By virtue of two separate legal notices, the interest on late payments of income tax and VAT has been reduced from 0.54% to 0.33% per month. The change is effective from 1 January 2020.
By virtue of two separate legal notices, the interest on late payments of income tax and VAT has been reduced from 0.54% to 0.33% per month. The change is effective from 1 January 2020.
Avanzia Taxand is pleased to announce that The World Tax 2020 edition ranked the firm as Tier 1 in Private Client and Tier 2 in General Corporate Tax. The details of these rankings may be accessed through the following link: https://www.itrworldtax.com/Firm/Avanzia-Taxand-Malta/Profile/1075#rankings
The World Tax 2020 is a comprehensive guide to the world’s leading tax firms covering more than 60 jurisdictions and is produced in association with the International Tax Review.
On 14 October 2019, the Honourable Minister for Finance, Professor Edward Scicluna, presented the Budget for the coming year. In his introduction, he summarised the most salient features in relation to the performance of the Maltese economy with the main points being the following:
The Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for 2020 will amount to €3.49 per week which will be given in full to pensioners and persons on social benefits. Employees will also be entitled to an additional day of vacation leave which is added to their annual leave entitlement.
The Minister announced that a report issued by the European Commission’s Directorate General for Taxation and Customs (TAXUD) noted that Malta is the fourth country within the EU Member States with the least evasion in VAT collection.
Following the issuance of the Moneyval recommendations, the National Coordination Committee is coordinating a detailed plan for the implementation of these recommendations.
The Minister further announced that a new agency known as the ‘Financial Organised Crimes Agency’ will be set up and will be complimentary to the Economic Crimes Unit.
As from next year, cash payments exceeding €10,000 for the purchase of property, cars, boats, yachts, diamonds, precious stones and works of arts will not be allowed.
During the budget speech, the Minister noted that Malta’s success is being recognised by international agencies. Indeed, The World Economic Forum rated Malta in the first place for two consecutive years. Furthermore, he noted that this is the third budget in a row with no increase in taxes and based on the Government’s estimates, the year 2020 will be the fifth year with a budget surplus.
Rather than introducing new measures, this budget was an extension of existing measures focusing on the social aspect and low-income earners, property related measures and environment friendly measures. The Minister made references to plans to develop new areas like Artificial Intelligence and Digital Arts in order to attract further foreign direct investment.
As from year of assessment 2020, any person incurring qualifying IP expenditure and from which qualifying IP income is derived, may claim a deduction which may reduce the chargeable income from qualifying IP by 95%. The assets that are considered as qualifying IP are defined in the Rules and include registered patents and assets covered by protection rights, however, exclude brands, trademarks and trade names. Every item of qualifying IP in relation to which income is derived and against which the Patent Box Regime Deduction is claimed, need to be vetted and approved by the Malta Enterprise. The deduction is aimed for assets which are developed by the person rather than for acquired assets. The deduction is however not limited to assets developed in Malta but require that the beneficiary maintains sufficient substance as is commensurate with the type and extent of activity being carried out. The Rules also require that the income brought to charge is in line with the Transfer Pricing Method in terms of the OECD’s Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations.
The introduction of the Patent Box Regime is particularly interesting for persons investing in the development of patents or other innovative products from which income or gains arise. Indeed, this regime may drastically reduce the taxable income of the person and may also be applied upon the disposal of the relevant asset.
The tax treaty between Malta and the Republic of Kosovo has been published in Legal Notice 168 of 2019.
As most other tax treaties, this tax treaty is also modelled on the OECD model convention. No withholding taxes apply on dividends paid by a company resident in Kosovo if the holding percentage of the Maltese tax resident exceeds 10% and the shares are held for more than a year. In other cases, the withholding tax rate on dividends is 10%. Withholding tax on interest paid in Kosovo is limited to 5% of the gross amount of interest whereas no withholding tax applies on royalty payments.
Elimination of double taxation is provided for under the credit method. As with other tax treaties, the treaty also contains the standard articles with respect to the Mutual Agreement Procedure and Exchange of Information.
Following the publication of the Consolidated Group (Income Tax) Rules by means of Legal Notice 110 of 2019, Malta introduced fiscal unity rules providing for a consolidated tax group. As a result, certain groups of companies may, from the year of assessment 2020 (basis year 2019), opt to be treated as one single taxpayer.
