The Review of Marks & Spencer Plc V David Halsey Case

2029 Words Jul 28th, 2013 9 Pages
The Review of Marks & Spencer plc v David Halsey case (Case C-446/03)

Currently, for the purpose of clear understandidng it is proposed to look through Marks & Spencer judgement basing on the on the following main aspects:

I. The procedural background of the case : jurisdictions involved and procedure II. The facts. III. The arguments of the parties IV. The court’s decision V. Comment on the case

Marks and Spencer v Halsey case is an international case about tax base harmonization. However, M&S might be called a “pro-European” policy case, because it implies an over-arching vision of a unified Europe. A unified Europe implies political, economic, and cultural integration, as well as
…show more content…
The Advocate-General substantiated his conclusion by stating that the difference in tax treatment is not due solely to the fact that the entities are subject to different tax obligations; it is also due to the fact that they are subject to the UK system of corporate taxation. IV. It is said the relief scheme, which does not allow a parent company to deduct losses from its subsidiaries, does not break European law. The problem comes where the subsidiaries are unable to claim tax relief from the states in which they operate. Therefore, the judgment only applies to companies whose loss-making subsidiaries are unable to claim tax relief from the states in which they are based. This is to avoid companies claiming relief against losses in more than one country, so called 'double relief '. Judges said the UK regulations were contrary to the principle of freedom of establishment: 'In effect, the United Kingdom rules apply different treatment for tax purposes to losses incurred by a resident subsidiary and losses incurred by a non-resident subsidiary. They therefore discourage undertakings from setting up subsidiaries in other member states. '

The decision also affects other
Open Document