IFRS News July 2017

Our latest IFRS News contains some information about
IFRIC 23, the leases lab, demistifying IFRS 9 for corporates, IFRIC rejections and more.

IFRIC 23 – Putting some certainty into uncertain tax positions.

Ernesto Mendez highlights the key elements of IFRIC 23, the new Interpretation on uncertain tax treatments.

IFRS News IFRS News – July 2017

The Leases Lab

IFRS 16 brings significant changes to accounting for lessees, but what about lessors? Can Professor Lee Singh help you solve the disclosure Problem? Let’s experiment!

IFRS News – July 2017

Scene 4, Take 1: Demistifying IFRS 9 for corporates: Factoring and business model

Holger Meurer, Financial Instruments expert, explains how Factoring can affect the measurement of receivables.

IFRS News – July 2017

IFRIC Rejections Supplement – IAS 37

Looking for an answer? Maybe it was already addressed by the experts. Joanna Demetriou investigates.

IFRS News – July 2017

The IFRS 15 Mole

PwC revenue specialist Ruth Preedy investigates how to account for licenses under IFRS 15 with the help of the Mole.

Suspects: A licence Arrangement establishes a customer’s rights to an entity’s intellectual property (IP) and the entity’s obligations to provide those rights. Common licenses include patents, software, motion picture and trademarks.
Incident description: Management should assess whether the contract includes a license that is distinct and therefore treated as a separate performance obligation.

IFRS News – July 2017

Cannon Street Press

  • Definition of a business
  • IAS 8 –  Accounting policy changes resulting from IC agenda decisions
  • Rate regulated

IFRS News – July 2017

Read the latest issue on IFRS News from June 2017

Read more

In brief – A look at current
financial reporting issues

  • SEC announces policy changes designed
    to facilitate capital formation:

    PwC In brief US2017-20
    Read more
  • GASB issues new lease accounting rules:
    PwC In brief US2017-19
    Read more
  • FASB proposal would amend related party consolidation guidance for VIEs:
    PwC In brief US2017-18
    Read more

 

EU Benchmarks Regulation and Market Impact as of 1 January 2018

The new EU Benchmarks Regulation (BMR) was published in June 2016 and most rules will apply as of 1 January 2018. The BMR introduces new compliance requirements for benchmark administrators, contributors, and users, with regard to interest rate, foreign exchange, security, commodity, and other benchmarks used in financial transactions. The BMR was enacted in response to public pressure resulting from the aftermath of the LIBOR scandals and follows the recommendations of the IOSCO and ESMA EBA Principles.

Executive summary

Functioning benchmarks are key to ensuring the smooth functioning of financial markets. However, they lead to conflicts of interest and other integrity issues on the part of contributors of input data and administrators. The scope of the BMR covers all published benchmarks which are used in the European Union with regard to associating financial instruments, financial contracts and/or fund managers. The BMR defines obligations and conduct requirements for both administrators and contributors to ensure market integrity. The Regulation has an extraterritorial dimension in cases where third country administrators request market access. Market access can be granted on the basis of equivalence, recognition, and endorsement by an EU supervised entity. All the legal requirements of the BMR will phase-in on 1 January 2018 and take effect on 1 January 2020 – except for the EURIBOR, which is subject to the BMR today.

What is a benchmark?

A benchmark is defined as “a reference index, to which the amount payable under a financial instrument or a financial contract, or the value of a financial instrument, is determined, or an index that is used to measure the performance of an investment fund with the purpose of tracking the return of such index or of defining the asset allocation of a portfolio or of computing the performance fees” (Article 3(1)(3) BMR).  Such an index is a figure, fulfilling one of the following criteria:

  1. Published or made publicly available;
  2. Determined at a regular interval by either:
    • partially or entirely applying a formula or any other method of calculation, or another means to assess it by; and
    • on the basis of the value of one or more underlying assets or prices, including estimates of prices, actual or estimated interest rates, quotes and committed quotes, or other values or surveys.

Derivatives as defined in Section C, Annex I, Directive 2014/65/EU do not qualify as an index where there is only a single reference value. Such is the case where a single price or value is used as a reference for a financial instrument, e.g. the reference price for a future or option, without any calculation, input data or discretion. Equally, reference or settlement prices produced by central counterparties are not considered to be benchmarks.

