x

The Exchange of Tax Information Portal is an initiative of the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes. The Global Forum conducts peer reviews of its member jurisdictions' ability to co-operate with other tax administrations in accordance with the internationally agreed standard. The standard provides for exchange of information on request where it is foreseeably relevant to the administration and enforcement of the domestic tax laws of the requesting jurisdiction. Effective exchange of information requires that jurisdictions ensure information is available, that it can be obtained by the tax authorities and that there are mechanisms in place allowing for the exchange of that information. The Global Forum's peer review process examines both the legal and regulatory aspects of exchange (Phase 1 reviews) and the exchange of information in practice (Phase 2). The EOI Portal will track the development of these peer reviews, including changes that jurisdictions make in response to the Global Forum's recommendations.

Peer Review: Peer Review Report Phase 1 Legal and Regulatory Framework - Czech Republic

This report for Czech Republic has been published on 5 Apr 2012. You can buy this report, or browse it online below.

Skip directly to the Executive Summary. You may also want to view the tables of determinations and ratings.


loading...


Determinations and Recommendations

Jurisdictions should ensure that ownership and identity information for all relevant entities and arrangements is available to their competent authorities. (ToR A.1)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is not in place.   Public limited liability companies are allowed to issue bearer shares and there are insufficient mechanisms in place that ensure the availability of information allowing for identification of their owners.  The Czech Republic should take necessary measures to ensure that appropriate mechanisms are in place to identify the owners of bearer shares in all instances. 
Not all companies incorporated outside of the Czech Republic but having their place of effective management (and thus tax residency) therein are subject to clear requirements to maintain identity information concerning their owners.  The Czech Republic should ensure that ownership and identity information are available for all foreign companies having a sufficient nexus with the Czech Republic. 
Czech legislation does not provide for sanctions in all cases for public limited liability companies and cooperatives that fail to maintain ownership information.  The Czech Republic should introduce appropriate enforcement measures to address the risk of public limited liability companies and cooperatives not complying with the requirement to maintain a register of their shareholders and members. 
Jurisdictions should ensure that reliable accounting records are kept for all relevant entities and arrangements. (ToR A.2)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.      
Banking information should be available for all account-holders. (ToR A.3)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.   Although opening of bearer passbooks was prohibited in 2002, some pre-existing passbooks are still in existence and identity information on their holders will not be available unless a withdrawal takes place.  The Czech Republic should strengthen measures so that information on the holders of bearer passbooks is available to its competent authority. 
Competent authorities should have the power to obtain and provide information that is the subject of a request under an exchange of information arrangement from any person within their territorial jurisdiction who is in possession or control of such information (irrespective of any legal obligation on such person to maintain the secrecy of the information). (ToR B.1)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place, but certain aspects of the legal implementation of the element need improvement.   The privileges attaching to certain information held by legal advisors and tax advisors are more extensive than prescribed by the standard, and could impede effective exchange of information in a given case.  The Czech Republic should ensure that domestic provisions on professional privileges allow exchange of information in line with the standard. 
The rights and safeguards (e.g. notification, appeal rights) that apply to persons in the requested jurisdiction should be compatible with effective exchange of information. (ToR B.2)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.      
Exchange of information mechanisms should provide for effective exchange of information. (ToR C.1)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.      
The jurisdictions' network of information exchange mechanisms should cover all relevant partners. (ToR C.2)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.     The Czech Republic should continue to develop its EOI network with all relevant partners. 
The jurisdictions' mechanisms for exchange of information should have adequate provisions to ensure the confidentiality of information received. (ToR C.3)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.      
The exchange of information mechanisms should respect the rights and safeguards of taxpayers and third parties. (ToR C.4)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place, but certain aspects of the legal implementation of the element need improvement.   The Czech Republic’s tax treaties do not define the term “professional secret” and the scope of the term “professional secret” under its domestic laws is wide and goes beyond the international standard.  It is recommended that the Czech Republic restricts the scope of the protection under the term “professional secret” in its domestic laws so as to be in line with the standard for the purpose of agreements for exchange of information. 
The jurisdiction should provide information under its network of agreements in a timely manner. (ToR C.5)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The assessment team is not in a position to evaluate whether this element is in place, as it involves issues of practice that are dealt with in the Phase 2 review.