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

This report for Slovakia has been published on 24 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 in place, but certain aspects of the legal implementation of the element need improvement.   Not all companies incorporated outside of the Slovak Republic but having their place of effective management (and therefore resident) therein are subject to clear requirements to maintain identity information concerning their owners. The availability of such information will generally depend on the law of the jurisdiction in which the company is incorporated and so may not be available in all cases.  Ownership and identity information should be available for all foreign companies having a sufficient nexus with the Slovak Republic. 
Persons in the Slovak Republic who act as professional trustees for foreign trusts are not obliged to identity the settlors and beneficiaries of such trusts.  Persons in the Slovak Republic who act as professional trustees for foreign trusts should be required to maintain identity information on the settlors and beneficiaries of the foreign trusts for which they act. 
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.   Slovak trustees of foreign trusts are not required to keep accounting records that fully reflect the financial position and assets/liabilities of the foreign trust.  The Slovak Republic should ensure that such accounting records are maintained for a minimum of five years for any foreign trusts which have Slovak-resident administrators or trustees. 
Banking information should be available for all account-holders. (ToR A.3)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.      
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 power of the Slovak authorities to obtain information for EOI purposes is unclear in a narrow range of cases where a person has no nexus with the Slovak Republic for tax purposes, as the interaction between the EOI Act and TAA Act is unclear.  It is recommended that the Slovak Republic clarifies its legislation to put beyond doubt that the tax administration’s information gathering powers can be exercised to meet all EOI requests. 
Professional privilege is broadly defined under Slovak domestic laws and there are no express exceptions in the case of requests made under an EOI agreement.  The Slovak 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 Slovak Republic should continue to develop its EOI network to the standard 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 Slovak 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 may go beyond the international standard.  It is recommended that the Slovak 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.