Frumvarp til laga um breytingu á lögum um tekjuskatt, nr. 90/2003 (erlendar fjárfestingar í nýsköpun)

Þó drög að fyrirhuguðu frumvarpi finnist ekki hér í samráðsgáttinni þá má ráða að fyrirhugaðar breytingar eru brýnar og skipta miklu máli. Fyrst, eða að minnsta kosti samhliða, þarf þó að skapa traust í íslenskri skattframkvæmd. Annars er hætta á að þessi lagabreyting nái illa markmiðum sínum. Sem einn af eigendum á stærslu lögmannsstofu landsins, og í reglulegu samtali við keppinauta á öðrum stórum ráðgjafastofum landsins, þá get ég fullyrt að öll þessi ráðgjafafyrirtæki geta nú orðið sjaldnast gefið út lögfræðiálit án nýrra fyrirvara og æ oftar þarf það að koma fram á fundum með erlendum fjárfestum að ekki er hægt að svara mörgum grundvallarspurningum skattaréttar vegna réttaróvissu sem þróast hefur í íslenskri skattframkvæmd á undanförnum árum. Þetta getur átt m.a. við það að lögbundnar endurgreiðslur eru afgreiddar seint eða hreinlega aldrei, fyrirtæki fá ekki ákvörðun um skráningu á virðisaukaskattsskrá svo mánuðum eða árum skiptir. Þá þarf að útskýra að hefðbundin lögskýringarsjónarmið í skattarétti eigi bara stundum við í framkvæmd, o.s.frv. Þá hafa mál þróast í átt að síauknu ógagnsæi. Nú er t.d. búið að taka út tengil á reglugerðasafn á heimsíðu Skattsins. Nánast engar fordæmisgefandi túlkanir (ákvarðandi bréf) eru birt lengur. Þá er beiðnum um bindandi álit ítrekað vísað frá án sýnilegrar réttlætingar. Þá er ekki einu sinni hægt að leggja allar upplýsingar á borð Skattsins, fá þaðan vel ígrundaða ákvörðun og treysta því að hún standi. Áralangri skattframkvæmd er einfaldlega breytt án nokkurrar annarrar ástæðu en breyttrar skoðunar hjá Skattinum, o.s.frv. Nýleg dæmi staðfesta þessa stöðu mála, um það verður varla deilt - þó vissulega geti einhverjum fundist þetta einhverra hluta vegna bara allt í lagi. Það er alveg ljóst að það þarf að vera forgangsatriði að skapa aftur traust í skattframkvæmd á Íslandi. Á meðan það er ekki gert þá skiptir ný og uppbyggileg lagasetning litlu máli, því miður.

I think the potential to clarify the tax treatment of foreign investors investing in Icelandic funds and companies could have a very significant impact on the amount and type of capital that is invested in Iceland in the near future. The double taxation issue has been a significant point of concern for the largest foreign investors, and I believe the lack of tax certainty has discouraged most foreign funds investing in Iceland. My background is in private capital investing with 25 years of experience working in the U.S. for institutional investors. When I became a resident of Iceland in 2018 and met many of the private funds in Iceland, I was surprised that there were no foreign investors in some of the very good Icelandic venture capital and private equity funds. The funds are of high quality and there are many good investments in Iceland but Iceland has not yet had significant foreign limited partners as investors. Globally, 59% of all capital invested in venture capital and private equity funds in the world comes from U.S. based limited partners (Pitchbook data). 23.7% of the capital from these U.S. funds is invested in European funds and companies (source: Partners Group, Stepstone, Pantheon). Iceland’s portion of that annual committed capital should be almost 50b ISK a year (average of Iceland’s recent Eurozone GDP/FDI share), but it has been almost 0 ISK. I believe that clarifying the tax treatment of foreign registered pass through entities is key to unlocking this potential investment into Iceland. I have met with four of the leading tax and legal firms in Reykjavik and all have confirmed there is a strong potential for double taxation of foreign fund investors and the law is unknown, at best. It would be helpful for U.S. funds desiring to invest in Icelandic funds to be confident that that Iceland/U.S. tax treaty would be applied to them as taxable entities. As I understand it, investments in licensed slhf. funds are not taxed at the fund level in Iceland so it functions as a pass through (like a traditional private equity fund) but the tax obligation is on the taxable investor in the fund. Currently, if a U.S. fund invests in an Icelandic slhf. the U.S. fund is not considered a taxable entity for purposes of the tax treaty then it seems that taxes may be withheld in Iceland which would result in double taxation and probably continue to prohibit U.S. investors from investing in Icelandic venture capital and private equity funds. The primary pass-through fund investors in the U.S. that could be investing in Icelandic private funds and companies are U.S. based private equity funds and fund of funds. These funds are either (1) limited partnerships or (2) registered investment companies (RIC). On the registration and regulation issue in the U.S., RICs of any size and all limited partnerships over $150 million USD must be registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). This can be checked on any firm or individual at: IAPD - Investment Adviser Public Disclosure - Homepage (sec.gov) On the taxation and investor reporting issue, both types of funds are required to file annual tax returns detailing all income of the fund in extensive detail and the amounts allocated to every investor with all of their tax identifying information to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). These funds are also required to file additional forms detailing international income and allocate that income to every investor. The other common option is limited partnerships. Limited partnership private equity funds and funds of funds have been the most common in the past 40 years. They are limited to institutional and high net worth individual/family investors but can have a high number of investors if some requirements are met. With the passing of the Dodd-Frank Act in 2010, these funds had to register with the SEC if they are larger than $150 million. They are required to file a Form PF (Private Fund) Form PF (sec.gov) for registration and any material changes to the fund. Summary: I request that for the benefit of all investors interested in investing in Icelandic venture capital and private equity funds, the potential for double taxation of capital gains is clearly resolved by law. The uncertainty of how pass through foreign investors are treated has been holding back investment in Icelandic funds and companies. I look forward to clarity on this issue and the ability to grow Icelandic funds with foreign investors. Thank you for the opportunity to make a comment on this issue. Sorry it’s in English but my Icelandic is still pretty basic. Heath Cardie, CFA Arrowhead ehf.