Who will be affected?

While the IOSCO Principles are the basis of the BMR, the Principles included the concept of “comply or explain”; this exemption with respect to proportionality and the nature of the benchmark is only included to a limited extent in the BMR. In order to comply with the new Regulation, administrators of a benchmark will either have to apply for registration or for authorisation, depending on the type of benchmark they provide. The provision of critical and significant benchmarks, as well as commodity and interest rate benchmarks, requires an application, while in all other cases registration with the designated authority will suffice.

  • Administrators: An administrator can be either a natural person or a legal entity with control over the provision of a benchmark, in particular by administering the arrangements determining the benchmark, by collecting and analysing the input data, as well as by determining the rate of the benchmark, and by publishing it. While specific functions of the administrator can be outsourced to a third party, the sole act of publishing or referring to an existing benchmark is insufficient for an individual or an entity to be considered as the benchmark administrator. Control of provision of the benchmark is a necessary regulatory requirement for the provider to become subject to the BMR.
  • (Supervised) Contributors: The two types of contributors are differentiated in that any natural person or legal entity can contribute input data as a “contributor”, but only a “supervised contributor” can contribute input data to an administrator located in the EU as a supervised entity and the contributor has to comply with more stringent requirements, in accordance with Article 16 BMR. The quality and reliability of any benchmark is based on the integrity and accuracy of the input data, which is provided by the contributor. To prevent manipulation at data contribution level, contributors are subject to stringent rules under the BMR. The administrator has to ensure contributors adhere to the code of conduct and that input data is of the required integrity and can be validated, even if the contributor is located in a third country. Any omission by a contributor providing input data to a critical benchmark can undermine the credibility and representativeness of such a benchmark, with severe impact on the underlying market and economic reality. As such, national authorities are given the power to demand mandatory contributions from supervised contributors to critical benchmarks.
  • User of a benchmark: A supervised entity may use a benchmark or a combination of benchmarks in the EU if the benchmark is provided by an administrator located in the Union and included in the register or is a benchmark which is included in the register. Where the object of a prospectus is transferable securities or other investment products that reference a benchmark, the issuer, offeror, or person asking for admission to trade on a regulated market shall ensure that the prospectus also includes clear and prominent information stating whether the benchmark is provided by an administrator included in the register.

Which benchmarks will be affected?

The BMR subdivides the benchmarks into various subcategories, based on the type of market they reproduce. The Regulation contains specific additional requirements for both commodity and interest rate benchmarks. The following provides an overview of the various subcategories of benchmarks:

Type of Benchmark Description
Regulated Data Benchmark Data input for the benchmark is provided directly from regulated venues. Certain provisions of the BMR do not apply to regulated data benchmarks, and they cannot be classified as critical.
Interest Rate Benchmark An IR Benchmark is determined on the basis of the rate at which banks may lend or borrow from other banks or agents in the money markets. They are subject to the requirements set out in Annex I BMR. Provisions of the BMR relating to significant and non-significant benchmarks do not apply.
Commodities Benchmark The basis for the benchmark is a commodity as defined by MiFID II. Commodity Benchmarks are subject to the requirements of Annex II BMR, unless the benchmark also qualifies a regulated data benchmark, or is based on submissions from mainly supervised entities. Provisions of the BMR relating to significant and non-significant benchmarks do not apply.
Critical Benchmark To qualify as a critical benchmark, the value of the underlying contracts needs to be at least EUR 500 bn, or it has to have been recognised as critical in a member state. Critical benchmarks are subject to more stringent and specific requirements than other types of benchmarks.

A framework has been developed by ESMA to determine Interbank Offered Rates benchmarks (IBORs) and the Euro Over Night Index Average (EONIA) as critical benchmarks. To date, only EURIBOR has been qualified as such by the EC.

Significant Benchmark Requires the value of underlying contracts to be at least EUR 50 bn, or there to be none or very few market-led substitutes, leading to significant impact on financial stability, if the benchmark ceases to be produced.
Non-Significant Benchmark All other benchmarks where the benchmark is neither a commodity nor an interest rate benchmark and the value of underlying contracts of the benchmark is less than EUR 50 bn.

How will a Switzerland-based benchmark provider be affected?

