Categories
GCC Tax UAE Tax

Q1 and Q2 2021 Tax Update Webinar

Q1 and Q2 2021 Tax Update Webinar

Do not miss our webinar covering the first two quarters of 2021 from a GCC tax perspective.

Attend our webinar on 24 May and make sure you are up to date with every single tax development in the GCC.

Are you afraid you missed KSA’s First Free Zone? Not sure what to do with round 2 of ESR?  That you missed the Clarifications in the UAE? Did you miss the Qatari TP updates? 

We will cover all important 2021 updates across the GCC and across all taxes. 

The webinar is a must attend for any in-house tax person.

Registration via the following link: https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_kcOGTdr0Sb-vLRxNKqhjSA

Seats are limited!

Categories
UAE Tax

UAE scales down penalty regime and encourages voluntary disclosures

UAE scales down penalty regime and encourages voluntary disclosures

Since the inception of VAT in the UAE in January 2018, the Federal Tax Authority (FTA) had put in place a strict penalty regime. It was much stricter than its neighbour Saudi Arabia, which implemented VAT at the same time. In terms of the types of penalties, it was not the harshest, since both Bahrain and Oman later imposed prison sentences for what are often considered administrative oversights.

The tax authorities were also very active from the start in 2018, mostly imposing automatic penalties, as our survey back then showed (https://aurifer.tax/news/vat-survey-shows-fta-is-very-active/?lid=482&p=14). However, the authorities also imposed their so-called 2-4-1 penalties for late payment, which were the most impactful. A business making a mistake and being audited would be subject to a fixed penalty of up to AED 5,000, but also a penalty of up to 356% of the unpaid tax. The predicted pushback in terms of litigation followed, as scores of tax payers challenged penalties, on whatever basis they could find. The litigation was potentially mainly in the interest of litigators.

The Federal Cabinet listened to the concerns of tax payers, and now decided to act and to reduce the penalties, but also propose a penalty amnesty for penalties applied under the old regime. Cabinet Decision No. 49 of 2021 amends provisions of the Cabinet Decision on Penalties (No. 40 of 2017) and enters into effect 60 days after the issuance, i.e. 28 June 2021.

In most circumstances, the new regime will be more beneficial. It should be noted as well, that there is still an FTA Decision to be expected to implement the changes.

Amnesty

First off the FTA would like to give all tax payers a clean slate. Tax payers having outstanding penalties under the old regime, i.e. imposed on 27 June 2021 or before, can benefit from a 70% waiver, provided they settle the penalties on or before 31 December 2021. This is surely to add substantial cash to the Federal budget.

What is currently not clear, and might be in the announced FTA Decision, is how to handle penalties against which tax payers have filed a reconsideration, have gone before the Tax Disputes Resolution Committee (“TDRC”), or have gone before the administrative courts. Insofar as we know, the FTA has not been open to negotiated settlements for these types of litigation, but perhaps this is an opportunity for tax payers and the FTA to agree on a settlement, even if they are already before court.

As a comparison, KSA until recently was offering a full waiver of all penalties for voluntary disclosures. The Cabinet has not opted for the same approach, though it offers a partial amnesty.

New penalty regime

What’s new in the new penalty regime then? A number of fixed penalties have been lowered (e.g. late registration, late deregistration, filing incorrect tax return, …). However, the paradigm shift came in the late payment penalties.

Where before, a tax payer was subject to the 2-4-1 penalties, i.e. 2% for paying one day late, 4% for paying a week late and 1% per day after one month, the monthly penalty is now only 4% (in addition to the 2% penalty which remains).

However, and this is probably the most fundamental change, in case of a voluntary disclosure or a tax assessment, the late payment penalty only starts to run as from 20 business days after the date of submission of the voluntary disclosure or receipt of the assessment. While this position was advocated before the UAE Federal Court of Cassation, the highest court had ruled that the FTA was correct in applying a penalty since the time of supply (UAE Court of Cassation 14 October 2020, Appeal No. 227 of 2020). The Federal Cabinet now decided that it is the right approach to start calculating late payment penalties after the submission of the voluntary disclosure, and not as of the initial supply.

In other words, under the new penalty regime, if the tax payer pays within 20 days, there is no late payment penalty due.

That does not mean he is completely off the hook as a proportional penalty is due ranging from 5 to 40% calculated on the difference between the tax calculated and the tax that should have been calculated. The range depends on the period elapsed between the error and the date on which the voluntary disclosure was submitted.

There is a substantial difference in the calculation of the penalty. Where the previously law had ambiguity around what constituted “payable tax”, the new regime is clear that any situation will be penalized where there is a difference between the tax calculated, and the tax that should have been calculated. Especially for tax payers in a constant refund position, this may constitute a higher penalty bill.

Comparison

In order to compare the effect of the amendments in the regime, let us have a look at a few examples.

Example 1 – Supply in January 2018

Company A in January 2018 made a supply which it had incorrectly zero rated. After reviewing its records, it came to the conclusion that it had not exported the goods from the UAE, but instead sold them on the local market. Company A comes to this conclusion on 15 June 2021. Company A has 20 days to file a Voluntary Disclosure.

It now faces the choice between making a voluntary disclosure under the old regime or under the new regime. The goods supplied had a value of AED 300,000 and the applicable VAT was AED 15,000. This is the first time Company A is subject to a penalty for submitting an incorrect tax return.

                                                Old regime           New regime

Fixed Penalties                     AED 3,000.00        AED 1,000.00

Proportional penalties         AED 750.00           AED 4,500.00

Late Payment Penalties       AED 45,600.00      AED 0.00

Total                                       AED 49,350.00     AED 5,500.00

It is clear that Company A has a real benefit in waiting for the new regime to be in force. However, as illustrated below, because of the dynamics triggered by the tax amnesty, depending on when the mistake is made, business may need to try and have the penalties imposed before or on 27 June 2021.

Example 2 – Supply in January 2021

Company B in April 2021 made a supply which it had incorrectly zero rated. After reviewing its records, it came to the conclusion that it had not exported the goods from the UAE, but instead sold them on the local market. Company B comes to this conclusion on 15 June 2021. Company B has 20 days to file a Voluntary Disclosure.

It now faces the choice between making a voluntary disclosure under the old regime or under the new regime. The goods supplied had a value of AED 300,000 and the applicable VAT was AED 15,000. This is the first time Company B is subject to a penalty for submitting an incorrect tax return.

