By decision of Parliament Speaker I. Murniece, the double tax treaty (DTT) and its protocol have been suspended indefinitely from 16 May. The decision makes unavailable from this date the DTT and national reliefs that provided for an exemption on the basis that Russia had a DTT with Latvia. In this article we explore how this decision affects paying taxes. And we note that the Latvia-Russia social security agreement is still in force (link here).
The DTT suspension affects the following taxes:
- Corporate profit tax
- Personal income tax
- Corporate property tax
- Personal property tax
- Corporate income tax
- Personal income tax
- Real estate tax
The DTT suspension has the effect of cancelling DTT reliefs and restrictions on taxation as well as references in the national legislation to Russia as a country that has an effective DTT with Latvia. Below we offer a couple of examples where you can see the effects of the suspension. While these examples are not final, they give some insight into the tax treatment that Latvian tax-resident companies and individuals will face when receiving income or when making or receiving payments from Russia. This article ignores the potential impact of sanctions and the ability of Latvian residents to cooperate with Russian residents.
Because of the DTT suspension, for CIT purposes we will only have our national legislation to rely on, i.e. provisions of the CIT Act. Changes will affect the taxation of several types of income, for instance, a 20% withholding tax when paying management or consulting fees to Russian tax residents. Previously, a Latvian company holding the recipient’s Russian tax residency certificate was released from the obligation to withhold tax on those fees under DTT article 7. Given the DTT suspension, the CIT rates will now be applied, so the Russian company will receive the agreed fee minus 20%.
Changes will also affect the application of section 9 of the CIT Act. A Russian debtor could be excluded from the CIT base under section 9(3)(1) as a person from a country that had a DTT with Latvia. The section 9(3) exemption for Russian debtors is no longer available.
As the DTT suspension affects income gained from 16 May 2022 onwards, these changes will not affect the preparation and filing of the PIT return for 2021. Income gained before 16 May 2022 will have to be separated from income gained after this date because taxes apply differently. As stated above, in assessing the tax treatment, we now have to rely on our national legislation, i.e. the PIT Act.
The PIT treatment of the following types of income, for instance, is affected:
A list of all double tax treaties with links to the documents is available from MindLink.lv section Useful – Double Tax Treaties.
If you have any comments on this article please email them to lv_mindlink@pwc.com
Ask questionFor many years, challenging the receipt of intragroup services and commercial benefits has been among the most popular grounds for corporate income tax (CIT) assessments made by the State Revenue Service (SRS). Our analysis of one of the latest publicly available transfer pricing court cases leads to the conclusion that such a taxpayer dispute with the SRS has not lost its relevance. This article looks at an example from the Latvian court case – the taxpayer’s dispute with the SRS over missing evidence that the taxpayer has actually received management services from a related foreign company.
After the Russian Federation decided on 23 February 2022 to recognise the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Luhansk People’s Republic as independent states, followed by the invasion of Ukraine on 24 February, the EU, the UK, the US and Canada as well as other countries have launched wide-ranging sanctions aimed at changing Russia’s behaviour and eliminating the current threats in Ukraine and CEE.
On 24 February 2022 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled on a dispute over the VAT treatment of costs the customer had recharged to the supplier of goods under the contract during the warranty period. This article explores what the CJEU found and how those findings can be put into practice.
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.