Non-EU administrators are subject to BMR rules where they intend to obtain EU market access; non-compliance will likely lead to these non-EU benchmarks being denied EU market access. There are three ways for third country administrators to become compliant: equivalence, recognition, and endorsement. Firstly, an equivalence decision with regard to foreign jurisdictions can be made by the European Commission if the requirements of Article 30(1) BMR are met and this results in benchmarks from relevant third country jurisdictions being eligible for use by supervised entities in the EU. Secondly, where an administrator located in a third country provides proof of compliance with the IOSCO Principles and said compliance is equivalent to the BMR, the administrator should be recognised as an administrator within the EU. An administrator located in a third country, such as Switzerland, must have a legal representative in the reference member state, if the entity intends to obtain recognition. The legal representative must oversee the provision of benchmarks as performed by the administrator and is accountable to the competent EU member state authority. Finally, market access as a third country administrator can be gained through an endorsement by an administrator of a supervised entity located in the EU. Endorsement will permit market access where the third country administrator adheres to the IOSCO Principles and such adherence results in equivalent compliance with the BMR.

Obligations for administrators and contributors

The BMR directly imposes a variety of obligations on persons involved in the provision, contribution, and use of benchmarks throughout the EU to prevent conflicts of interest and manipulation of benchmarks as well as to ensure maximum harmonisation in cross-border applications. If tasks are outsourced to an external service provider the provider also has to adhere to the BMR. In particular, the administrator is required to provide a code of conduct specifying the requirements and responsibilities regarding input data and to supervise adherence to the code, even if the contributor is located in a third country.

The obligations include the following provisions for administrators:

  • Robust governance arrangements, including a clearly organisational structure with well-defined, transparent and consistent roles and responsibilities for all involved, preventing conflicts of interest (Article 4 BMR).
  • Develop and maintain robust procedures to ensure oversight of all aspects of the provision of a benchmark and communication with the relevant competent authorities (Article 5 BMR).
  • Ongoing control of benchmarks to ensure they are provided, published and/or made available in accordance with the Regulation, and maintained through an accountability framework, record-keeping, auditing, and review and complaints handling process (Article 6 to Article 9 BMR). These frameworks must include any third party to which a task has been outsourced (Article 10 BMR).
  • The administrator is also responsible for overseeing the quality of input data and reporting any infringements without delay to the competent authority (Article 11 to Article 15 BMR).

The obligations include the following provisions for contributors:

  • The contributor must adhere to the code of conduct provided by the administrator and the specific requirements prescribed with respect to the contribution of input data (Article 15 BMR).
  • Supervised contributors must also ensure input data is not affected by any existing or potential conflicts of interest and that all discretion is exercised in an independent and honest way (Article 16 BMR).

Typical products in scope

Entry into force

The BMR will enter into force on 1 January 2018. There is a transition period for certain new and existing benchmarks until 1 January 2020. In accordance with the transitional provisions of Article 51(3) BMR, ESMA considers existing benchmarks as including benchmarks “existing on or before 1 January 2018”, including those provided for the first time on or before 1 January 2018. Thus, an EU index provider may provide a benchmark created between 30 June 2016 and 1 January 2018, including updates and modifications, to supervised entities in the EU until 1 January 2020, even if authorisation or registration has not yet been granted, unless authorisation or registration has been refused.

The BMR has applied to the EURIBOR since 12 August 2016, following qualification as a critical benchmark.

Impact

The BMR is a highly complex regulation with implications for all market participants. It requires considerable time to plan, structure, and implement the requirements set forth in accordance with the IOSCO Principles and EU regulations. The requirements have a direct impact on the usage of benchmarks, provision of input data, and cross-border market access.

Please contact our experts on this topic for a free consultation:

Martin Liebi
Director
Tel: +41 58 792 2886
martin.liebi@ch.pwc.com

Alexandra Balmer
Consultant
Legal FS Regulatory & Compliance Services
Tel: +41 58 792 1424
alexandra.balmer@ch.pwc.com

PwC @ Salesforce Essential Zurich | 4 July 2017

“Forge new paths and inspire clients”

     

On 4 July 2017, the Salesforce Essential event, which featured the keynote speech “Forge new paths and inspire clients”, took place in Zurich. It was a whole day of speeches, discussions and breakout sessions around the keynote speech, and offered interesting insights into the digital world of Salesforce. In the Samsung Hall foyer, a Salesforce partner exhibition took place alongside the event and our PwC stand invited those interested to learn more about our capabilities and discuss hot Salesforce trends. In one of the breakout sessions, we had the opportunity to present our E2E implementation approach at Bank Vontobel.