Unlike the group relief provisions already contained in the Income Tax Act which provide for the surrendering of tax losses to other members of the same group, the fiscal unity rules provide for a consolidated tax group.
Also, the definition of a group in these rules is different and much wider than the definition contained in the Income Tax Act allowing both Maltese companies as well as foreign entities that fall within the definition of a company to form part of the consolidated group. The foreign entities need not be tax resident in Malta to form part of the fiscal unit, but it is necessary that they are tax registered in Malta.
It is interesting to note that certain trust arrangements as well as certain foundations may also form part of the consolidated tax group. This will give flexibility to certain structures. On the other hand, the rules exclude certain types of foundations, securitisation vehicles and finance leasing companies.
Requirements for the Formation of a Fiscal Unit
A parent company, as the principal taxpayer, may make an election for itself and its one or more subsidiaries to form a fiscal unit provided that in the year prior to the year of assessment it holds at least 95% of two of the following rights in each subsidiary (hereinafter refer to as 95% subsidiary):
Where the election is made, each 95% subsidiary will form part of the same fiscal unit of its parent company, with such subsidiaries being referred to as “transparent subsidiaries.” Where the transparent subsidiary is itself a parent company, its 95% subsidiaries will also join the fiscal unit. The principal taxpayer’s election becomes effective as from the year of assessment in which it is made, provided that it is made prior to tax return submission due date of the transparent subsidiaries.
Such an election is possible provided that the accounting periods of all the members within the fiscal unit are the same and subject to the consent of any minority shareholders. Naturally, no company shall form part of more than one fiscal unit at any one time.
Upon registering as a fiscal unit, the principal taxpayer assumes the rights, duties and obligations under the Income Tax Acts relative to the fiscal unit. The subsidiaries within the fiscal unit shall be deemed to be transparent entities for Malta income tax purposes. Balances of items allowed to be carried forward, tax credits, tax account balances (excluding the untaxed account) of the transparent subsidiaries at the end of the basis year preceding the year in which the election is made are considered to be balances of the principal taxpayer. Such carryforward is subject to the consent of the minority shareholders and if minority shareholders do not approve, then such balances will be suspended for as long as the transparent subsidiary remains part of the fiscal unit.
The Fiscal Unit’s Chargeable Income and Tax Payable
Intra-group transactions or transactions between members of the fiscal unit are referred to as “ignored transactions” and are disregarded for tax purposes. An exception relates to transfers of immovable property situated in Malta and transfers of property companies.
A property company is defined in the Income Tax Act as a company which owns immovable property situated in Malta or any real rights thereon or a company which holds, directly or indirectly, shares or other interests in any entity or person, which owns immovable property situated in Malta or any real rights thereon where 5% or more of the total value of the said shares or other interests so held is attributable to such immovable property or right.
Naturally, transfers of immovable property and property companies cannot be characterised as ignored transactions as otherwise such transfers would become exempt when transferred within a fiscal unit.
Given that the subsidiaries are deemed to be transparent subsidiaries, any income and gains which is not regarded as ignored transactions derived by such transparent subsidiaries, is directly allocated to the principal taxpayer.
Income or gains allocated to the principal taxpayer retain their character and source. The rules however contemplate a number of deemed source rules. For example, income or gains derived by a non-Malta tax resident transparent subsidiary is deemed to be attributable to a permanent establishment of the principal taxpayer situated outside Malta insofar as the transparent subsidiary maintains sufficient substance therein.
Similarly, expenditure and capital allowances incurred by transparent subsidiaries and which is not regarded as an ignored transaction, is directly allocated to the principal taxpayer or the parent company.
This tax consolidation provides for a full integration of the tax position of its members and hence is different in scope than the group relief provisions referred to above.
Furthermore, any foreign income tax suffered by a company forming part of the fiscal unit is deemed to have been incurred by the principal taxpayer, and relief from double taxation in accordance with the Income Tax Act is allowed accordingly.
The main advantage of the tax consolidation or the fiscal unity is that a group may achieve the same effective tax rate without the need for the distributing company or transparent subsidiary to pay the relevant tax and also avoid the need to make claims and await the receipt of the refunds.
