What question did this study set out to answer?

The aim is to analyze the implications of the CJEU's ruling on Apple's tax structure and State aid under EU law.

July 1, 2026European Taxation0 citations

Beyond the Tax Rulings: Apple 2.0 – Capital Allowances, Equal Treatment and the Limits of Member State Fiscal Autonomy under Article 107(1) TFEU

AIAleksandar IvanovskiCenter for Health, Exercise and Sport Sciences

Key Points

The aim is to analyze the implications of the CJEU's ruling on Apple's tax structure and State aid under EU law.
Review of the CJEU decision from September 10, 2024, regarding Apple and Irish tax matters.
Examination of section 291A of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 in relation to post-2015 profit attribution.
Analysis of article 107(1) TFEU with respect to equal treatment and fiscal autonomy.
CJEU found that pre-2015 IP-related profits are tied to Irish branches, affecting post-2015 structure.
The ruling raises new State aid questions not addressed in previous litigation.
Implications for Irish tax autonomy under EU law are significant, particularly regarding equal treatment.

Abstract

The Court of Justice of the European Union’s 10 September 2024 decision in Commission v. Ireland and Others (C-465/20 P) closed one chapter of the Apple controversy and opened another. The Grand Chamber’s finding that the pre-2015 IP-related profits were attributable, for Irish tax purposes, to the Irish branches of ASI and AOE weakens the factual premise of the post-2015 structure. Apple 2.0 — the operation of section 291A of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 between 2015 and 2017 — raises State aid questions distinct from the closed dispute that bring into operation the equal treatment rationale of article 107(1) of the TFEU.

问 AI

Bookmark

View Full Paper