Our “How to eat the big white elephant” breakout session gave insights into our large Salesforce transformation project at Bank Vontobel. The key factor for success was defined as slicing the project – the big white elephant – into the right pieces, supported by the right approach. Oliver Ripplinger and our client Mark Berger presented the solutions provided for a complex CRM implementation within the highly regulated banking sector. To come back to the elephant, our team used a proven agile approach paired with our own framework.

The agile approach that we presented included PwC’s BXT framework, standing for Business, Experience and Technology. Within the Business dimension, the bank’s CRM future strategy is broken down into requirements. The Experience element allows us to assess requirements in terms of customers’ and employees’ expectations and to create prototypes for quick, visible results. The technological dimension covers integration into the existing ecosystem and ensures the realization of new user experiences.

If you have not had the chance to meet us at Salesforce Essentials, then please contact us directly. We would be happy to share our Salesforce insights and expertise with you personally.

Team

Alexander Schultz-Wirth
Partner Financial Services – Business Technology

Oliver Ripplinger
Manager Digital Strategy – Business Technology

Stefan Dobritzsch
Senior Consultant Digital Strategy – Business Technology

The New EU Prospectus Regulation and its impact on Swiss-based issuers and their KIDs under PRIIPs

The new EU Prospectus Regulation (“PR”) was adopted by the European Council on 16 May 2017 and will enter into force on 20 July 2017. The PR is the latest regulation issued by the European Capital Markets Union (“CMU”) and should become reality by 2019. The PR is based on and further clarifies the existing EU Prospectus Directive. It contains provisions that are directly applicable in all EU member states without discretion, but that also apply in particular to Swiss-based issuers and their agents offering securities in the EU or admitting transferable securities to trading on regulated markets located in the EU such as EUREX. One of the main goals of the PR is to reduce the length of prospectuses by providing clear and detailed guidelines of how to create a prospectus. This newsletter gives a short overview of the key content of the PR and explains in particular how it will be applicable to Swiss-based issuers and their agents.

1. Executive Summary

The PR particularly affects Swiss-based issuers and their agents publicly offering transferable securities in the EU and admitting transferable securities to EU regulated markets such as EUREX.

Most financial instruments, such as shares, bonds, warrants and structured products come under its scope, except for units in collective investment schemes which are not close-ended. There are detailed new requirements related to the content, scope, length, formalities and other requirements of a prospectus.

The summary of a prospectus can be used instead of a KID created under PRIIPs. Issuers should therefore investigate operational and legal synergies between the PR and the KID. Consequently, the PR should be addressed now despite the fact that most provisions will not enter into force until 21 July 2019.

2. When a prospectus is required

A prospectus must be published when transferable securities are offered to the public in the EU or admitted to trading on regulated markets located in the EU by means of a communication to persons in any form and by any means, presenting sufficient information on the terms of the offer and the securities to be offered so as to enable an investor to decide to purchase or subscribe to the securities in question.

The prospectus obligation applies to both equity and non-equity securities entitling the holder either to acquire transferable securities or to receive a cash amount through a cash settlement determined by reference to other instruments, notably transferable securities, currencies, interest rates or yields, commodities or other indices or measures. It covers in particular warrants, covered warrants, certificates, structured products, and securities convertible at the option of the investor, but not units in collective investment schemes other than the closed-end types.

No public offer of transferable securities is deemed an offer to qualified investors in the sense of MiFID II (safe harbour). Any resale to the public of transferable securities first placed with qualified investors or admitted to trading on a regulated market will however require the publication of a prospectus. Offers to fewer than 150 natural or legal persons per EU Member State are not deemed to be public, nor are offers of securities with denominations per unit amounting to at least EUR 100,000 or offers of securities addressed to investors who acquire securities for a total consideration of at least EUR 100,000 per investor. There are also multiple exemptions applicable to securities traded on a regulated market.

