VAT deduction right of holding companies - New Guidelines published by the VAT authorities
13/08/2018

• On 11 June 2018, the Luxembourg VAT Authorities published Circular n° 765-1 providing additional guidelines on the VAT deduction right of partial VAT taxable persons, i.e. taxable persons performing both activities within the scope of VAT and activities outside the scope of VAT.
• A first Circular n°765 was published in 2013, focusing specifically on the VAT deduction right of mixed VAT taxable persons and stating that mixed taxable persons should determine whether input VAT can be deducted based on a direct allocation of their costs to specific revenues or based on specific keys.
• While Circular n°765 provides guidelines regarding the VAT deduction methodology applicable to companies performing both VAT taxable and VAT exempt activities, Circular n°765-1 clarifies the methodology to be used by companies carrying out both economic activities (VAT taxable or VAT exempt) and non-economic activities (outside the VAT scope – e.g. passive holding of shares), so called ‘‘partial VAT taxable persons’’.
• As from 1 January 2018, the new Circular extends the VAT deduction methodology described as per Circular n°765 to partial VAT taxable persons. The latter have to therefore determine their VAT deduction right by applying the direct allocation method or specific allocation keys.

Certificat médical – salarié déclaré apte au travail – renversement de la présomption de maladie par la CNS
13/08/2018

A ce comportement fautif du salarié dans le mois précédent son licenciement viennent encore s’ajouter ses absences injustifiées depuis le 28 juillet 2014.

Draft Law for the ATAD 1 Implementation
13/08/2018

On June 18th 2018, the Luxembourg government published a draft law implementing the first Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (hereafter “ATAD”) into Luxembourg law (please see our Newsletter of April 2016 on the topic of the ATAD).

Debranding Before Import Not Allowed
09/08/2018

The CJEU sided with Mitsubishi and ruled that a trade mark proprietor has the right to oppose the removal by third parties of its trade marks and their replacement with other marks, even if the products

Tax Treatment of virtual currencies
08/08/2018

Following decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union¹ and of the French Conseil d’Etat² dealing with virtual currencies (e.g., bitcoin, ethereum), the director of the Luxembourg direct tax administration clarified the tax treatment applicable to virtual currencies in a circular issued on 26 July 2018 (the Circular).

Comportement déloyal – licenciement avec effet immédiat – licenciement abusif (non)
08/08/2018

Il suit des développements qui précèdent qu’il y a lieu de retenir comme avéré le fait du 15 novembre 2013 et de dire que le comportement déloyal de A était, nonobstant son ancienneté de trois années, de nature à ébranler immédiatement et définitivement la confiance que tout employeur doit avoir dans son salarié.

Enforceability of a "Mandat de Protection Future"
06/08/2018

In a judgment dated June 6th 2018, the District Court of Luxembourg (le Tribunal d’Arrondissement de et à Luxembourg) made a mandat de protection future, under French law, enforceable, for the first time in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg.

New reporting requirements on transactions with related parties
02/08/2018

On 7 May 2018, the Luxembourg tax authorities released a circular introducing for Luxembourg corporate taxpayers some new reporting requirements on transactions concluded with related parties located in so-called “non-cooperative jurisdictions”.

Démission avec effet immédiat – retards de paiement de salaire – forclusion
02/08/2018

Ces retards de paiement du salaire constituent des fautes répétitives dans le temps et le dernier retard de paiement se situe dans le mois précédant la résiliation du contrat par A. 

EU Trade Marks Should Be Distinctive Throughout the EU, Not Just a Significant Part Thereof
01/08/2018

In its recent Nestlé v Mondelez decision (C-84/17P, C-85/17P and C-95/17P), the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) confirmed that the acquisition of distinctive character by non-traditional EU trade marks (EUTM) should be established for the entire European Union not just a substantial part thereof.