                                              Old regime        New regime

Fixed Penalties                    AED 3,000.00     AED 1,000.00

Proportional penalties        AED 750.00        AED 750.00

Late Payment Penalties      AED 900.00        AED 0.00

Total                                      AED 4,650.00    AED 1,750.00

Waiver                                   AED 3,255.00      N/A

Net                                         AED 1,395.00     AED 1,750.00

Company B has an incentive to voluntary disclose the transaction before the new regime enters into force so that the penalties are imposed under the old regime.

Example 3 – Supply in January 2021

Company C in January 2021 made a supply which it had incorrectly zero rated. After reviewing its records, it came to the conclusion that it had not exported the goods from the UAE, but instead sold them on the local market. Company C comes to this conclusion on 15 June 2021. Company C has 20 days to file a Voluntary Disclosure.

It now faces the choice between making a voluntary disclosure under the old regime or under the new regime. The goods supplied had a value of AED 300,000 and the applicable VAT was AED 15,000. This is the first time Company C is subject to a penalty for submitting an incorrect tax return. Company C is in a constant refund position, and even after correcting the January 2021 supply, it remains in a refund position.

                                              Old regime        New regime

Fixed Penalties                    AED 3,000.00    AED 1,000.00

Proportional penalties        AED 750.00       AED 750.00

Late Payment Penalties      AED 0.00           AED 0.00

Total                                      AED 3,750.00     AED 1,750.00

Waiver                                   AED 2,625.00     N/A

Net                                         AED 1,125.00      AED 1,750.00

Company C has an incentive to voluntary disclose the transaction before the new regime enters into force. Note that we have observed here that the FTA had not applied penalties under the old regime for these kinds of mistakes. However, we would have expected it to treat an over claimed amount in the same way as an underpaid amount.

Example 4 – Failure to register

Company D in January 2021 made supplies worth AED 400,000 but failed to register for VAT purposes. On 15 June 2021 it discovers it had to register for VAT purposes already back in January 2021. 

                                   Old regime         New regime

Fixed Penalties         AED 20,000.00   AED 10,000.00

Waiver                        AED 14,000.00    N/A

Net                              AED 6,000.00     AED 10,000.00

Company D has an incentive to make use of the old regime to register for VAT purposes, before the new regime enters into force.

Audit and enforcement

When we conducted our survey back in 2018, we saw a very active FTA. With the additional resources it has gained over the years, it has conducted a great number of additional audits. Especially refund audits have been very prevalent. More regular audits have happened as well, although these often focused on entertainment expenses and non-compliant invoices. In 2023, transactions conducted in 2018 will be statute barred, so we may see additional activity by the FTA to ensure compliance before that date.

Tax payers have consciously being disclosing non compliant transactions and reporting under the old regime, and were hit with penalties, which then often spilled over into litigation.

Once the liabilities are final, or the court case ruled, the file would eventually end up in enforcement. The advantage the FTA had in litigation is the application of the “pay and claim” principle. If the tax payer lost the case, the litigious amount was already paid.

In situations where there was no Tax Disputes Resolution Committee litigation, the liabilities sometimes remained outstanding (with no additional penalty being added), or for businesses in a refund position, the refund was compensated bit by bit by the penalty amount.

Since 2018, the FTA did take a number of steps to encourage compliance and try and move tax payers towards settling their liabilities.

It had for example suspended the application of the automatic reverse charge mechanism for businesses with a customs number and a VAT number which were linked. The only impact of this decision was negative cash flow.

In addition, in early 2021, the UAE appointed judicial officers which have the powers to seize assets. This was seen as a step up in terms of the enforcement in the UAE.

Conclusion

Rather than stepping up enforcement under its tax procedures law (see our article on the FTP law (https://www.aurifer.tax/news/the-uae-publishes-more-detail/?lid=482&p=19) and on the FTP law lacking director’s liability (https://www.aurifer.tax/news/dawn-of-a-new-tax-era–corporate-perspectives/?lid=482&p=14), the UAE has chosen to make it easier to correct mistakes.

It has taken a substantial turn with the newly implemented policy, which will surely have a very beneficial impact on the tax compliance climate in the UAE. While the penalties are still there as a deterrent, there is now a real motivation in most cases to voluntary disclose and to build a more horizontal and transparent relation with the FTA. The move is without doubt a benefit to businesses, in terms of reduced penalties applied for errors made, and a benefit to the FTA, in terms of increased compliance and perhaps additional revenues from this increased compliance and the amnesty.

Categories
UAE Tax

New UAE disclosure requirements: why consistency is important

New UAE disclosure requirements: why consistency is important

1.     Introduction 

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is a tax friendly country, imposing no personal income tax and no federal corporate income tax. Nevertheless, it has recently introduced a set of new tax driven disclosure requirements which have significantly increased the level of transparency for individuals and multinational groups with operations in the country.

This development mostly originates from the work delivered by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and G20 during the past few years on measures against Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS), more specifically Action 5 of the BEPS Action Plan introducing certain minimum standards that countries should implement to counter harmful tax practices and Action 13 introducing Country-by-Country Reporting (CbCR) to increase global tax transparency. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) on the other hand has been the key driver behind the recent Ultimate Beneficial Owner disclosure rules.

This analysis will cover the main three components of the new UAE measures, namely:

1.     CbCR – governed by Cabinet Resolution No 44 of 2020

2.     Economic Substance Regulations (ESR) – governed by Cabinet Resolution No 57 of 2020 and Ministerial Decision No 100 of 2020

3.     Ultimate Beneficial Owner (UBO) declaration – governed by Cabinet Decision No 58 of 2020

We will not be analysing Common Reporting Standards (CRS) and the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), which are also disclosure regimes but which have been in place for longer.

This article comes at a time where the deadlines for compliance with these new disclosure requirements are fast approaching (i.e. filing of CbCR and ESR reports and resubmission of Notifications before 31 December 2020), while other compliance dates have already passed, such as for the submission of UBO data before or on 27 October 2020 and the initial submission of CbCR and ESR Notifications before 31 December 2019 and 30 June 2020 respectively. 

Keeping this in mind, this publication aims to 1. provide the reader with an understanding of the new compliance requirements, 2. highlight the impact for individuals and multinational groups 3. illustrate some common pitfalls for those preparing and submitting CbCR, ESR and UBO reports and 4. explain why consistency in the information is of the essence.

2.     New disclosure arrangements

2.1  CbCr

2.1.1.     Context

In the Framework of the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) project of the OECD and the G20, countries agreed, amongst others, to implement BEPS action 13 in order to tackle the shortcomings of the international tax system. 

