The ” Google tax “, it is censored. This provision, which would have applied only to companies erected by the tax authorities, sought to create a “new tax 38,33 % on profits diverted” to foreign countries.
The government can blow. Its budget 2017 has passed almost without a hitch on the review of the constitutional Council. First, it was considered sincere by the Sages, while the elected members of the right disagreed with this point. However, it is the lip that the Sages have dubbed the last finance act of the quinquennium. “If the assumptions for 2016 and 2017 may be regarded as optimistic, especially in regards to the deficit for 2017, the forecast and the available evidence do not, however, to conclude that these assumptions are fraught with an intention to distort the broad outlines of the balance of the law of finance,” says the Council.
The constitutional Council considers that there is “contrary to respect for the private life of the taxpayer”. But he considers that “such infringement is justified by the general interest”
There is an article, a particularly heavy one, the law of finance by 2017 on which the decision of the guarantor of the Constitution was expected: the collection at the source. The last tax reform of the mandate of François Hollande has not been affected by the Wise. The transmission of the sampling rate taxpayers to their employer posed a problem, after the elect of right, challenging the reform. The constitutional Council considers that there is “contrary to respect for the private life of the taxpayer”. But he considers that “such infringement is justified by the general interest which attaches to the implementation of the levy at the source to avoid that taxpayers suffer a one year lag between the collection of revenues and the payment of the tax.” The Sages add that the employee can choose a “neutral rate” if he doesn’t want his tax rate to be communicated to his employer. The Board notes, however, that it is expressed that “on ly on the grievances laid out by the senators and deputies, authors of the appeal”. The other points will be the subject of priority issues of constitutionality”. As for the act working, the case is not closed.
The censorship the most important of the “Google tax”, being pushed by the socialist deputy Yann Galut and against which a long struggle of the ministry of Finance. This provision, which would have applied only to companies erected by the tax authorities, sought to create a “new tax 38,33 % on profits diverted to foreign countries through transfer pricing abuse. This accounting technique is to make up the bulk of the profits of a French subsidiary to its parent company, installed in a high-tax countries more favourable. However, down by the constitutional Council, the legislature “could not have (…) leave to the tax administration the power to choose the taxpayers who should or should not fall within the scope of application of the tax on companies”. The new measures to curb tax optimization in terms of ISF, via a holding company, have been approved by the Board.