The tax consolidation regime is optional, but should a fiscal unit be formed, the principal taxpayer is required to prepare, on a yearly basis, a consolidated balance sheet and consolidated profit and loss account covering all companies within the fiscal unit accompanied by an audit report. Given the criteria described above to form a fiscal unit, the companies included in the consolidated accounts for the tax consolidation regime may differ from thse included in the consolidated accounts as required in terms of the Companies Act.
The principal taxpayer is responsible for filing the tax return/declaration of the fiscal unit, with other members of the fiscal unit being exempted from filing their respective tax returns. However, members of the fiscal unit are jointly and severally liable for the payment of tax, additional tax and interest. The tax liability by the fiscal unit may be apportioned between the principal taxpayer and the transparent subsidiaries.
These tax consolidation rules provide for an anti-abuse rule where the tax payable by the principal taxpayer cannot be lower than 95% of the aggregate tax that would have been payable by the companies within the fiscal unit had an election under these rules was not applied for.
Benefits of Tax Consolidation
As highlighted earlier on, the main benefit of the tax consolidation or fiscal unity is the cash flow advantage especially when compared to the current operation of the partial shareholder tax refunds upon a distribution of taxed profits. The new tax consolidation rules reduce the tax due to the combined overall effective tax rate without the need to wait for the income tax refund on distributed taxed profits. However, the tax consolidation may also be useful within a local context since it is wider in scope than the surrendering of tax trading losses. Clearly in view of the embedded anti-abuse provision, the purpose of these rules is not to provide a tax advantage.
It is evident that the tax consolidation rules will bring further compliance obligations, particularly the need to prepare and submit consolidated financial statements. Additionally, tax computations will still be required for each company and also for the fiscal unit as a whole in order to compare the tax liabilities and satisfy the anti-abuse provision. On the other hand, there is less compliance with respect to the filing of the income tax returns or declarations as only one return or declaration is submitted by the principal taxpayer.
The Notional Interest Deduction (NID) has already eased the number of tax refund claims filed by shareholders upon a receipt of taxed dividends but we expect that these rules will be availed of by large groups. The introduction of tax consolidation rules is long-awaited and is welcome as it brings Malta at level with other financial centers.
Malta published the tax treaty with the Principality of Monaco by means of Legal notice 70 of 2019.
The tax treaty is modelled on the OECD model convention, but there are no withholding taxes on dividends, interest and royalties given that both countries do not levy any withholding taxes. The residence state will have jurisdiction to tax such income according to the tax legislation. The treaty also provides that the source state will have taxing rights with respect to capital gains on immovable property and capital gains on shares whose value is derived as to more than 50% from immovable property.
The tax treaty also contains ‘standard articles’ with respect to the elimination of double taxation (under the credit method), mutual agreement procedure (MAP) and exchange of information.
Malta implemented the EU Directive 2016/1164 of 12 July 2016 laying down rules against tax avoidance practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market (ATAD) by means of Legal Notice 411 of 2018 EU ATAD Implementation Regulations, 2018. The below provides an overview of the different new tax measures which will become applicable as from 1 January 2019, except for the exit taxation rule which will become applicable as from 1 January 2020.
The aim of ATAD is to implement at EU level the BEPS (Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) recommendations made by the OECD and the G20 in October 2015. ATAD lays down anti-tax avoidance rules in the following fields:
The regulations apply to taxpayers including companies as well as other entities such as trusts and similar arrangements that are subject to tax in Malta in the same manner as companies. The definition also applies to entities that are not resident in Malta but have a permanent establishment (PE) in Malta provided these are subject to tax in Malta as companies.
Limitation to the Tax Deductibility of Interest Payments (Rule 4)
Regulation 4 of L.N. 411 aims at limiting the deductibility of interest payments as it was recommended in the Final Report on BEPS Action 4 (interest deductions and other financial payments) and included as a minimum standard in ATAD. The objective of this rule is to discourage multinational groups from reducing their overall tax base through financing group companies in high-tax jurisdictions with debt. Notably, the scope of the interest limitation rule encompasses both related party borrowing and third party borrowing.
As from 1 January 2019, subject to certain conditions and limitations, “exceeding borrowing costs” shall be deductible only up to 30% of the corporate taxpayers’ earnings before interest, tax and amortization (“EBITDA”) or up to an amount of EUR 3 million, whichever is higher. Corporate taxpayers who can demonstrate that the ratio of their equity over their total assets is equal to or higher than the equivalent ratio of the group can fully deduct their exceeding borrowing costs (so called “escape clause”).