This action prescribes that countries implement legislation requiring multinational enterprises (MNEs) to report annually and for each tax jurisdiction in which they do business certain relevant financial and qualitative information, which is subsequently exchanged with other countries. The data should allow tax administration and governments to assess MNEs’ Transfer Pricing risks and it could also provide a first indication whether MNEs are involved in BEPS behaviours.

2.1.2.     Scope

The UAE’s legislation very much mirrors the common and internationally accepted standard imposed by the OECD which has by now been adopted by almost 100 countries globally. The CbCR disclosure requirement is applicable to UAE headquartered groups with operations in at least two different tax jurisdictions. The rules are only applicable if the consolidated revenues during the Financial Year preceding the Financial Year in scope is equal to or exceeds AED 3.15 billion.

Ultimate Parent Entities (UPEs) in the UAE of large MNEs will therefore have the obligation to file a CbCR to the Ministry of Finance (“MoF”). As of yet, the Federal Tax Authority is not involved in the CbCR process, even though it would also be competent according to its Establishment Law. There is no (longer a) requirement for notifications for UAE constituent entities for MNEs of which the UPE is located outside the UAE.

Whilst there is also a requirement for Transfer Pricing Master Files and Local File documentation as part of the OECD’s BEPS Action 13, the UAE has currently not introduced such a requirement. We do not expect the UAE to implement a requirement to file a Master File or Local File as long as it does not have Federal Corporate Income Tax. Furthermore, there is no requirement to file a Controlled Transactions Disclosure Form or similar document (KSA on the other hand has recently implemented such requirement). Since there is no requirement for CbCR filing by foreign headquartered MNEs in the UAE, there is also no need to monitor the implementation of exchange of information relations between countries . 

2.1.3.     Disclosures

In Table 1 of the CbCR , MNEs need to list financial information grouped on a country per country level regarding revenues (third-party and intercompany), profits (losses) before income tax, income tax paid, income tax accrued, stated capital, accumulated earnings, number of employees, and non-cash or cash-equivalent net tangible assets.

In addition to the above information, Table 2 of the CbCR asks for information about activities for each company of the MNE (e.g. Research & Development, Holding Intellectual Property, Procurement, Manufacturing, Sales, Marketing, Distribution, Administrative support services, third-party services, intercompany financing, financial services, insurance, holding, dormant or others). Additionally, the tax residency, address and Tax Identifications Numbers for each of the subsidiaries needs to be disclosed. Table 3 provides a free field for MNEs to provide additional information (such as source of data, reporting periods, foreign exchange rate used, strategic positions taken, etc.).

The CbCR needs to be filed by the end of 2020 for companies with a financial year matching Gregorian calendar years. The portal can be found here: https://www.mof.gov.ae/en/StrategicPartnerships/Pages/Country-by-Country-Reporting.aspx

2.1.4.     Impact

The importance of the first time submission to the Ministry of Finance of the CbCR for large multinational groups headquartered in the UAE cannot be underestimated. 

This is because companies operating in the UAE so far had no strict requirement to disclose financial information about their own operations and/or that of affiliated companies to any regulatory authority in the country (except for publicly listed companies). For most of the privately owned large multinational businesses headquartered in the UAE, the CbCR requirement results in the first-time disclosure of such global scale (and sometimes considered sensitive) information to a regulatory body.

With the CbCR data, the Ministry of Finance (and foreign governments) will gain valuable insights, not only about the financial position of the aforementioned privately owned large multinational groups, but will also receive data about publicly listed companies which may not have been available in the public domain previously (e.g. headcount, taxes paid rather than tax provisions, functional profile of affiliates, etc.).

In line with the OECD’s intention, the Ministry of Finance has stated on its website (FAQ section) that the CbCR data will be used for 1. assessment of high-level transfer pricing risk, 2. assessment of other BEPS-related risks and 3. for economic and statistical analysis. This being said, it is yet to be observed how the Ministry (and potentially other governmental bodies) will analyze and/or use this wealth of information for decision-making. For example, neighboring countries with income tax regimes such as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Oman may be interested in such information.  

2.1.5.     Common pitfalls

Although the CbCR may look seemingly straightforward to fill out, there is a range of errors which can be made. The OECD already listed a number of them[1]. The below section is listing (in a non-exhaustive manner) a few important considerations which we formulate and which should be kept in mind by those preparing and/or submitting a CbCR:

      i.         Sourcing of information

At the outset, one should be able to determine if a multinational group headquartered in the UAE exceeds the AED 3.15 billion global revenue threshold for filing of a CbCR. While we discuss below what exactly constitutes a multinational group and what should (not) be included under revenues in this calculation, many may face time-consuming and burdensome challenges in the data collection process. Importantly, revenues are an indicator of size, and size is an indicator of complexity.

Even though the CbCR Table 1 groups the financial information on a country-by-country level, the underlying workings usually require the information to be sourced for each legal entity separately. In this respect, some enterprises may have a single and all-encompassing source of information available to them that covers all companies in the group (e.g. consolidation and/or enterprise resourcing system), others will typically operate in an environment where information about the parent company and affiliates (such as stand-alone financial accounts, headcount data, functional profile, taxes paid, tax numbers for all legal entities, etc.) is available across different platforms and/or is managed by various teams at a global scale.

In such cases, it is important for those preparing a CbCR to consistently follow either a “top-down approach” (starting from consolidated information that is centrally available and filling in gaps by sourcing of information from other platforms and various teams) or a “bottom-up” approach (aggregation of data from all decentralized sources). In addition, a reconciliation of both approaches may be advised.

In all cases, it would be appropriate to standardize and document the approach that is consistently followed in a company specific process document and make mention of this approach in Table 3 of the CbCR.

     ii.         Defining a “Group of companies”

In line with the OECD standards, a Group is defined in the Cabinet Resolution as “A group of companies related through ownership or control, such that it either is required to prepare Consolidated Financial Statements for the purposes of preparing financial reports under the applicable accounting principles, or would be so required if the equity interests in any of the companies were traded on a public securities exchange”. This definition is primarily dependent on applicable accountings standards, such as the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) for example.

Furthermore, in order to fall under the scope of the UAE CbCR requirements, a group of companies should be headquartered in the UAE, have operations in two or more countries (and exceed the AED 3.15 billion threshold as mentioned earlier). The UAE has limited the CbCR disclosure to UAE headquartered groups, whereas the previously repealed legislation also required Surrogate Parent Entities (“SPE”) for foreign headquartered MNEs to file the CbC report.

