Latvia continues to sign protocols amending its treaties by mutual agreement. On 29 September 2022 a protocol was signed to amend Latvia’s double tax treaty with Germany. To take effect, it must be ratified by the parliaments of the two countries.
The protocol aims to amend several provisions of the treaty.
The scope
According to the OECD’s recommendations, the treaty’s preamble will be amended to state that applying the treaty cannot create an opportunity to escape or reduce taxation through tax avoidance, evasion or non-payment, or to enter into a business relationship that is mainly aimed at securing easier terms. Also, the treaty cannot be applied to help third-country residents take its benefits indirectly.
Counter-adjustment
The protocol will amend the text of the treaty that provides for an opportunity to resolve double taxation where a profit that an enterprise of one state recognises because of a transfer pricing adjustment has already been taxed in the other state as a profit of the other state’s taxpayer. In that case the other state will have to make an appropriate counter-adjustment.
This amendment is particularly important for Latvia because its local legislation does not allow a Latvian taxpayer to reduce his income that is subject to corporate tax if the price (value) a controlled transaction is not arm’s length.
Capital gains from real estate
The protocol will supplement the treaty’s article 13 (Capital Gains) with more criteria that give the contracting states the power to charge their national tax. If a resident of one state disposes of real estate located in the other state, the other state will have the power to tax a capital gain. Also, the other state will have the power to charge a tax where a resident of one state disposes of shares or interests in a partnership or trust if more than 50% of the value of those shares or equivalent interests were directly or indirectly acquired from real estate located in the other state at any time during the 365-day period before the disposal.
Mutual agreement procedure
There was a time limit in the treaty for the mutual agreement procedure already. The treaty will now have provisions requiring the competent authorities to give mutual notices or to secure a consultation process where one of the competent authorities believes a taxpayer’s claim is invalid.
Preventing abuse of the treaty
Latvia and Germany will have the power to deny treaty benefits if an assessment of all relevant circumstances shows that one of the main goals of any agreement or transaction was to obtain a benefit.
Latvian taxpayers that are doing business with a German partner or whose group structure includes a German entity might want to consider the implications of these amendments.
If you have any comments on this article please email them to lv_mindlink@pwc.com
Ask questionInvestment funds have recently become more active in Latvia. Foreign non-resident investment funds often invest in the share capital of Latvian companies. The Corporate Income Tax (CIT) Act is silent on the CIT or personal income tax treatment of a non-resident investment fund paying income to its non-resident members from the sale of shares in a Latvian-registered company. Following the “Advise First!” principle of the State Revenue Service (SRS), PwC has prepared an application on behalf of a client seeking an advance tax ruling on how to proceed in this case.
With advanced technology and improved international cooperation, people are becoming less and less tied down to a particular residence. Many relocate from Latvia to live abroad indefinitely. Since this is a new experience for most people, this article summarises key tax aspects a Latvian tax resident should consider in the case of relocation.
In statutory cases, the taxpayer is liable to prepare transfer pricing (TP) documentation and file it with the State Revenue Service (SRS). An examination of TP documentation helps the SRS monitor the correctness of corporate income tax (CIT) payments because the difference between a controlled transaction’s value and market price must be included in the taxable base under the CIT Act. If the taxpayer defaults on the obligation to prepare and file TP documentation, then in addition to the opportunity to start an audit and assess the correctness of the CIT calculation, the SRS may start a data assesment in the field of tax revenue risks and charge a hefty fine on the company if an offence is found. This article explores what offences relating to TP documentation permit the taxpayer to be fined outside an audit and how the SRS should evaluate and justify the size of fine.
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.