN, 2022. p. 1-8.

Resultado de pesquisa: ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.workingpaper.preprint???

TY - UNPB

T1 - Opinion Statement ECJ-TF 1/2022 on the CJEU Decision of 25 November 2021 in case C-437/19, état luxembourgeois v L, on the conditions for information requests and taxpayer remedies

AU - Nogueira, João Félix Pinto

AU - Prats, Francisco Alfredo Garcia

AU - Haslehner, Werner C.

AU - Heydt, Volker

AU - Kemmeren, Eric

AU - Kofler, Georg

AU - Lang, Michael

AU - Panayi, Christiana HJI

AU - Blétière, Emmanuel Raingeard de la

AU - Raventos-Calvo, Stella

AU - Richelle, Isabelle

AU - Rust, Alexander

AU - Shiers, Rupert

PY - 2022/3/22

Y1 - 2022/3/22

N2 - The CFE Tax Advisers Europe welcomes the judgment of the Court as it provides further clarification on the legal protection of the information holders afforded by Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in cases of cross-border exchange of information. Article 47 of the Charter guarantees that national courts can review the cross-border information request in order to assess its legality and also that the information holder must be able to ascertain the reasons upon which the order they receive is based. Moreover, the CFE Tax Advisers Europe welcomes the illumination regarding the concept of “foreseeable relevance”, but also notes that additional clarification will be needed to distinguish permissible group requests from illegal “fishing expeditions”.

AB - The CFE Tax Advisers Europe welcomes the judgment of the Court as it provides further clarification on the legal protection of the information holders afforded by Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in cases of cross-border exchange of information. Article 47 of the Charter guarantees that national courts can review the cross-border information request in order to assess its legality and also that the information holder must be able to ascertain the reasons upon which the order they receive is based. Moreover, the CFE Tax Advisers Europe welcomes the illumination regarding the concept of “foreseeable relevance”, but also notes that additional clarification will be needed to distinguish permissible group requests from illegal “fishing expeditions”.

KW - Taxation

KW - Tax law

KW - European taxation

KW - Exchange of information

KW - OECD

U2 - 10.2139/ssrn.4017710

DO - 10.2139/ssrn.4017710

M3 - Preprint

SP - 1

EP - 8

BT - Opinion Statement ECJ-TF 1/2022 on the CJEU Decision of 25 November 2021 in case C-437/19, état luxembourgeois v L, on the conditions for information requests and taxpayer remedies

PB - SSRN

ER -

Opinion Statement ECJ-TF 1/2022 on the CJEU Decision of 25 November 2021 in case C-437/19, état luxembourgeois v L, on the conditions for information requests and taxpayer remedies

Resumo

ODS da ONU

Acesso ao documento

Impressão digital

Projetos

CEID-CRCFL: Católica Research Centre for the Future of Law

Resultado de pesquisa

Opinion Statement ECJ-TF 1/2022 on the ECJ decision of 25 November 2021 in État Luxembourgeois v. L (Case C-437/19) on the conditions for information requests and taxpayer remedies

Citação