At first glance, the definition of “group of companies” may appear straight-forward. However, there are certain important considerations that should be kept in mind for CbCR purposes, such as:

·       The CbCR preparation requires information to be collected at a legal entity / permanent establishment level (which may not always align with an enterprise-specific IT and/or corporate coding structure)

·       There may be differences between the legal structure and accounting consolidation. For example, are there any legal entities that are in- or excluded from the accounting consolidation that should have been ex- or included if the group were publicly listed under IFRS 10 rules? 

·       Whilst legal entities may be legally owned by (a part in) the group, there could exist special arrangements following which “control” is with other parts of the group or even an outside party or vice versa (e.g. side agreements)

·       For Joint Venture arrangements, the OECD has clarified earlier that an entity that is not required to be consolidated under applicable accounting rules (e.g. equity accounted companies), does not have to be considered for the CbCR.

As a final note on this subject, it is worth mentioning that the OECD mentioned in the public CbCR consultation paper of February 2020 that it is looking at a possible revision to the definition of a “group of companies” so that in the future one CbCR may need to be filed for different groups / accounting consolidations that are under common control (by an individual for example).  

    iii.         Definition of “revenues”

For CbCR purposes, revenues are the “top-line” in the income statement which includes all trading income, gains, or other inflows shown in the financial statement prepared in accordance with the applicable accounting rules. This definition also includes extraordinary income and gains from investment activities (e.g. extraordinary or below the line income from services, royalties, interest on loans, premiums, net gain on sale of property, etc.).

A common pitfall is to include dividend income from subsidiaries for the calculation of the AED 3.15 billion threshold and/or for the reporting of revenues and profits before taxes in Table 1 of the CbCR. On the other hand, dividend income from associates, joint ventures, and investment securities should be included in revenues and profits before taxes.

Reversals (of provisions and impairments), foreign exchange conversion differences and other non-business income type of items should be excluded from revenues.

When amounts are reported on a net basis in the financial statements under applicable accounting rules (e.g. net interest income for financial institutions) this should be reported as net in the CbCR as well.

    iv.         Foreign exchange rate

Most UAE based large multinational groups that will have to file a CbCR will do so in the AED currency. Because the report contains financial information from companies abroad using a non-AED currency for financial reporting, it is important to consider what foreign exchange rate needs to be used for translation of such non-AED currency amounts into AED.

A common mistake made by preparers of the CbCR is to rely solely on the FX rate conversion system that is embedded in the consolidation or accounting software , which would typically use year-end exchange rate for balance sheet amounts and transaction dated exchange rate for P&L amounts. The guidance provided by the OECD clearly states however that for the CbCR preparation, foreign currency amounts should be translated to the single CbCR functional reporting currency using the internal average foreign exchange conversion rates for the financial year concerned for both balance sheet and PL amounts (see OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines, version 2017, page 513).

     v.         Definition of tangible assets

This Column in Table 1 of the CbCR requires reporting of the sum of the net book values of tangible assets (accounting definition), including inventory, properties, plants, equipment, investment properties and development properties.

A common mistake made in the CbCR data reporting is that cash or cash equivalents, intangible assets and/ or financial assets are included.

    vi.         XML conversion

Filing of the CbCR on the MoF portal is required in XML format in accordance with the OECD reporting schema. The UAE requires the filing to be made in Schema version 2.0, which may be challenging because the OECD only expects countries to adopt the Schema 2.0 standard as from February 2021 (most countries have adopted the 1.0 Schema thus far). Many software providers are not yet ready to offer the Schema 2.0  solution and the guidance notes released by the OECD for XML conversions to be done by MNEs are limited.

Most preparers of the CbCR will use standard functionalities of Excel to collect and aggregate the data. The process of conversion of this Excel data into XML format can be complicated and time-consuming for those unfamiliar with XML technology. Therefore, companies should start thinking about creating this capability in-house or using external service providers, some of which have developed easy to use applications for CbCR XML generation.

2.2.     ESR

2.2.1.     Context

On 30 April 2019, the UAE issued Cabinet Decision No. 31 concerning economic substance requirements (Economic Substance Regulations or “ESR” in short). It later replaced this Cabinet Decision with Cabinet Decision No. 57 of 2020, which had different Implementing Regulations.

UAE onshore and free zone entities that carry on specific activities mentioned in the regulations need to examine whether they meet the economic substance requirements. Failing to meet those will trigger penalties.

The introduction of a legal framework regulating the economic substance criterion in the UAE is a direct consequence of the OECD’s ongoing efforts to combat harmful tax practices under Action 5 of the BEPS project. 

It also follows the increased focus by the European Union (EU) Code of Conduct Group (COCG) on companies established in jurisdictions with a low or no income tax regime, resulting in the publication of the first EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions. In response to the EU COCG initiatives, the governments of Anguilla, the Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands (BVI), Cayman Islands, Guernsey, Isle of Man, Jersey, Turks and Caicos islands all recently introduced economic substance rules. The UAE followed suit as well.

There has also been growing interest and scrutiny from the public opinion as to whether entities established in no or low tax jurisdictions should be required to have sufficient economic substance before being able to benefit from beneficial tax regimes and benefits under double taxation agreements. 

The purpose of ESR is to curb international tax planning of certain business activities, which are typically characterised by the fact that they are “mobile” in nature because they do not require extensive fixed infrastructure in terms of human and technical capital, in a way which allows the business (and attached profits) to be shifted to no or nominal tax jurisdictions, as opposed to taxing profits where the company has actually created economic value. 

One of the many reasons why the UAE has attracted so many businesses is because there is currently no income tax regime at a federal level. The ESR legislation therefore is specifically targeted at businesses that do not have genuine commercial operations and management in the UAE to support the underlying activities and therefore also the underlying income.

Economic substance requirements are used to analyze whether a company’s presence in a country such as the UAE has a commercial and/or business purpose rather than reduction of a tax liability. 

2.2.2.     Scope

The Economic Substance Regulations apply to UAE onshore and free zone entities that carry out one or more of the following activities:

· Banking

· Insurance

· Fund management

· Lease-finance (including intercompany lending for interest income)

· Headquarters

· Shipping

· Holding company

· Intellectual property (IP)

· Distribution and service centre

Especially the definition of distribution and service centre catches a great deal of businesses. Service centre is defined as “providing services to foreign related persons”. Given the fact that the UAE is a regional hub focused on Foreign Direct Investment, a very important part of UAE incorporated businesses falls into this scope.

Entities are required to meet the Economic Substance Test when they conduct any of the above activities and earn income from such activities.

