The French Constitutional Court ("Conseil Constitutionnel") issued a decision holding that a French anti-avoidance tax provision, known as the “Charasse amendement”—that prohibits the deduction of part of the interest charge borne by a French tax group for the acquisition of the shares of a French company that was not previously member of the tax group from a company that controls the acquiring company or is under common control with the acquiring company—was constitutional.
Read the decision (French) issued on 20 April 2018.
Article 223B §6 of the French tax law is known as the “Charasse amendement” providing that:
The aim of the “Charasse amendement” is to address a perceived tax abuse in connection with favorably locating the financial expenses of the tax group.
A challenge to the “Charasse amendement” was submitted to the Constitutional Court by France’s highest administrative court (“Conseil d’Etat”) on the basis that the provision automatically applies when the factual conditions (noted above) are met and could therefore be contrary to article 13 of the Declaration of Human and Civic Rights (that provides for the constitutional principle of equality of citizens before the law). Read TaxNewsFlash-Europe
At issue was whether the absence of a safe harbor clause in the application of what has been known as the “Charasse trap” as codified under article 223B §6 of the French tax law, could be considered as contrary to the French Constitution.
In its decision (20 April 2018) the French Constitutional Court answered that the absence of a safe harbor clause was not contrary to the provisions of the French Constitution.
The Constitutional Court considered that the aim of the provision was appropriate to avoid a situation when, in a transaction that is financed by borrowings, interest related to the acquisition borrowing is set off against the inclusion of the income results of the acquired company in the results of the tax group. The intention of the French measure was, in the court’s opinion, appropriate to avoid additional tax benefits.
The Constitutional Court noted that to the extent that:
then the French law used what were found to be rational and objective criteria in order to meet the objectives.
The Constitutional Court concluded that there was no infringement of the principle of equality for taxpayers to finance public spending and that article 223B §6 conformed to the rules of the French Constitution.
For more information, contact a tax professional with Fidal in France or with KPMG in the United States:
Olivier Ferrari | +33 1 55 68 14 76 | firstname.lastname@example.org
Gilles Galinier-Warrain | +33 1 55 68 16 54 | email@example.com
Laurent Leclercq | +33 1 55 68 16 42 | firstname.lastname@example.org
Bruno Bacrot | +33 1 47 38 89 96 | email@example.com
Patrick Seroin | +1 (212) 954-2523 | firstname.lastname@example.org
* Fidal is a French law firm that is independent from KPMG and its member firms.
The KPMG logo and name are trademarks of KPMG International. KPMG International is a Swiss cooperative that serves as a coordinating entity for a network of independent member firms. KPMG International provides no audit or other client services. Such services are provided solely by member firms in their respective geographic areas. KPMG International and its member firms are legally distinct and separate entities. They are not and nothing contained herein shall be construed to place these entities in the relationship of parents, subsidiaries, agents, partners, or joint venturers. No member firm has any authority (actual, apparent, implied or otherwise) to obligate or bind KPMG International or any member firm in any manner whatsoever. The information contained in herein is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavor to provide accurate and timely information, there can be no guarantee that such information is accurate as of the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. No one should act on such information without appropriate professional advice after a thorough examination of the particular situation. For more information, contact KPMG's Federal Tax Legislative and Regulatory Services Group at: + 1 202 533 4366, 1801 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20006.