Resales of transferable securities in the scope of the PR are generally treated as separate offers and are subject to a prospectus, unless an exemption applies. No additional prospectus is required as long as a valid prospectus is available. A prospectus is valid for 12 months from the date of approval of the offer or the admission to trading and the date on which the issuer or the person responsible for drawing up the prospectus consents to its use in written form.

It is possible to voluntarily draw up a prospectus in accordance with the provisions of the PR even if the offer would be outside the scope of application of the PR. Such prospectuses are subject to all the rights and obligations of a prospectus created according to the PR.

3. The issuer of a prospectus

The issuer who issues or proposes to issue securities, the offeror who offers securities to the public, or a mandated third party such as a bank, is responsible for ensuring that the prospectus provides sufficient information to enable investors to make informed investment decisions.

The liability for the information given in the prospectus, and any supplement thereto, lies at the very least with the issuer, or its administrative, management or supervisory bodies, the offeror, the person asking for the admission to trading on a regulated market, or the guarantor. The persons responsible for the prospectus must be clearly identified in the prospectus. Civil liability remains with the individual EU member states.

4. When do Swiss-based issuers have to issue a prospectus?

Any non-EU domiciled issuer, such as a Swiss issuer, bank or intermediary, can offer transferable securities in the EU or seek admission to trading of securities on a regulated market established in the EU, such as EUREX, if a prospectus is drawn up and approved by the competent authorities according to the PR. It is to be expected that the corresponding Swiss prospectus requirements will be equivalent to the prospectus requirements under the PR. The Swiss requirements are currently undergoing a revision in the context of the debate on the Swiss Financial Services Act (FinSA) in the Swiss parliament. As a result, competent authorities may in future even approve prospectuses issued under Swiss law if certain additional requirements are met.

5. The Key Types of Prospectuses

6. The prospectus approval process

Any prospectus and all its constituent parts must be approved by the competent authority prior to publication. Any of the constituent parts can be approved separately. The competent authority is generally the EU member state where the issuer has its registered office or, in the case of a third-country issuer such as a Swiss bank, the member state where the securities are intended to be offered to the public for the first time or where the first application for admission to trading on a regulated market is made.

The prospectus has to be made available to the public by the issuer, offeror or person asking for admission to trading on a regulated market in advance of, and at the latest at the beginning of the offer to the public or the admission to trading of the securities concerned. The prospectus is regarded as public if it is published in electronic format or on certain web pages.

The approving authority will then notify the competent authorities of the EU member states in which the securities will be distributed.

7. The rules for advertisements

Any advertisement regarding either an offer of securities to the public or an admission to trading on a regulated market must be clearly recognisable as such. All information disclosed in the context of an advertisement must be consistent with the information contained in the prospectus.

8. When are updates required?

Every significant new factor, material mistake or material inaccuracy relating to information included in the prospectus which may affect the assessment of securities and which arises between the time of the approval of the prospectus and the closing of the offer period or when trading on the regulated market begins, must be mentioned in a supplement to the prospectus and must be approved by the competent authority. In such cases, investors who have already agreed to purchase or subscribe to the securities have two days in which to withdraw their acceptance.

9. When will the PR enter into force?

The PR will enter into force on 20 July 2017. There will be a transitional period until 21 July 2019 for most requirements under the PR. Certain provisions will already apply as of 21 July 2018 and 20 July 2017 respectively, such as the exemption from publishing a prospectus for shares which represent less than 20% of the number of shares of the same class admitted to trading on the same regulated market over a period of 12 months.

Please contact us for your free consultation:

Martin Liebi
Director
Tel: +41 58 792 2886
martin.liebi@ch.pwc.com

Michael Taschner
Senior Manager
Legal FS Regulatory & Compliance Services
+41 58 792 23 25
michael.taschner@ch.pwc.com

Anne Batliner
Manager
Legal FS Regulatory & Compliance Service
+41 58 792 2955
anne.batliner@ch.pwc.com

Successful Transactions with PwC

14/07/2017

PwC Corporate Finance advises Giroflex on the sale of the Group and its subsidiaries to Flokk A.S., a portfolio company of Triton

Zurich | A team of PwC Switzerland led by Sascha Beer, Partner Corporate Finance/ M&A, acted as lead advisor to Giroflex Holding AG, a manufacturer of award-winning office chairs generating c. EUR 42 million of revenues with c. 200 employees in Switzerland, Belgium, Germany, France and the Netherlands.

