Further reliance on financial intermediaries to prevent tax abuse
05/07/2021

Earlier this week, the Act of 2 June 2021 providing for various financial provisions relating to the combat against fraud has entered into force. This Act further enhances the combat against specific tax mechanisms by providing new criminal sanctions and by broadening reporting obligations of the FSMA and of the NBB.

Context

Earlier this week, on 28 June 2021, the Act of 2 June 2021 providing for various financial provisions relating to the combat against fraud has entered into force (the “Act”).

According to the Parliamentary works, the Act aims at adjusting and broadening the FSMA and the NBB’s duty to report specific tax mechanisms (“specific mechanisms”) to judicial authorities, i.e. to the Public Prosecutor. This legislative initiative comes from recommendations issued by the Parliamentary Commissions dedicated to the Panama Papers and to the bankruptcy of the Optima Bank, which called for such broadening of the reporting duty of the supervisory bodies.

Prior to the adoption of the Act, the FSMA and the NBB were only obliged to report to judicial authorities "specific mechanisms" put in place by a company under their control when they held evidence that these "specific mechanisms" constituted a tax offence punishable by criminal penalties against these companies as perpetrator, co-perpetrator or accomplice.

This obligation to report to the judicial authorities could only be applied when the facts were likely to be subject to criminal prosecutions, i.e:

  • either when the financial entity itself committed as perpetrator a criminal offence by infringing tax provisions (for example the failure to comply with the obligation to withhold withholding tax) ;
  • or when the financial entity intervened as co-author or accomplice in the commission of a tax fraud committed by a third party.

As a result, in the absence of tax fraud committed by the client, the supervisory authorities had the power to injunct the company to put an end to this "specific mechanism" on the basis of the provisions governing the supervisory status of financial institutions, but they had no obligation to report it to the judicial authorities.

Content of the Act : explicit prohibition of specific tax mechanism and reporting obligations of the FSMA and NBB

The Act inserts legal provisions into each of the sectoral supervisory legislation of the financial entities which are supervised either by the FSMA or by the NBB, which expressly prohibit the setting up of "specific mechanisms".

Credit institutions, insurance companies, brokerage firms, payment and electronic money institutions, portfolio management and investment advisory companies, mutual funds, etc. were already subject to the prohibition to set up "specific mechanisms" before the entry into force of the Act. Indeed, the prohibition resulted at least implicitly from the competence of the supervisory authorities to put an end to a "specific mechanism".

The addition of provisions explicitly confirming that prohibition is therefore no revolution. The true novelty is that criminal sanctions are now attached to it.

In addition, the Act provides for a broadening of the reporting obligation of the FSMA and the NBB, which will not only be obliged to report cases where there is evidence of tax fraud by the companies under their supervision or by their clients, but also cases where the setting up of specific mechanisms noticed by the FSMA or the NBB could have the purpose of the effect to breach tax provisions, i.e. even in cases where no tax fraud has (yet) been committed. 

The Act also defines the notion of “specific (tax) mechanisms” as mechanisms meeting four cumulative criteria : (i) they aim at enabling or facilitating tax fraud; (ii) they are the result either of an active behavior or of a gross negligence from the company; (iii) they are the result of repetitive behaviors / omissions, and (iv) they are “specific” in the sense that they deviate from the standard practice of financial institutions (e.g. money transfer from or to a foreign country which constitutes a normal banking operation but which becomes suspicious in case of use of internal technical transit accounts, in order to hide its true nature).

Circular CBF D1 97/9 of the former “Commission bancaire et financière / Commissie voor het bank-en financiewezen” already included a (non-exhaustive) list of some of the practices likely to fall into the scope of the notion of “specific mechanisms”. An updated list of such practices shall be drawn up by the NBB and the FSMA.

Conclusion

By providing an explicit prohibition of specific mechanisms and by attaching criminal sanctions to that prohibition, the Act is an additional example of the legislator relying on financial intermediaries to prevent tax evasion. Additional pressure is also brought by the broadening of the reporting duty of the FSMA and of the NBB, since it increases the risk of criminal prosecutions for financial institutions and their clients.

In the same way, it is worth noting that the Act modifies the law of 18 September 2017 on the prevention of money laundering and terrorist financing and on the restriction of the use of cash to impose that the intermediaries who fall within the scope of application of that law notifies to the Tax Administration any discrepancies they would note between the information displayed by the UBO register and the information they received from their clients in the framework of their KYC checks.

 

Zie ook : Loyens & Loeff CVBA ( Mrs. Vanessa Marquette ,  Mrs. ClĂ©mence Van Muylder )

[+ http://www.loyensloeff.com]

Mrs. Vanessa Marquette Mrs. Vanessa Marquette
Partner
[email protected]
Mrs. Clémence Van Muylder Mrs. Clémence Van Muylder
Senior Associate
[email protected]

Alle artikels Financieel recht

Laatste artikels Financieel recht

Insolvency: Cash Is king: New Rules Against Late Payment
20/07/2021

Late payment puts a substantial dent in companies’ cash flow and, ultimately, their continuity. In recent years, pay...

Read more

Global rise of Buy Now Pay Later: state of play in Belgium
22/06/2021

Deferred payment methods, often called “Buy Now Pay Later (“BNPL”) solutions”, allow customers to ...

Global rise of Buy Now Pay Later: state of play in Belgium Read more

The ELTIF: amendments in the Belgian AIFM Law
17/06/2021

On 19 April 2021, a draft law on diverse financial provisions (the “Draft Law”) was published. The Draft Law w...

Read more

Sustainable Finance Package: what next for Taxonomy, NFRD and MiFID II/UCITS/AIFMD/Insurance ESG...
26/04/2021

The Commission has released a bumper package of sustainable finance legislation. We have the more or less final version of...

Sustainable Finance Package:  what next for Taxonomy, NFRD and MiFID II/UCITS/AIFMD/Insurance ESG amendments Read more

Laatste artikels van Mrs. Vanessa Marquette

EU Whistleblower Directive: New standards applicable across all sectors
23/04/2021

To guarantee an EU-wide minimum standard for the protection of whistleblowers, the European Union adopted the Whistleblowe...

Read more

EU Recovery Prospectus: temporary fast-track to boost listed companies' COVID-19 recovery
09/04/2021

In addressing the severe economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the European legislator amended the existing Prospectus...

Read more

Q&A – Brexit impact on financial services in Belgium
24/03/2021

As of 1 January 2021, UK regulated entities are no longer allowed to make use of the European Union (EU) passport mechanis...

Read more

The ECJ affirms the right to remain silent for individuals
15/03/2021

In a recent decision, the ECJ affirms the right to remain silent for individuals prosecuted for administrative offence of ...

Read more

Laatste artikels van Mrs. Clémence Van Muylder

Criminal liability of directors – the blind spot
29/03/2021

In addition to the specific criminal liability that directors incur for certain acts that they themselves commit in this c...

Read more

The ECJ affirms the right to remain silent for individuals
15/03/2021

In a recent decision, the ECJ affirms the right to remain silent for individuals prosecuted for administrative offence of ...

Read more

LexGO Network