For each Activity, the regulations have defined the so-called Core Income Generating Activities (“CIGA”). This is a list of activities that must be conducted in order to meet the Economic Substance Test. For example, for intellectual property the CIGA would consist of research and development.

In general, the Economic Substance requirements will be met:

· If CIGA are conducted in the UAE;

· If the activities are directed and managed in the UAE;

· If there is an adequate level of qualified full-time employees in the UAE, 

· If there is an adequate amount of operating expenditure in the UAE,

· If there are adequate physical assets in the UAE.

In case the CIGA are carried out by another entity, these need to be controlled and monitored.

In accordance with EU recommendations, the regulations provide for less stringent requirements for Holding Company Businesses (“Holding Companies”). Then again, for IP Companies, the standards are set higher.

2.2.3.     Disclosures

Businesses that conducted a Relevant Activity during the 2019 Financial Year were required to file an ESR notification by end of June 2020 to the respective licensing authorities, such as the Ministry of Economy for onshore companies and free zone regulators for offshore companies.

Whilst the Ministry of Economy did not require companies to submit an ESR Notification if no Relevant Activity was conducted in the Financial Year 2019, some free zone authorities required a Notification for all companies irrespective of the nature of their activities (e.g. DIFC).

2020 was a transitional year with a revised ESR legislation retroactively impacting businesses and a change in the structure in terms of the enforcement (i.e. the Federal Tax Authority now has the mandate to review ESR filings, issue penalties where appropriate and handle litigation matters).

As a consequence of the revised legislation, businesses now need to resubmit their ESR notifications if Relevant Activities have been performed in FY 2019 and file their economic substance report if income was earned from the Relevant Activities by the end of December 2020  to the Ministry of Finance.

The revised ESR legislation introduced 5 categories of exemptions, amongst which the UAE branch of a foreign head office is the most common exception. However, for this particular exception to apply, it requires that the UAE branch’s income is subject to tax abroad in the country of the head office (to be demonstrated by a copy of the foreign income tax return). The exemptions generally entail important administrative requirements. Benefiting from the exemptions means that no Economic Substance Report needs to be filed (but the Notification is still required).

If a business conducts a relevant activity and has relevant income, and cannot benefit from an exemption, it needs to demonstrate substance in the UAE. The UAE has chosen for a substance over form method and not a “one size fits all” approach, where the conducted activity is important and there is no minimum threshold for meeting the substance.

The requested information as part of the ESR Notification and ESR Report is listed in the official templates published by the MoF, along with a link to the portal for submissions: https://www.mof.gov.ae/en/StrategicPartnerships/Pages/ESR.aspx  

2.2.4.     Impact

Similar to the effect of CbCR, the UAE companies that are in scope of the new ESR reporting requirements at the year-end will need to disclose, possibly for the first-time ever, sensitive financial and other information (revenues, profits, operating expenditures, headcount, etc.) to a regulatory body in the UAE.

Specifically, the requirement to inform the Ministry of Finance whether the financial accounts of the company (or its consolidating parent company) are being audited and the need to upload financial statements (it is assumed that also non-audited financial statements will be accepted) can trigger the attention of companies’ Tax, Finance and Legal teams. This is because so far compliance with the requirement for UAE companies to prepare and/or submit financial statements to a UAE regulatory body has been spotty.

Finance teams of UAE companies that have not been preparing financial statements and that are in scope of the new ESR regulations will need to prepare a set of financial accounts in a format that is presentable to the Ministry of Finance (expected to cover at a minimum a balance sheet, income statement, cash flow statement and notes).

Similarly, some companies may need to prepare and keep available, for the first time ever, formal Board resolutions (or single manager decisions) which can be requested by the Ministry of Finance and/or the Federal Tax Authority at any time. For companies without a formal Board of Directors, which are for example operating under the leadership of a single Director or Manager, this may pose the question if sufficient evidence for the “directed and managed” test can be provided to the MoF.

2.2.5.     Common pitfalls

A thorough and well-documented process for the examination of the substance (not only the form) of activities for each UAE license is absolutely necessary. For this process, the scope of “Relevant Activities” needs to be well understood, because although some definitions may appear straightforward at first glance (e.g. Lease-Finance), the reality of their application may be wider than initially thought (e.g. Lease-Finance includes intercompany lending for interest income while trade credit arrangements are not in scope).

The examination of Relevant Activities should be made on per license basis. For example, while a legal entity with multiple licenses in the UAE (e.g. one onshore and two different licenses in two separate free zones) is generally involved in routine trading operations and therefore would initially be considered outside the scope of the ESR rules, it may be required to file an ESR Notification and/or Report if a significant Relevant Activity is conducted under one of the licenses (e.g. one of the free zones branches is regulated by the Insurance Authority and underwrites insurance for the products sold).

The UAE MoF has clarified that “Relevant Income” means all of an entity’s gross income from a Relevant Activity as recorded in its books and records under applicable accounting standards. A literal interpretation of this clarification would mean that abstraction needs to be made of any actual cash flows for the income in scope. For example, a holding company that records a dividend income in its FY 2019 financial statements, but that is not actually receiving the dividend cash proceeds, would still be required to submit an ESR Notification and Report.

A common reason why businesses might not meet the substance test is that Board Meetings are not physically held in the UAE. In addition, the meeting minutes need to be signed by all members. It may surprise that this condition is necessary in a globalized world, where board members can be dialing in from other countries. These antiquated methods may conflict with modern decision making. In addition, where UAE businesses are looked after by a local manager, he may have a certain degree of autonomy but perhaps not full autonomy. What meets the substance level then?

In a country where free zones often act as landlords as well, it may surprise that the UAE has not prescribed a minimum level of space for offices per license, as this would have created a higher demand for commercial real estate (we do note however that the square footage needs to be provided as part of the ESR report). Additionally, the ESR sometimes conflict with commercial considerations for free zones (e.g. attracting IP for solely licensing purposes would not meet the DEMPE criterion under the ESR).

2.3.     UBO

2.3.1.     Context and scope

By way of Cabinet Decision No. 58 of 2020, the UAE has implemented a new UBO regime applicable to businesses established in the UAE, except for ADGM and DIFC businesses which already have their own UBO requirements in place. Government owned businesses are excluded from the UBO regulations.

Under the new UBO regime, businesses in the UAE are subject to stricter disclosure obligations. Some Free Zone companies, such as the ones established in the DIFC, already were subject to UBO requirements and therefore the new regime does not change much for them.