Flokk is one of the leading office chair manufacturers in Europe with sales of c. EUR 140 million and 550 employees. Acquired by Triton, a private equity fund, in 2014, the company has since then made several add-on acquisitions.

According to Flokk’s managing director, Lars Roiri, the acquisition allows Flokk to expand outside of Scandinavia with Giroflex complementing Flokk’s existing activities and geographic footprint. The acquisition is part of Flokk’s goal to double its turnover within three to five years via both organic growth and further acquisitions.

The team

Sascha Beer
Partner, Corporate Finance/ M&A

Marc C. Buser
Senior Manager, Corporate Finance/ M&A

Lasse Stünitz
Senior Consultant, Corporate Finance/ M&A

Nikola Gozze
Consultant, Corporate Finance/ M&A

“Royalty Restrictions“ in Germany

11 July 2017

Germany has recently introduced new rules that will restrict the tax deductibility of related-party cross-border royalty payments if these payments are benefiting from a low taxation triggered by a harmful preferential tax regime in the country of the recipient.

Based on these new rules, such royalty expenses incurred after 31 December 2017 will no longer be fully deductible in Germany if the relevant income is subject to an effective tax rate of less than 25%:

In detail

For example, if the royalty income is subject to a preferential 10% effective tax rate, 60% of the royalty payments would not be deductible at the German taxpayer level.

However, if a recipient of cross-border royalty payments is subject to the regular tax rate (i.e. no preferential tax regime applies), the royalty restriction rule is not applicable, even if the effective tax rate is less than 25%.

Furthermore, patent box regimes which comply with the OECD “nexus” approach (i.e. under foreign law the preferential tax rate is only granted following an OECD-compliant “nexus” approach) are exempt from the new rule. A patent box of this kind is likely to be introduced in Switzerland in the context of tax package 17 (former corporate tax reform III).

It should however be noted that tax package 17 and therefore an
OECD-compliant Swiss patent box will probably not be introduced before 2020. Consequently, German royalty payments incurred between 1 January 2018 and the introduction of such a patent box in Switzerland could be subject to the new German royalty restriction rule if such royalties benefit from a Swiss preferential tax regime. The following regimes in Switzerland should be investigated in particular to establish whether or not they qualify as harmful preferential tax regimes:

  • Nidwalden IP Box
  • Mixed companies
  • Holding companies
  • Principal companies

An investigation into the impact of the new German limitation rules is recommended in order to determine their impact and to decide whether restructuring should be conducted before 1 January 2018.

In summary, there is still some uncertainty about how the new rules will be interpreted and applied. However, for now it can be assumed that all Swiss preferential regimes may potentially cause issues under the German royalty restriction rule.

There are, however, certain planning ideas which can help mitigate and/or reduce such issues. These solutions may depend on the very specific circumstances of your group and we advise you to have them analysed by your PwC tax consultant on a case-by-case basis.

For a more detailed discussion of how this might affect your business, please contact:

Armin Marti
Partner, Leader Corporate Tax
Tel. +41 58 792 43 43
armin.marti@ch.pwc.com

Stefan Schmid
Partner, Tax & Legal
+41 58 792 44 82
stefan.schmid@ch.pwc.com

Roman Brunner
Partner, Tax & Legal
+41 58 792 72 66
roman.brunner@ch.pwc.com

Urs Brügger
Partner, Tax & Legal
+41 58 792 45 10
urs.bruegger@ch.pwc.com

Reto Inauen
Senior Manager, Tax & Legal
+41 58 792 42 16
reto.inauen@ch.pwc.com

EUDTG Newsletter May – June 2017

EU direct tax law is a fast developing area. This presents taxpayers, in particular groups and multinational corporations that have an EU or European Economic Area (EEA) presence, with various challenges.

