Décisions fiscales anticipées et confiance légitime - État des lieux et retour sur la notion d’opposabilité (Tax Rulings and Legitimate Expectations in Luxembourg Tax Law)

Abstract

French Abstract: Les décisions anticipées relèvent, tout comme les circulaires administratives, de ce qu’il convient de qualifier plus génériquement de doctrine administrative fiscale. La prévisibilité et la stabilité de ces mécanismes d’interprétation s’inscrivent dans une exigence croissante de sécurité juridique à laquelle la matière fiscale est loin d’être étrangère. S’il est communément admis que les prises de position formelles émises par l’administration fiscale échappent à tout caractère normatif, l’opposabilité de ces interprétations amène cependant à s’interroger sur l’étendue des garanties en faveur des contribuables qui se prévalent de cette doctrine. La formalisation de cette procédure au lendemain du scandale LuxLeaks et les réponses jurisprudentielles récentes permettront de mettre en évidence la précarité de ce mécanisme à la lumière du principe de la confiance légitime.

English Abstract: This contribution explores the enforceability and legal value of tax rulings in Luxembourg domestic tax law. After a historical analysis of the advance decision mechanism in Luxembourg, this study reviews the certainty attached to tax rulings in light of the principle of legitimate expectations and related principles. I argue in this paper that both statutory and judicial conceptions of tax rulings, which lead to opposite results, are equally unsatisfactory as the two approaches either favor the strict application of the principle of legality (§29a AO) or promote a ‘generous’ application of the principle of legitimate expectations to tax rulings that are manifestly contra legem. In light of the status quo, I defended the need to resort to a balancing construction, which would entail, in the judicial review of tax rulings, the insertion of an additional subjective criterion to assess the reasonableness of the legitimate expectations invoked by the ruling recipient. Overall, this new standard would assess first the fitness of the ruling issued (e.g. its legality) and then, in a second phase, whether the ruling in question did give rise to a reasonable expectation in the mind of a diligent and prudent taxpayer. This balancing formula provides an additional safeguard for taxpayers, instead of strictly denying the validity of the ruling for its contra legem nature, as it permits to ultimately protect the unlawful advance decisions where it has reasonably given rise to legitimate expectations that deserve protection. This ‘reasonable’ standard would, for instance, include a review of the personal status of the taxpayer (e.g. non-expert taxpayer, assistance by a tax adviser, etc.) and whether the erroneous treatment confirmed by the tax authorities was reasonably detectable by a diligent and prudent recipient of an advance decision.

Note: Downloadable document is in French.

Keywords: tax rulings, Luxembourg, legitimate expectations, rescrit fiscal, décision anticipée, confiance légitime