The new UBO regime is derived from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF)’s Guidance on Transparency and Beneficial Ownership and it stems from the Anti Money Laundering legislation in the UAE, more in particular Federal Decree-Law No. 20/2018 and its Implementing Regulation. It is suspected to target amongst others disclosures of nominee structures.

The new UBO regime requires businesses in the UAE to maintain beneficial ownership and shareholder registers at their registered office, and to submit information from these registers to their regulatory authority (e.g. Department of Economic development, DED in short or a Free Zone Authority). Any changes in the information previously provided need to be disclosed as well.

2.3.2.     Disclosures

The requirement to submit the UBO Register was earlier based on ad hoc requests from the licensing authorities, for example whenever requesting for issuance of a new trade license for a new legal entity in the UAE. However, with the latest Decision, UAE entities are required to maintain a UBO Register more consistently and update the Regulators accordingly for any changes.

A beneficial owner can be determined as follows:

1.     Any physical person who owns or ultimately controls through direct or indirect ownership shares at the rate of 25% or more, or whoever has the right to vote at the rate of 25% or more, including retaining ownership or control through other means such as the right of appointment or dismissal of most of the Managers.

2.     If no physical person was determined as per (1), the physical person who exercises control over the legal person through other means such as the right of appointment or dismissal of most of the Managers

3.     If no physical person can be determined as per (1) or (2), then the physical person who holds the position of the person in charge of Senior Management.

The UBO Register needs to contain the following information on the UBO:

· Name, nationality, date and place of birth

· Place of residence or address 

· Number of travel document/ID card, country, date of issuance and expiry

· Basis on which the UBO is the UBO

· Date of acquiring capacity as UBO

· Date on which UBO ceased to be UBO 

In this section, we are not discussing the Shareholder or Partner Register. 

2.3.3.     Impact

In addition to similarities with ESR regulations which also require the disclosure of the UBOs as part of some of the Notifications and Reports, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) and Common Reporting Standards (CRS) already required UAE businesses to provide a certain level of information regarding the UBOs. From a tax perspective, it should be ensured that the information provided to the financial institutions and relevant Regulatory Authorities (MoF and licensing authorities) is consistent and under no circumstances incorrect. Inconsistent or misleading information may lead to significant penalties being imposed by the Authorities. 

3.         Conclusion – Managing and matching disclosures is a delicate exercise

In recent years, the UAE has been signing up to different international standards and conventions to request from companies certain information and exchange this with other countries. From a tax perspective, the UAE did already have broad exchange of information provisions in its large network of double tax treaties.

With the introduction of FATCA/CRS and CbCR, the UAE signed up to different Multilateral Competent Authority Agreements (MCAA in short) for the automatic exchange of information with other countries.  

A few years back, the UAE MoF put different MoU’s in place with different authorities, such as e.g. the DIFC, DMCC, RAKFTZ and others. The intention was to allow these authorities to act as agents to collect information from their members, which the MoF required in its international relations.

The recently introduced set of regulations around CbCR, ESR and UBO add another layer to the obligations of UAE businesses.

Whilst the new UAE disclosure requirements detailed above are governed by three separate Cabinet Resolutions, it is important to keep in mind that the information that needs to be provided under the separate regulations is centralized in the hands of the Ministry of Finance (CbCR and ESR), the Federal Tax Authority (ESR) and Licensing authorities (UBO). These bodies can compare and check the consistency of the information being provided for a specific UAE company.

For example, the Ministry of Finance would be able to check if a UAE company that was reported under a certain classification in Table 2 of the CbCR (e.g. Holding, Headquarter, Dormant, IP company, etc.) matches with the information (not) submitted as part of the ESR declarations.

Another example is that where the identity of the UBOs declared to the Licensing authorities as part of the new UBO requirements should match with the UBO information included in ESR filings.

With the implementation of the different regulations, the UAE has lifted itself onto the level of global transparency for tax matters. Although some businesses are still waking up to the impact, insufficiently realizing the consequences of setting up shell companies and other companies, the wake-up call should really be answered now. For other international businesses, it simply entails that they have additional compliance obligations in the UAE, like they would have in other countries. The level of “red tape” is still relatively doable from a tax perspective, given that there is no federal corporate income tax. The UAE keeps its position as an attractive tax jurisdiction given that it additionally applies no withholding taxes and no capital gains tax.

Categories
GCC Tax UAE Tax

Financial Services Tax and Regulatory Webinar

Categories
GCC Tax UAE Tax

Working remotely tax free – not that simple

Working remotely tax free – not that simple

The Government of Dubai launched a virtual working program for overseas employees wishing to relocate to Dubai whilst retaining employment in their respective countries. This program aims to enable individuals to utilize the economical and tax advantages associated with residing in Dubai, despite being employed in their countries. 

While seemingly very attractive, unfortunately it is not that easy for these employees to ensure that their salary will be tax free. In addition, every case may be different. Of course the UAE does not impose Personal Income Tax, but that does not mean that the other jurisdiction will let go that easily.

One can broadly distinguish the following scenarios: 

Scenario 1: No Double Taxation Treaty in place between UAE and country of employment 

Nothing shall prevent the application of the Personal Income Tax Law of the country of employment. That country shall retain the right to tax the person on his employment income (but may choose not to tax the employment income).  

E.g.: Jim is a US Citizen and and is employed by USCO. He decides to work from Dubai. The US tax authority still has the right to tax Jim.

Scenario 2: Double Tax Treaty in place between UAE and country of employment or tax residency and person does not qualify as tax resident in UAE

A non-resident in the UAE which is employed by a non UAE entity would still be taxed on his income in the state of his residence. Under the treaty, the country of residence would be obliged to provide double tax relief for taxes paid in the UAE. Even though the UAE has a primary right to tax, due to the fact that it does not tax employment income, the state of residence retains the right to tax the income of the employee. 

As an exception, in cases where the country of employment applies an exemption system, the person may not pay tax in the country of residence and exercise his employment tax-free in the UAE.   

E.g.: Roberto is a tax resident of country A, employed by a company incorporated in country A. Roberto moved to Dubai in December 2020 to benefit from the virtual working scheme. Roberto is not a resident in the UAE for tax purposes and is not aiming to be a resident in the UAE for the near future. 

The Double Tax Agreement between country A and the UAE applies the credit method to eliminate double taxation, which entails that country A shall deduct from the taxes calculated, the Income Tax paid in the UAE. As there is no Income Tax in the UAE, country A shall request the tax due in totality and fully retain its right to tax. 