The following topics are covered in this issue of EU Tax News:

CJEU Cases

  • Belgium: CJEU judgment in X concerning the Belgian fairness tax
  • Belgium: CJEU judgment in Van der Weegen and Pot concerning the tax exemption applicable to income from savings deposits
  • France: CJEU judgment in AFEP concerning the French contribution tax
  • Luxembourg: CJEU judgment in Berlioz concerning exchange of information upon request

National Developments

  • Austria: Administrative High Court disallows import of foreign (final) losses despite transfer of place of management
  • Germany: Federal Fiscal Court refers §6a RETT Act to CJEU as potential State aid
  • Germany: Federal Fiscal Court denies deduction of final losses according to EU law
  • Italy: Amendments to the NID and Patent Box Regime: conversion into law with revisions
  • Poland: Ministry of Finance publishes warning on aggressive tax planning structures
  • Spain: Supreme Court issues preliminary ruling about tax on activities that affect the environment
  • Switzerland: Federal Council presents basic parameters of the renewed planned tax reform
  • United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal Tax and Chancery decision on the Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme Trustees

EU Developments

  • EU: ATAD II Directive formally adopted
  • EU: European Commission proposes mandatory disclosure rules for intermediaries
  • EU: ECOFIN Council of 23 May 2017: agreement on Double taxation dispute resolution mechanism in the EU
  • EU: ECOFIN Council of 16 June 2017: Main results
  • EU: European Parliament PANA Committee issues draft report and draft recommendations
  • EU: Public CBCR: European Parliament ECON and JURI Committees adopt joint report
  • Italy: EU Tax Commissioner Moscovici concludes that Italian flat tax for high net worth individuals does not appear to constitute harmful tax competition
  • Spain: European Commission starts infringement procedure on state liability for breach of EU law

Fiscal State aid

  • EU: European Commission and China start dialogue on State aid control
  • EU: European Commission adopts annual Competition Policy Report for 2016
  • Hungary: Advertisement Tax Act aligned to comply with EU State aid rules
  • Spain: CJEU judgment on tax exemptions for Catholic Church
  • United Kingdom: CJEU judgment on the Gibraltar Betting and Gaming Association

 

Read the full newsletter

 

This EU Tax Newsletter is prepared by members of PwC’s international EU Direct Tax Group (EUDTG).

Further information about our service offerings in EU taxes: www.pwc.com/eudtg


Contact

Armin Marti
Partner Tax & Legal Services, Leader Corporate Tax Services
+41 58 792 43 43
armin.marti@ch.pwc.com

Anna-Maria Widrig Giallouraki
Senior Tax Manager
+41 58 792 42 87
anna-maria.widrig.giallouraki@ch.pwc.com

Latest Level 3 ESMA Q&As related to MiFID II/MiFIR – July 2017

ESMA published and updated in the last couple of days additional Level 3 Q&A papers. Due to the specification and clarification purposes of the Level 3 papers, this should help you during the implementation phase and could clarify open questions. Please find the relevant ESMA Q&As from 7 July and 10 July 2017 listed below.

PwC provides you with this newsletter an overview of the latest questions related to the following topics:

  1. Investor protection and intermediaries topics (10 July 2017)
  • Best execution
  • Recording of telephone conversations and electronic communications
  1. Market structures topics (7 July 2017)
  • Direct Electronic Access (DEA) and algorithmic trading
  • Multilateral and bilateral systems
  • Access to CCPs and trading venues
  1. Data reporting (7 July 2017)
  • Field 14 and Field 17 – Total issued nominal amount
  • Field 30 – Quantity
  • Reference data for financial instrument
  • Transaction reporting
  • Order record keeping
  1. Commodity derivatives topics (7 July 2017)
  • Position limits
  • Position reporting

Read the whole article.

We are happy to discuss with you any thoughts and issues or are happy to review your solutions with regard to MiFID II and MiFIR.

Please do not hesitate to contact us.

Günther Dobrauz
Partner
Leader Legal FS Regulatory & Compliance Services
+41 58 792 14 97
guenther.dobrauz@ch.pwc.com

Michael Taschner
Senior Manager
PwC Legal FS Regulatory & Compliance Services
+41 58 792 23 25
michael.taschner@ch.pwc.com

Orkan Sahin
Senior
PwC Legal FS Regulatory & Compliance Services
+41 58 792 19 94
orkan.sahin@ch.pwc.com

Liechtenstein has signed an additional DTA with Monaco

On 29 June 2017 the Government of the Principality of Liechtenstein issued a press release stating that Liechtenstein has signed an additional Double Taxation Agreement (DTA) with Monaco. The DTA between Liechtenstein and Monaco is intended to increase the legal certainty for investors and strengthen the close cooperation between the two countries.

