I v p\u0159\u00edpad\u011b, kdy doch\u00e1z\u00ed k platb\u011b licen\u010dn\u00edch poplatk\u016f mezi dv\u011bma \u010desk\u00fdmi rezidenty, je nutn\u00e9 zkoumat, kdo je skute\u010dn\u00fdm vlastn\u00edkem p\u0159\u00edjmu z licen\u010dn\u00edch poplatk\u016f. <\/p>\n
Nejvy\u0161\u0161\u00ed spr\u00e1vn\u00ed soud vynesl koncem minul\u00e9ho roku rozsudek (10 Afs 140\/2018 \u2013 32) t\u00fdkaj\u00edc\u00ed se uplatn\u011bn\u00ed sr\u00e1\u017ekov\u00e9 dan\u011b u p\u0159\u00edjmu vypl\u00e1cen\u00e9ho mezi dv\u011bma \u010desk\u00fdmi da\u0148ov\u00fdmi rezidenty na z\u00e1klad\u011b uzav\u0159en\u00e9 sublicen\u010dn\u00ed smlouvy.<\/p>\n
Rusk\u00e1 nerezidentn\u00ed spole\u010dnost poskytla licenci \u010desk\u00e9 spole\u010dnosti A. Ta na z\u00e1klad\u011b sublicen\u010dn\u00ed smlouvy d\u00e1le zajistila v\u00fdrobu u \u010desk\u00e9 spole\u010dnosti B. NSS ve sv\u00e9m rozhodnut\u00ed do\u0161el k z\u00e1v\u011bru, \u017ee \u010desk\u00e1 spole\u010dnost A, kter\u00e1 inkasovala licen\u010dn\u00ed poplatky, byla ve skute\u010dnosti pouze mezi\u010dl\u00e1nkem, j\u00edm\u017e p\u0159\u00edjem protekl a \u017ee skute\u010dn\u00fdm vlastn\u00edkem licen\u010dn\u00edch poplatk\u016f byla rusk\u00e1 spole\u010dnost.<\/p>\n
Osvobozen\u00ed od sr\u00e1\u017ekov\u00e9 dan\u011b je z\u00e1visl\u00e9 na prok\u00e1z\u00e1n\u00ed skute\u010dn\u00e9ho vlastn\u00edka p\u0159\u00edjmu a jeho da\u0148ov\u00e9ho rezidenstv\u00ed. Jak je vid\u011bt z rozsudku, da\u0148ov\u00e1 spr\u00e1va se rozhodn\u011b nespol\u00e9h\u00e1 jen na \u010destn\u00e9 prohl\u00e1\u0161en\u00ed a skute\u010dn\u00e9ho vlastn\u00edka p\u0159\u00edjm\u016f fakticky prov\u011b\u0159uje. NSS argumentoval t\u00edm, \u017ee podle \u010desk\u00e9ho z\u00e1kona o dan\u00edch z p\u0159\u00edjm\u016f zodpov\u00edd\u00e1 \u010desk\u00e1 spole\u010dnost B jako pl\u00e1tce p\u0159\u00edjm\u016f za sra\u017een\u00ed a odveden\u00ed dan\u011b ve spr\u00e1vn\u00e9 v\u00fd\u0161i. Proto\u017ee bylo spole\u010dnosti B zn\u00e1mo, \u017ee skute\u010dn\u00fdm vlastn\u00edkem licen\u010dn\u00edch poplatk\u016f je nakonec nerezidentn\u00ed spole\u010dnost z Ruska, a nikoliv \u010desk\u00e1 spole\u010dnost A, m\u011bla srazit a odv\u00e9st 10% sr\u00e1\u017ekovou da\u0148 v souladu se smlouvou o zamezen\u00ed dvoj\u00edmu zdan\u011bn\u00ed.<\/p>\n
P\u0159i v\u00fdplat\u00e1ch p\u0159\u00edjm\u016f do zahrani\u010d\u00ed z titulu \u00farok\u016f, licen\u010dn\u00edch poplatk\u016f, dividend apod. v\u011bt\u0161ina pl\u00e1tc\u016f skute\u010dn\u00e9ho vlastn\u00edka zji\u0161\u0165uje. Z judik\u00e1tu je v\u0161ak z\u0159ejm\u00e9, \u017ee je pot\u0159eba skute\u010dn\u00e9ho vlastn\u00edka \u0159e\u0161it i u tuzemsk\u00fdch plateb, zejm\u00e9na pokud jsou pochybnosti o tom, zda je ten, kdo p\u0159\u00edjmy obdr\u017eel na bankovn\u00ed \u00fa\u010det, i jejich skute\u010dn\u00fdm vlastn\u00edkem.<\/p>\n
Je skute\u010dn\u00fd vlastn\u00edk p\u0159\u00edjm\u016f v\u017edy a\u017e ten na \u00fapln\u00e9m konci \u0159et\u011bzce dan\u00e9 transakce nebo je pot\u0159eba j\u00edt je\u0161t\u011b d\u00e1l? V\u011bnujte pozornost vypl\u00e1cen\u00fdm p\u0159\u00edjm\u016fm a strukturujte transakce tak, aby Va\u0161e spole\u010dnost nebyla jako pl\u00e1tce dan\u011b vystavena riziku dom\u011brku.<\/p>\n
Zdroj:Rozsudek NSS 10 Afs 140\/2018 -32 z 12.11.2019<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
I v p\u0159\u00edpad\u011b, kdy doch\u00e1z\u00ed k platb\u011b licen\u010dn\u00edch poplatk\u016f mezi dv\u011bma \u010desk\u00fdmi rezidenty, je nutn\u00e9 zkoumat, kdo je skute\u010dn\u00fdm vlastn\u00edkem p\u0159\u00edjmu z licen\u010dn\u00edch poplatk\u016f. Nejvy\u0161\u0161\u00ed spr\u00e1vn\u00ed soud vynesl koncem minul\u00e9ho roku rozsudek (10 Afs 140\/2018 \u2013 32) t\u00fdkaj\u00edc\u00ed se uplatn\u011bn\u00ed sr\u00e1\u017ekov\u00e9 dan\u011b u p\u0159\u00edjmu vypl\u00e1cen\u00e9ho mezi dv\u011bma \u010desk\u00fdmi da\u0148ov\u00fdmi rezidenty na z\u00e1klad\u011b uzav\u0159en\u00e9 sublicen\u010dn\u00ed smlouvy. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":5465,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[78],"tags":[79],"class_list":["post-6879","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-bnt","tag-czech"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lynx.legal\/cs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6879","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lynx.legal\/cs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lynx.legal\/cs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lynx.legal\/cs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lynx.legal\/cs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6879"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lynx.legal\/cs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6879\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lynx.legal\/cs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5465"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lynx.legal\/cs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6879"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lynx.legal\/cs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6879"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lynx.legal\/cs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6879"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}