“Exceeding borrowing costs” correspond to the amount by which the deductible “borrowing costs” of a taxpayer exceed taxable “interest revenues and other economically equivalent taxable revenues” that the taxpayer receives. Thus, in order to determine the amount of exceeding borrowing costs, it is necessary to understand which costs fall within the scope of borrowing costs and what is considered as interest revenues and other economically equivalent taxable revenues.
Borrowing costs to take into account are interest expenses on all forms of debt, other costs economically equivalent to interest and expenses incurred in connection with the raising of finance, including, without being limited to:
As far as interest revenues and other economically equivalent taxable revenues are concerned, neither ATAD nor the LN 411 of 2018 clarifies what is to be considered as revenues which are economically equivalent to interest. However, since the definition of borrowing costs also refers to “other costs economically equivalent to interest”, there should be a symmetry in the interpretation of the two concepts.
The optional provision of ATAD according to which EBITDA and exceeding borrowing costs can be determined at the level of the consolidated group (in case of tax consolidation) has also been introduced in this regulation.
Entities which are out of the scope of the rule
Financial undertakings are out of the scope of the interest limitation rule. Financial undertakings are the ones regulated by the EU Directives and Regulations and include among others credit institutions, investments firms, insurance and reinsurance companies, certain pension institutions, alternative investment funds (“AIF”), undertakings for collective investment in transferable securities (“UCITS”), as well as central counterparties and central securities depositories.
In addition, standalone entities, i.e. entities that are not part of a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes and have no associated enterprise or PE are able to fully deduct their exceeding borrowing costs. In other words, these entities are not subject to the new interest limitation rule.
Loans which are out of the scope of the rule
Malta chose to limit the scope of the new rule through the inclusion of the following two optional provisions under ATAD:
Carry forward of unused exceeding borrowing costs and unused interest capacity
Exceeding borrowing costs which cannot be deducted in one tax period because they exceed the limit set in the rule, can be carried forward in whole or in part without any time limitation.
In addition, unused interest capacity can be carried forward over 5 tax years. The regulations do not define what falls under unused interest capacity.
Exit Taxation Rules (Rule 5)
As from 1 January 2020, re-domiciliation’s and shift of tax residency to other jurisdictions will trigger exit taxes. The aim is to even out discrepancies in the valuation of assets in the country of origin and the valuation of assets in the country of destination.
The exit rules transposed through rule 5 of L.N. 411, provide for tax on capital gains which are triggered when a taxpayer:
The capital gain will be equivalent to the difference between the market value of the assets at the time of the exit and their value for tax purposes. The capital gain will be subject to the provisions of the Income Tax Act. The income tax on the capital gain becomes payable by not later than the taxpayer’s subsequent tax return date. In case of transfers within the EU or European Economic Area (“EEA”), the taxpayer may request to defer the payment of exit tax by paying in equal installments over 5 years.
Exit taxes do not apply if the assets are set to revert back to Malta within a period of 12 months and the assets relate to the financing of securities, assets posted as collateral or an asset transfer that takes place in order to meet prudential capital requirements or for the purpose of liquidity management.
General Anti-Abuse Rule (Rule 6)
Any arrangements put into place for the main purpose or one of the main purposes of obtaining a tax advantage that defeats the object or purpose of the applicable tax law shall be disregarded. Arrangements are considered as non-genuine to the extent that they are not put into place for valid commercial reasons which reflect economic reality.
Article 51 of the Income Tax Act already includes general anti abuse provisions which explicitly states that any series of arrangements which are put up solely for taking benefit of any tax advantage is ignored for tax purposes. The GAAR transposed in regulation 6 of L.N. 411 prescribes that, for the purposes of calculating the corporate tax liability, there shall be ignored an arrangement or a series of arrangements which, having been put into place for the main purpose or one of the main purposes of obtaining a tax advantage that defeats the object or purpose of the applicable tax law, are not genuine having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances. An arrangement or a series thereof is regarded as non-genuine to the extent that they are not put into place for valid commercial reasons which reflect economic reality.
CFC Rule (Rule 7)
ATAD provides for CFC rules to discourage the attribution of income in a low-taxed jurisdiction. Malta opted to adopt the non -genuine arrangement CFC rule, thus, as from 1 January 2019, Malta will tax the non-distributed income of an entity or PE which qualifies as a CFC.