The DTA is based on the current international OECD standard. It takes into account the results of the OECD/G20 BEPS project, which is intended to prevent tax avoidance in a cross-border context. The exchange of information is regulated based on international standards, whereby the automatic exchange of information (AEOI) will be carried out in accordance with the framework of the Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement (MCAA).

We assume that the new DTA with Monaco will be approved this year by the Landtag of the Principality of Liechtenstein, which would allow it to enter into effect as of 1 January 2018.

Contacts

Martin_Meyer_09723
Martin Meyer
PwC | Director
Office: +41 58 792 42 96
Mobile: +41 79 348 36 13
Email
PricewaterhouseCoopers GmbH
Austrasse 52 | Postfach | FL-9490 Vaduz

 

 

Bieri_Ralph_70735
Ralph Bieri
PwC | Senior Manager
Office: +41 58 792 72 76
Mobile: +41 79 643 14 37
Email
PricewaterhouseCoopers AG
Vadianstrasse 25a | Neumarkt 5 | 9001 St. Gallen

Newsflash: The Swiss Federal Council has published some key amendments to the current version of the Swiss Financial Market Ordinance (FinfraV/FMIO)

The new regulations on initial and variation margins for OTC-derivatives, the platform trading obligation, the delayed recording and reporting obligation for securities dealers and foreign market participants, and the prolonged exemption for pension funds and investment funds for retirement.

The Swiss Federal Council has published some key amendments to the current version of the Swiss Financial Market Ordinance (FinfraV/FMIO) affecting a wide variety of market participants such as counterparties of OTC-derivatives, securities dealers, pension funds, and investment funds for retirement.

The new regulations on initial and variation margins for OTC-derivatives under the Swiss Financial Market Infrastructure Act FinfraV/FMIO will enter into force on the 1st of August 2017. The variation margin requirements under FinfraV/FMIO will enter into force on the 1st of September 2017 and will affect all counterparties to OTC-derivatives not being small non-financial counterparties (NFC-). The key new requirements under the new initial and variation margins regulations will be as follows:

  • The new regulations are much stronger aligned to the final initial and variation margin regulations under EMIR, the corresponding European regulation. The new Swiss regulations do however not impose an obligation to review the legal opinions applicable to OTC-contracts on an annual basis. This is a welcomed alleviation for the Swiss market participants.
  • It is now generally possible to re-use initial margins granted in the form of cash if they are held in custody with a third party custodian bank or a central bank.
  • It is now possible to change the method for the calculation of the initial margin in each derivative category also after a mutual agreement on such calculation has been achieved.
  • There will no mandatory haircut of 8% anymore if the variation margin paid in cash is not provided in the mutually agreed currency.
  • The obligation to exchange initial and variation margins for options on equity, indexes or similar equity derivatives will apply only beginning as of the 4th of January 2020.
  • Units in UCITS funds can now also be used for initial and variation margin purposes.
  • No initial margin must be provided anymore for the foreign exchange component of Cross Currency Swaps.
  • OTC-derivatives related to covered bonds are under certain conditions totally or at least partially exempted from the initial and variation margin obligation.

The platform trading obligation, that requires that certain specifically designated derivatives must be traded on a trading venue, has formally set in force. There is however currently no derivatives category that has been designated as subject to the trading obligation on a platform.

Another important alleviation for securities traders and foreign market participants at Swiss trading venues is the delayed entry into force of the recording and reporting obligations. These obligations will now only enter into force on the 1st of October 2018 for Swiss securities dealer. The transactions and orders that have occurred in between the 1st of January 2018 and the 30th of September 2018 will however have to be recorded and reported no later than until the 31st of December 2018 (“backloading”). The recording and reporting obligations will enter into force for foreign branches of Swiss securities dealers and foreign participants of Swiss trading venues as of the 1st of January 2019.

The exemption for pension funds and investment foundations for retirement from the clearing obligation has been extended until the 16th of August 2018.

Please do not hesitate to contact us for a free consultation on any of these new provisions.

Contact

Martin Liebi
Head Capital Markets
martin.liebi@ch.pwc.com
0041 76 341 65 43