The New Belgian CFC Rule under Model A of the EU Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (2016/1164): The Infamous Trend Carries On – Part 2

In this two-part article, the author discusses the new Belgian controlled foreign corporation (CFC) rule under Model A of the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD). Part 1, which was published in issue 4 of European Taxation (2026), dealt with the compatibility of Belgium’s implementation of the ATAD’s CFC substance carve-out with EU law and the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Part 2 analyses, in section 3., the case law of other EU Member States on the application of the substance carve-out under long-standing entity-based CFC rules. The lessons drawn from these cases will be of particular relevance for Belgium and other EU Member States that have more recently adopted entity-based CFC legislation. Two further issues will also be addressed: the interaction between the CFC substance carve-out and the Parent-Subsidiary Directive (PSD) general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR) (section 4.) and the still unexplored question of the elimination of double taxation arising from the application of the CFC rules (section 5.)

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
European Taxation
Published
2026-05-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.59403/2q3tpf9
Primary Topic
Taxation and Legal Issues
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The New Belgian CFC Rule under Model A of the EU Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (2016/1164): The Infamous Trend Carries On – Part 2

David Seutin
European Taxation
Taxation and Legal Issues
article

The New Belgian CFC Rule under Model A of the EU Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (2016/1164): The Infamous Trend Carries On – Part 2

David Seutin
article en

Abstract

In this two-part article, the author discusses the new Belgian controlled foreign corporation (CFC) rule under Model A of the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD). Part 1, which was published in issue 4 of European Taxation (2026), dealt with the compatibility of Belgium’s implementation of the ATAD’s CFC substance carve-out with EU law and the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Part 2 analyses, in section 3., the case law of other EU Member States on the application of the substance carve-out under long-standing entity-based CFC rules. The lessons drawn from these cases will be of particular relevance for Belgium and other EU Member States that have more recently adopted entity-based CFC legislation. Two further issues will also be addressed: the interaction between the CFC substance carve-out and the Parent-Subsidiary Directive (PSD) general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR) (section 4.) and the still unexplored question of the elimination of double taxation arising from the application of the CFC rules (section 5.)

European TaxationVol. 66(5)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Taxation and Legal Issues
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.