The situation would differ if Roberto is a tax resident of country B and relocates to Dubai, and the Double Taxation Agreement between the UAE and country B applies an exemption method. Under the exemption system, any income which may be taxed by the UAE will be exempt from tax in country B. In the absence of the conditional subject to tax rule, the exemption system would effectively allow Roberto to escape the burden of Personal Income Tax in Country B, and pay no taxes in the UAE.

Scenario 3: Double Taxation Treaty in place between UAE and country of employment and the person qualifies as tax resident in the UAE. 

This situation may lead to a so-called Dual Residency issue, where two jurisdictions consider a person a tax resident. Given that the person in our assumption qualifies as a tax resident in UAE in addition to being a resident in his country of employment as well, the tie-breaker rule would apply to determine the residency of that person.  

On the basis of the tie breaker rule, it may not be that easy to consider a person who just moved as a tax resident in the UAE, if he still has his first home in the country of employment, and if his economic and social interest alongside his habitual abode are in the same country, and if he hold nationality in the country of employment. 

In case the person is considered to be a resident in the UAE under the tie-breaker rule, the UAE has the exclusive right to tax, even if such right is not exercised. The other country may argue however that the person is neither liable nor (effectively) subject to tax in the UAE. What happens next depends highly on the other jurisdiction’s tax policy.

Given that there is no Personal Income Tax in the UAE, there are also no domestic legal criteria to consider a person a tax resident in the UAE. There is however a means to obtain a tax residency certificate, based on criteria prescribed by the UAE Ministry of Finance. To obtain such a certificate, the applicant amongst others has to be resident in the UAE for a period exceeding 183 days, and submit an annual lease agreement documented by the competent authority. 

E.g.: Roberto in this scenario qualifies as a tax resident in the UAE and also in country A due to his employment ties in country A. Both countries may consider Roberto as a tax resident on under their domestic law. The dual-residency tie-breaker rule in the treaty between country A and the UAE, based on the OECD Model, dictates that Roberto’s residency shall be decided on the basis of:  

a) Place of permanent home. If in both/none of the states then; 

b) Centre of vital interest. If cannot be determined then;

c) Habitual abode. If in both/none of the states then;

d) Nationality. If national of both states;

e) Competent authority shall determine by mutual agreement.

If it is determined on the previous basis that Roberto is a resident of the UAE, he shall be taxed exclusively in the UAE because the job is executed in the UAE where he is resident even though the employer is resident in country A. 

As a consequence, Roberto will effectively not be subject to any Personal Income Tax.

Article by Thomas Vanhee, Faisal Alasousi and Mohamed Alaradi

Categories
UAE Tax

UAE Tax Update Webinar

UAE Tax Update Webinar

On 4 June 2020 we will be organizing our UAE Tax Update Webinar covering the most recent tax updates in the UAE. Register now for our webinar via lovely@aurifer.tax

Categories
Int'l Tax & Transfer Pricing UAE Tax

UAE introduces Country by Country reporting

UAE introduces Country by Country reporting

By way of a Cabinet Resolution, the UAE has introduced Country by Country reporting (“CbC reporting”). Almost simultaneously with the introduction of economic substance regulations, the UAE further implements international tax standards and joins around 80 other countries which have implemented the CbC reporting. The impact of this reporting on international corporations in the UAE cannot be understated.

Background

In the Framework of the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (“BEPS”) project of the OECD and the G20, countries agreed, amongst others, to implement BEPS action 13 in order to tackle the shortcomings of the international tax system. 

This action prescribes that countries implement legislation requiring multinational enterprises (MNEs) to report annually and for each tax jurisdiction in which they do business certain relevant tax related information and exchange this information with other countries.

UAE implementation

The UAE’s legislation very much mirrors the standards imposed by the OECD which have been adopted in countries which have already implemented CbC reporting. It is applicable to groups which have subsidiaries in at least two tax jurisdictions. The threshold for the consolidated revenues is AED 3.15 billion.

Ultimate Parent Entities in the UAE will therefore have the obligation to file a CbC report to the Ministry of Finance (“MoF”). Certain entities in the UAE may become Surrogate Parent Entities as a result of the legislation.

The Federal Tax Authority is not involved in the process, even though according to its Establishment Law it is also competent.

There is currently no requirement to prepare master files and local files. There is additionally no requirement to file a Controlled Transactions Disclosure Form or similar, which KSA has implemented.

Information to be shared by 31 December 2019

The CbC report needs to include the amount of revenues, profits (losses) before income tax, income tax paid, income tax payable, declared capital, accrued profits, number of employees, and non-cash or cash-equivalent assets for each country. In absence of any UAE Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, it will be interesting to see what accounting methods will be used to share the information.

In addition to the above information, the tax residency of the subsidiaries needs to be disclosed, the nature of its activity or main business activities.

The notification needs to be done by the end of this year and the CbC report by the end of 2020 for companies with a financial year matching Gregorian calendar years. The portal can be found here: https://www.mof.gov.ae/en/StrategicPartnerships/Pages/Country-by-Country-Reporting.aspx

In KSA, the CbCR notification is made along with the corporate income tax or zakat declaration (within 120 days following the financial year end). In case of the CbCR filing, similar principles apply where the report must be submitted within 12 months following the end of the reporting year of the MNE group. Recently, the General Authority of Zakat and Tax of KSA has made the portal available to submit such reports: https://gazt.gov.sa/en/eServices/Pages/eServices_082.aspx.

In Qatar however, since the CbCR portal is not in place yet, only Qatari resident Ultimate Parent Entities of the MNE Group who fall within the scope of the CbCR regulations are required to submit a notification for the financial year started 1 January 2018 and also another notification with respect to financial year starting on 1 January 2019 maximum by 31 December 2019. 

The notification for two consecutive years will have to be done manually in paper form, until the online platform is set up. The notification has to be submitted to the Department of Tax Treaties and International Cooperation of the General Tax Authority of Qatar or the tax department of the Qatar Financial Center, whichever is applicable. 

Sharing of the information

The collected information will be shared by the UAE Ministry of Finance with other countries with which it has information sharing agreements. These could be bilateral treaties or the Convention on Mutual Assistance in Tax Matters. The bilateral treaties concluded by the UAE generally include a provision allowing the exchange of information.

Internationally the intention is to move towards an automatic exchange of the CbC reports. The first automatic exchanges have taken place in June 2018.

Penalties for non compliance

If businesses fail to file to comply with their obligations under the CbC reporting, they run a penalty exposure of up to AED 2,250,000.

