利息或是股息——资本弱化规则适用引发的定性识别冲突问题

Interest or Dividend?——Thin Capitalization Has Caused the Issue of Qualitative Recognization

所得来源国适用国内法上的资本弱化规则,将作为缔约国对方居民投资人以债权投资方式取得的"利息"所得重新定性为"股息"所得课税,由于难以为缔约国双方在税收协定中的股息定义所兼容,容易引起协定适用纠纷。经合组织范本注释为解决此种定性识别冲突,主张来源国将利息重新定性为股息课税,应以债权人实际负担借款企业的经营风险为前提。从我国对外签订的税收协定的实际情况和国内资本弱化税制规定来看,我国税务部门在有关税务行政规章中将超过固定比例的利息重新定性为股息课税的做法并不可取。在缔约国对方根据其资本弱化规则将利息视为股息课税时,我国也并不负有税收协定的义务给予相应的认可和抵免。

As the Source State applies its thin capitalization rules to reclassification of the income of 'interest' as the 'dividend' and tax it accordingly,it might trigger the conflict with the definition of the income set forth in double tax treaties.In the commentary of the OECD Model,it is required that in case of the reclassification under thin capitalization rules,the contributor of the loan shall share the risks run by the enterprise.Based on the double tax treaties that China has concluded and the current thin cap rules in China,it is suggested that the reclassification of the excessive 'interest' into 'dividend' set forth in the latest regulation promulgated by the State Tax Bureau is not feasible.When the other Contracting State of a treaty reclassifies the interest into dividend under thin cap rules and taxes it accordingly,China has no treaty obligation to make corresponding adjustments.