Having a network of double tax treaties (DTTs) helps countries work together when it comes to taxes, as DTTs aim to prevent the double taxation of income earned by individuals or companies doing business in two or more countries.
As for the latest developments in international taxation, in this article we will take a closer look at the technical aspects of the most-favoured-nation (MFN) clause, which is found in just a few DTTs and from October 2024 has been implemented in the DTT between France and Latvia. We will also look at the significance of the MFN regime for French companies wishing to expand their operations in Latvia.
The MFN clause in a DTT ensures that if one of the signatories offers a more favourable tax regime to a third country, the same treatment will be extended to the other signatory.
Here is how it works:
The French tax authority has announced the activation of the MFN regime in the France–Latvia DTT, as it contains the MFN clause. This change is due to the Japan–Latvia DTT signed in 2017, which offers more favourable terms for bank loan interest payments and royalties. Such payments between France and Latvia will be exempt from withholding taxes in their country of origin, as prescribed by the Japan–Latvia DTT.
The definition of royalty income in the France–Latvia DTT has been updated to make it consistent with the definition in the Japan–Latvia DTT by deleting payments for the use of or for the right to use copyright in radio and television recordings and films, as well as for the use of or for the right to use industrial, commercial or scientific equipment. From a legal perspective, these rules are applicable from 5 July 2017, when the Japan–Latvia DTT came into force, i.e. the MFN regime has retrospective effect.
Activating the MFN regime in the France–Latvia DTT will be relevant to companies operating in both countries.
French companies doing business in Latvia are likely to save more tax with the MFN regime. Since neither France nor Latvia currently withholds tax on interest paid to a resident of the other country, these changes make us pay attention to the terms of other Latvian DTTs and the scope for applying a more favourable regime.
The MFN regime is important for Latvian companies receiving royalties from French tax residents because radio and television recordings and films, as well as payments for the use of industrial, commercial or scientific equipment will be exempt.
Finally, although the MFN regime in DTTs is rarely used, its recent activation in the France–Latvia DTT suggests a desire to develop the international cooperation between French and Latvian companies. This is a welcome move that will promote fair competition and reduce tax barriers possibly resulting from the application of international taxes. So we encourage companies, especially those having close business ties with French companies, to explore potential tax benefits these changes can bring. PwC has a team of experts standing by to help you understand and evaluate the impact of the MFN regime on your company.
If you have any comments on this article please email them to lv_mindlink@pwc.com
Ask questionWhat are the most common errors in corporate income tax (CIT) treatment? And what controls can be used to avoid them? Episode 43 of PwC’s Tax Podcast features PwC tax director Irena Arbidane and senior consultant Tatjana Klimovica discussing the impact of common CIT errors on companies and exploring tax risks associated with management and consulting services.
Belarus has unilaterally decided to suspend the operation of certain articles of its double tax treaties (DTTs) with 27 countries from 1 June 2024. This article explores the status of the Belarus-Latvia DTT and the list of affected countries.
On 17 October 2023 the EU amended its blacklist of uncooperative tax havens that are subject to special taxation procedures. The blacklist now contains 16 jurisdictions, including Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, the Republic of Seychelles, and Russia. As 2023 saw the list being amended several times, there are certain tax aspects that may raise questions, yet national law does not always provide the answers. In this article we take a look at what the Ministry of Finance (MOF) and the State Revenue Service (SRS) think about the tax treatment of a Latvian-resident individual’s income from a substantial participation in a foreign company, including dividends from a blacklisted tax haven.
We use cookies to make our site work well for you and so we can continually improve it. The cookies that keep the site functioning are always on. We use analytics and marketing cookies to help us understand what content is of most interest and to personalise your user experience.
It’s your choice to accept these or not. You can either click the 'I accept all’ button below or use the switches to choose and save your choices.
For detailed information on how we use cookies and other tracking technologies, please visit our cookies information page.
These cookies are necessary for the website to operate. Our website cannot function without these cookies and they can only be disabled by changing your browser preferences.
These cookies allow us to measure and report on website activity by tracking page visits, visitor locations and how visitors move around the site. The information collected does not directly identify visitors. We drop these cookies and use Adobe to help us analyse the data.
These cookies help us provide you with personalised and relevant services or advertising, and track the effectiveness of our digital marketing activities.