Conclusion

The UAE is the third GCC country to implement CbCr reporting after Qatar and KSA had done so previously. The context of the UAE is slightly different, given the current absence of Federal Corporate Income Tax. Both Qatar and KSA have a form of corporate income tax.

How useful the CbC reporting is for MoF currently in absence of any Federal Corporate Tax remains to be seen. However, the introduction of the reporting will allow the UAE to be removed from domestic, European and other blacklists.

The Federal Tax Authority may be interested in the file for VAT purposes and ask tax payers to reconcile the amounts in the CbC report, as it can do today already with audited financial statements.

The importance of the introduction of CbC reporting cannot be understated. The UAE’s important neighbour, Saudi Arabia, will be very keen to examine the information in the CbC reports filed by UAE companies to verify whether it is receiving the right end of the tax portion.

Categories
Customs & Trade UAE Tax

UAE increasingly uses Anti Dumping Measures

UAE increasingly uses Anti Dumping Measures

Since the introduction of its Anti Dumping law in 2017, the UAE has recently imposed anti dumping duties again to tackle goods dumped on the UAE market. Even though many countries have had a legal framework in place to take such measures since a long time, the UAE only adopted Federal Law No. 1 on Anti-dumping, Countervailing and Safeguard Measures in 2017.

This law implemented the 2011 GCC Common Law on Anti-dumping, Countervailing and Safeguard Measures. The law only applies to trade practices by non-GCC countries and not between GCC States.

Dumping occurs when goods are exported to the UAE at substantially lower prices than the sales price in the country of export. The sellers can for example offer these lower prices because of subsidies or other financial support provided by the government of the exporting country. 

In a wider perspective, as illustrated by the US-China trade war, countries are increasingly looking at trade measures to tackle trade imbalances. In 2015, the US decided to impose a 500% antidumping duty on Chinese steel.

In January 2019, the UAE Cabinet decided to increase customs duties applicable to rebar and steel coils from 5% to 10% as a means to provide trade protection to iron producers in the UAE. This article discusses the provisions of the mechanics of such trade measures in the UAE.

Assessing dumping

Dumping measures are taken after a complaint by the UAE industry or the minister. The complaint demonstrates the link between imports and similar domestic products and the damage caused to the domestic industry.

If the complaint is accepted, an investigation will be started and notified in the Official Gazette and UAE’s top two newspapers.

An Advisory Committee will send questionnaires to interested parties to obtain essential data, notify the countries concerned, inspect the exporter’s facilities, hold public hearings and prepare a preliminary report before making a decision.

The investigation will be terminated in cases the complaint is withdrawn, the dumping margin is less than 2% of the export price, the volume of imports is less than 3% of the total imports or if there is insufficient evidence to support the dumping claim.

What is the damage?

The damage caused to the domestic industry may take the form of material damage (e.g. a drastic drop in sales volume), a threat of material damage or material retardation to the establishment of a domestic industry.

The damage can be demonstrated by an increase in the volume of imports which leads to a significant depressing or suppressing effect on domestic prices.

Determining the dumping margin

The dumping margin is the fair comparison between the normal value and the export price of these goods. This will be the base for levying anti-dumping duties or alternative measures.

The normal value is the comparable price at which the goods under complaint are sold, in the ordinary course of trade, in the domestic market of the exporting country. The export price is the price at which goods are exported to the UAE. It is generally the value at ex-factory level. 

Imposing anti-dumping measures

During the investigation, provisional measures can be taken for 4 months. Provisional measures can be for example imposing temporary duties or requesting a security deposit upon import.

The investigation will be suspended or terminated if the exporter is willing to increase prices or cease exports at dumped prices.

The final decision of the investigation will either include the termination of the provisional measures or the imposition of a definitive measure. A definitive measure will be in the form of a duty valid for a maximum of 5 years or until the damaging effects of dumping have been eliminated (or any other trade measure).

The anti-dumping duty on imports of car batteries from South Korea is a prime example of a definitive measure imposed by the UAE since the introduction of the law. The duty remains effective for 5 years starting from 25 June 2017 onwards. 

The Advisory Committee will review these measures to ensure that they have the desired effect on the domestic economy. A review will also take place on the need for imposing anti-dumping duties for new exporters of like goods from the same country.

Effect on customs valuation and VAT

In the GCC, anti-dumping duties are levied over and above the normal customs duties applicable on on imports of goods. Customs duties and VAT are intrinsically linked. VAT applies on top of these customs duties. Since in the EU VAT also applies on top of anti dumping duties, presumably VAT also applies on top of anti-dumping duties.

Categories
UAE Tax

UAE publishes FTP law

UAE publishes FTP law

The United Arab Emirates today released its first piece of federal tax legislation today which is not related to customs duties. It marks the first legislative step in an important process for the UAE of diversification of its revenues away from natural resources. The Law will apply for the administration of both Excise taxes and VAT. The former is expected to apply as from Q4 2017, whereas the latter as from 1 January 2018. It will also apply for any future taxes which the UAE may introduce. The UAE’s Federal Tax Authority will be responsible for administering federal taxes.

The Law will be followed by Implementing Regulations, but it already contains a number of important provisions. 

In terms of the tax related records and information, as well as returns to be filed, these need to be in Arabic. Another language can be used, provided that a translated copy is provided at the expense of the tax payer and under his responsibility.

The FTA has the right to not give a refund of a certain tax if the tax payer still owes other taxes. For example, if the tax payer requests a VAT refund, but still owes Excise Tax, the FTA can compensate the two amounts. 

Voluntary disclosures also need to be made using the original tax return which was filed. The FTA will however not automatically drop any penalties against the person making the voluntary disclosure.

Tax payers can appoint tax agents. These tax agents will be responsible for filing returns on behalf of tax payers. They are not jointly liable with the tax payer though, but do have the obligation to keep a copy of all records. 

Tax payers will be notified of an audit 5 business days before it takes place, except in specific circumstances. Importantly, the FTA can amend any assessment it has previously made when new information surfaces after a tax audit.

The FTA can make an audit until 5 years after the relevant tax period, and even up to 15 years in cases of tax evasion. The FTA’s claims are never subject to any time limitations.

As an intermediate step before going to court, a Tax Disputes Resolution Committee is being set up. It will rule on differences between the tax payers and the FTA. If the tax payer is unhappy with the ruling of the Committee, he can still bring his case before court.

Pending the Implementing Regulations, the FTP Law already constitutes the basis of the interaction of tax payers with the FTA. More detail to follow in due time.