The income of a CFC will be taxed in Malta if, and to the extent that, the activities of the CFC that generate this income are managed by the Maltese corporate taxpayer as the people functions in relation to the activities of the CFC are performed by the Maltese corporate taxpayer.
An entity or a PE will qualify as a CFC if the following conditions are met:
If an entity or PE is deemed to be a CFC, then the non-distributed income arising from non-genuine arrangements of a CFC which are put in place for the purpose of gaining a tax advantage shall be included in the tax base of the taxpayer and hence will be brought to charge in Malta. The CFC rule applies only if:
Allocation rules and methods to avoid double taxation
The income of the CFC to be included in the tax base of the Maltese taxpayer shall be limited to amounts generated through assets and risks which are linked to significant people functions carried out by the controlling Maltese corporate taxpayer. The attribution of CFC income shall be calculated in accordance with the arm’s length principle. The income to be included in the tax base shall be computed in proportion to the taxpayer’s participation in the CFC and is included in the tax period of the Maltese taxpayer in which the tax year of the CFC ends. Any tax paid by the CFC is allowed as a tax credit to the taxpayer in accordance with the provisions of articles 77 and 82 of the Act. Whilst the legislation provides for general guidelines as to how the income to be brought to charge will be calculated, in practice, various issues may arise which may require further clarifications from the tax department.
Following the launch of the BEPS recommendations by the OECD and the G20 in 2015, Malta has now implemented the EU directive to address tax avoidance schemes though ATAD. This follows the implementation of the MLI and the end of the single malt structures.
Most measures introduced through ATAD are new concepts to the Maltese tax framework. For the first time, Malta has interest deduction limitations, CFC rules and within two years, exit taxes. Being a new tax framework, various clarifications will be necessary to ensure that the rules are properly adhered to. It is indeed unfortunate that these rules have been released only a few days before these enter into effect as this gives very little time to taxpayers to assess the impact of these rules on current structures and assess whether changes are needed to mitigate the impact of these rules.
On 18 December 2018 Malta ratified the Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting, more commonly referred to as the Multilateral Instrument (MLI). Malta has expressed a number of reservations and these may be viewed by accessing http://www.oecd.org/tax/treaties/beps-mli-position-malta.pdf
The MLI is an OECD initiative with the objective of providing concrete solutions for governments to close the gaps in existing international tax rules by transposing results from the OECD/G20 BEPS Project into bilateral tax treaties worldwide. The MLI covers topics from transparent entities, dual resident entities, methods for elimination of double taxation as well as treaty abuse.
As a result of Malta’s implementation of the MLI, double taxation treaties must now be interpreted in light of the MLI provisions. Counties adhering to the MLI provisions will have greater powers in ensuring that treaty abuse is limited and double non-taxation avoided.
On the 27 November 2018, it was announced that an agreement was reached between Malta and Ireland which ends the Single Malt structures. These were being used through the transfer of the management and control of Irish incorporated entities to Malta. Through a Competent Authority Agreement, Malta and Ireland agreed that the purpose of the Double Taxation Convention (DTC) is to eliminate double taxation and not create the opportunity for double non-taxation. Thus, deeming a company incorporated in Ireland but managed and controlled in Malta to be tax resident only in Malta, does not serve the purposes of the Double Taxation Convention as income was not being brought to charge in neither Malta nor Ireland when the income was not remitted to Malta. Accordingly, such an Irish-incorporated company will be tax resident in Ireland and the relevant payments to it will come within the charge to Irish corporation tax.
The agreement will come into force with effect from taxable periods beginning on or after the expiration of a period of six months from the later of the dates on which the Multilateral Instrument (MLI) enters into force in Ireland and Malta. Malta endorsed its agreement with reservations to the MLI through Subsidiary Legislation 123.183 and ratified the MLI on the 18th December 2018.
The Agreement provides the following:
From the coming into effect of the MLI with respect to the DTC between Ireland and Malta (the “Contracting States” in relation to that DTC), where –
then any such deeming of the company to be resident only in one of the Contracting States shall not be for the purposes of the Ireland-Malta DTC – as it would serve no such purposes. It would be superfluous to, and redundant for, those purposes.
The Competent Authorities shall notify each other in a timely manner where they become aware of circumstances to which this Competent Authority Agreement refers.