Commentary on Judgment No. 10305 of 2024: Abuse of Rights and Shell Companies

The recent judgment No. 10305 of April 16, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, addresses a highly relevant and contemporary issue in the field of tax law: the abuse of rights through the creation of shell companies. This ruling stands out for its incisiveness and for the important perspectives it offers regarding the fight against tax evasion practices.

The Concept of Shell Companies

The Court clearly defines a "shell company" as a pure artifice designed to obtain an undue tax benefit. Essentially, these structures consist of chains of companies that lack economic substance, as highlighted in the ruling's maxim:

Abuse of rights - Shell companies - Pure artifice construction - Lack of economic substance for evasion purposes - Non-genuine activity - Indicators "no genuine economic activity" - Contractual discipline - National anti-evasion regulations - Admissibility. In terms of abuse of rights, a "shell company" is a pure artifice aimed, in the tax sector, at achieving a mere undue tax benefit, through the creation of chains of companies lacking economic substance or "no genuine economic activity" - derived from the non-existence of an organized, professional, and economically relevant corporate structure, from the absence of engagement in a predominant economic activity within the State, from the existence of intra-group agreements that compel the return of the proceeds obtained to the parent company or to other entities directly or indirectly controlled, from the performance of the predominant activity of the subsidiary in a State different from that of the source, from suspicious temporal coincidences between legal transactions carried out "intercompany", and from the presence of an exclusive tax motive that led the company to relocate in order to erode the taxable base - to which national regulations, especially to avoid the first being misused for evasion purposes, are applicable, while generally prioritizing contractual regulation.

The Implications of the Judgment

This ruling not only clarifies the concept of shell companies but also provides a broader view on how to identify evasion practices. It is essential for businesses and professionals in the sector to be aware of these aspects, as the presence of indicators of "no genuine economic activity" can entail serious tax risks. Among these indicators, we can mention:

  • Non-existence of an organized and professional corporate structure.
  • Absence of a predominant economic activity in the national territory.
  • Suspicious intra-group agreements.
  • Relocation motivated exclusively by tax reasons.

The Court emphasizes that the application of national anti-evasion regulations is crucial in combating such practices, stating that contractual regulations must prevail but cannot be used for evasive purposes.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 10305 of 2024 represents a significant step in the fight against the abuse of rights in the tax context. It invites deep reflection on corporate structures and their real economic substance, highlighting the importance of an ethical and transparent approach to tax management. For businesses, it is crucial to consider the regulatory implications and risks associated with adopting corporate structures that may appear as screens to evade tax regulations. Awareness of these dynamics not only protects companies but also contributes to a fairer and more equitable tax system.

Bianucci Law Firm