Sverige

Details

  • Service: Skatt
  • Type: Newsletter Article, Regulatory update
  • Date: 2013-10-16

Swedish Tax Agency’s duty to communicate documents in a carried interest case 

New judgment from the Administrative Court in Stockholm on the Swedish Tax Agency’s duty to communicate documents in a case relating to the taxation of carried interest.

The Swedish Tax Agency (“the STA”) decided, in a decision on additional assessment from December 2011, to increase the business income of a Swedish LLC and, also, to allow deduction for salary payments corresponding to that increase. Lastly, the STA decided to increase the LLC´s contribution base for payroll taxes regarding certain periods, and to impose a tax surcharge on the additional contribution.

 

The LLC appealed to the Administrative Court, pleading that the decision be set aside. In support for its claim, The LLC held that the STA had failed to communicate a large number of case relevant documents with the LLC before making its decision in December 2011.

 

Thus, what the LLC held was that the STA had failed to comply with its regulated obligation to communicate information with the taxpayer prior to making a decision.


In general, the obligation to communicate information with the taxpayer prior to making a decision implicates that the taxpayer has a right to be informed about all the information provided by others in its case and, also, that the taxpayer has been given the opportunity to respond to said information.

 

In response to the appeal, the STA held that it had communicated all the information relevant to the case with the LLC prior to making its decision.

 

In its judgment, The Administrative Court found that the STA had indeed failed to comply with its regulated obligation to communicate information to the taxpayer. The Administrative Court stated that it was not possible to deduce, from the audit report sent to the taxpayer by the STA prior to its decision, from which documents crucial information had been retrieved.

The Administrative Court therefore held that the appealed decision had not been made following due process and therefore should be eliminated. As far as concerned the fiscal years still within the deadline for additional assessment, the Administrative Court relegated the case back to the STA for further handling.

For more information contact:

Hans Eklund, Telefon +46 (0)31 61 48 93, hans.o.eklund@kpmg.se

 

 

Editorial

Feature image

Responsible Publisher 

Tina Zetterlund
tina.zetterlund@kpmg.se