Vodafone Group Plc. v. Indian tax authorities. In 2007 Vodafone International purchased the Indian mobile telephony assets of Hong Kong-based Hutchison.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
US International Tax Implications of Doing Business in Romania Charles T. Chongo, CPA January 13, 2011.
Advertisements

Acquisitions of Subsidiaries of Freestanding Companies
Fashion Boutique v. Fendi USA The case of improper evidence supporting plaintiffs claims and their subsequent appeal of District Courts decision.
C&A v. G-Star. Overview After a verdict by the Dutch court on 9 August 2011, fashion brand C&A was ordered to cease large-scale infringements of the trade.
Christian Louboutin v. Yves Saint Laurent. In April 2011, footwear designer Christian Louboutin filed a suit against luxury design house Yves Saint Laurent,
Excalibur Bakery V. Excellent Bakery The case of invalid trademark.
Small Business Seminar 5 February 2004 Maturity Victor Dauppe BSc CTA FCA AIIT TEP MacIntyre Hudson, London.
Mirror Worlds v. Apple. In 2008, the technology company Mirror Worlds, LLC filed suit against Apple, Inc. for patent infringement in the US District Court.
18 November 2014 Michael Butler
Alberta printed circuits v. Canada Revenue Agency.
Burger King Corporation v. C.R. Weaver; M-W-M, Inc.
WTO Dispute DS362 China vs. United States
Brian Andreas v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.. In 1994 Andreas, an artist, created an image that included the words, “most people don’t know that there.
Tax Executives Institute – Dallas Chapter U.S./Canada Tax Update – March 12, 2013 Update on International Tax Cases from Canada/Commonwealth Countries.
Nikhil V Mehta Gray’s Inn Tax Chambers 7 th March
Taxable Acquisitions  The transaction is taxable because most, if not all, consideration is cash. Consequently, the deal will not qualify as non-taxable.
Endemol v. Abbot Reif Hameiri. The Dutch international television production and distribution company “Endemol” has filed a lawsuit against Israeli production.
Tax Impact in India and Abroad in M&A 1 By Hitesh Kumar & Shradha Dubey.
1 TAXATION IN INDIA. 2 Overview 1- The provisions of Indian Income-Tax are governed by Indian Income-Tax Act, 1961 which extends to the whole of India.
1 INTERNATIONAL TAXATION OF GOODWILL AND INTANGIBLES IV CONGRESSO INTERNACIONAL DE DIREITO TRIBUTÁRIO – IBDT RICARDO MARIZ DE OLIVEIRA MARIZSIQUEIRA.COM.BR.
Balance Dynamics Corporation v. Schmitt Industries, Incorporated.
Tax-free* Acquisitions of Freestanding C Corporations Basic types: IRC §368(a)(1)(A)— Statutory merger IRC §368(a)(1)(B)— Stock-for-stock acquisition IRC.
1 Structuring M&A transactions in Kazakhstan December 2011.
Telecom industry overview….. Facts of the industry:  Total telecom subscribers: (at the end of September 2011)  The tele density in India has.
We are dependable and trustworthy knowledge processing partner. Although we are a separate entity, we are an integrated part of your organization, like.
Visual Identity Guidelines for PPT Presentation C h a l l e n g e U s.
Maximising tax efficiency 22 November 2006 Eleanor Watts.
6th Asia / Africa IFA Conference Mauritius May 10, 2012 Girish Dave Advocate, Director General of Income Tax (Retd.) Mahesh Kumar Senior Associate, Nishith.
Limited Liability Partnerships in India This PPT is prepared by P. GAMBHIR & ASSOCIATES (PGA) to provide foreign companies a general information about.
CROSS BORDER RESTRUCTURING TAX AND LEGAL ISSUES CASE STUDY 11 TH October 2013 BELA MAO COUNTRY TAX LEAD SHELL INDIA MARKETS PRIVATE LIMITED.
Chapter Seven Consolidated Financial Statements - Ownership Patterns and Income Taxes Copyright © 2013 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
9 th Meeting of AEG Economic Ownership of Intellectual Property Products by SPEs Michael Connolly Chair UNECE Task Force Global Production September 2014.
E. N. Kemp & Associates, Inc. Aloha. BUSINESS VALUATION 101 Where do I begin to tell the story…...
© Grant Thornton LLP. All rights reserved. International Developments and Trends in International Taxation Günter Spielmann Executive director, EMEA Tax.
Offshore Operations in FEA. What is the meaning of offshore banking?  Offshore banking refers to the deposit of funds by a company or individual in a.
CYPRUS – THE IDEAL HOLDING COMPANY LOCATION, ADVANTAGES OF THE CYPRUS TAX SYSTEM By Marios Efthymiou Senior Partner Dinos Antoniou & Co Ltd Certified Public.
International Tax Structuring. Tax Structuring Tax Structuring is defined as a form into which business or financial activities may be organized to minimize.
5-c. Case Study - Overview of issues TRANSFER PRICING CASE STUDIES WORKSHOP SAN JOSE 31 MARCH - 4 APRIL 2014 OECD freely authorises the use of this material.
Baker & McKenzie International is a Swiss Verein with member law firms around the world. In accordance with the common terminology used in professional.
Mattel, Inc. V. MGA Entertainment, Inc.. In 2004, MGA Entertainment’s Bratz range of dolls emerged on the market, they presented severe competition to.
Private Equity – A case study
GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) v. Canada revenue agency (CRA)
Cambrige University Press et al. V. Georgia State Univeristy.
PLANNING FOR A M&A TRANSACTION OR AN IPO: GENERAL LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS BC BIOTECH FINANCE FORUM NOVEMBER 27, 2002 JOSEPH GARCIA C AMPNEY & M URPHY.
Temple Island Collection V. New English Teas The case of photograph infringement.
DHL Corporation and Subsidiaries V. Commissioner
CORPORATE EXPATRIATION IN MEXICO RICARDO LEON-SANTACRUZ Washington D. C. APRIL 16, 2009.
Caraco Pharmaceuticals Vs. Novo Nordisk The case of unclear and unfair patenting of generic drugs.
Arlington Industies, Inc. v. Bridgeport Fittings, Inc.
THE FUNDAMENTALS OF INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE: TAX ISSUES ARISING IN DRAFTING INTERNATIONAL CONTRACTS Prepared by: Jeffrey M. Trinklein
Horlings is a world-wide network of independent accountants and consultants firms 6 February 2009 The Dutch co-operative Nexia European Tax Group Meeting.
Shonda Brown, et al. v. Ruallam Enterprises, Inc..
Veritas v. Commissioner. In November 1999, Veritas Software Corp. (Veritas US – now prt of Symantec Corp.) and its wholly owned foreign subsidiary Veritas.
Maruti Suzuki Indian V. India Transfer Pricing Office.
Nexia EMEA Warsaw 6 th February 2015 John Voyez Smith & Williamson (0)
“Due” means appropriate and Dilligence means Care and Effort. Dilligence is derived from the Latin word “Diligo” which means “Love”
International Fiscal Association Regional Conference Seoul, South Korea May 12, 2016 Shefali Goradia BMR Advisors India.
Flow of Presentation  Balance of Payments (BOP) Survey  Q & A  Annual System of National Accounts (SNA) Survey  Q & A.
Google v. Louis Vuitton. Louis Vuitton, which is part of the LVMH group of brands including Moet & Chandon and Dior, had argued that Google was acting.
Taxation of Intra-group Services in Korea Yoon OH.
Analysis of Arguments made Before
Intra-Group Financial Transfers
FINAL VERDICT OF SUPREME COURT OF VODAFONE CASE.
Mechanism to separate the Group
MERGER AND ACQUISITION
India’s Export and Imports
Auditing Multinational Enterprises
IFRS- 3 BUSINESS COMBINATION.
Resource Capital Fund III LP v Commissioner of Taxation
Mark de Haan & Joseph Haynes
Presentation transcript:

Vodafone Group Plc. v. Indian tax authorities

In 2007 Vodafone International purchased the Indian mobile telephony assets of Hong Kong-based Hutchison Whampoa Ltd.. The Indian Tax court issued that Vodafone withhold a $2.2 billion liability for capital gains tax to the Indian tax authorities. Hong Kong-based Hutchison sold its 66.98% shares in the Indian Telecom Company Hutch Essar ltd trough a holding company based in an offshore destination for $11.2 billion to Vodafone. Hutchison controlled its Indian telecom subsidiary through a Cayman Island company called CGP. CGP’s shares were sold to Vodafone, which consequently became majority owner of the Indian telecom firm. Overview

Vodafone’s arguments: India does not have jurisdiction to tax the Hutchison deal because it was structured as a transaction between two overseas entities. Indian Tax Authority’s arguments: Although Vodafone and Hutchison had conducted their transaction offshore, the deal involved Indian assets and was hence liable for capital gains tax in India. Under Indian laws, Vodafone was responsible for withholding tax on the transaction and playing it to the Indian authorities. The Arguments

Supreme Court Decision The Supreme Court ruled in favour of Vodafone in the $2 billion tax case saying Indian tax authorities have no jurisdiction over Vodafone’s 2007 purchase of the Indian mobile telephone assets of Hong Kong-based Hutchison Whampoa Ltd. when neither company is based in India.

Implications The verdict has implications for cross border M&A activity and similar pending cases before various courts. The Vodafone tax case threw an interesting question on the taxability of a non resident company acquiring shares of a resident company through an indirect route. This is a landmark case, as it is for the first time that the tax departments had sought to tax a company through a mechanism of tracing the source of acquisition.

Further Reference Further reference on this case can be found at: standard.com/content/general_pdf/012012_01.pdf standard.com/content/general_pdf/012012_01.pdf

About IPR Plaza IPR Plaza is a web-based platform that bridges the gap between IP law, accounting, tax, transfer pricing and valuation by providing general and profession-specific information on intangibles, as well as, quantifiable valuation models. IPR Plaza is empowered by different leading IP advisory firms. IPR Plaza is headquartered in the Netherlands with representation in other major countries.