Greece aligns rules regarding limited deductibility of foreign losses

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Greece aligns rules regarding limited deductibility of foreign losses

Sponsored by

eygreece.png
Positive development for Greek companies conducting business abroad through a branch

Eirini Theodoropoulou of EY Greece considers the rules regarding the deductibility of losses incurred abroad through a branch, for Greek companies.

The Greek tax administration recently acknowledged the right of Greek businesses to utilise losses of a permanent establishment (branch) of theirs located in an EU/EEA country, and offset them against profits incurred in Greece, at the time they incur. 

This stance, adopted with Circular 2100/2021, constitutes a positive development for Greek companies conducting business abroad through a branch, and will be evaluated by the affected companies upon the specific facts of each case.

Until May 2021, losses reported at a foreign, EU/EEA-based branch level, could be used by the Greek parent company, provided that the branch had ceased operations. Thus, the loss could be considered as ‘definite’. 

Under the previous regime – per the guidelines provided by Article 27 paragraph 4 of the Greek Income Tax Code (GITC), by virtue of Circulars 1088/2016 and 1200/2016 – losses incurred from the business activities of a branch located in an EU/EEA country, could not be used for offsetting Greek-sourced profits, if the foreign branch remained operational. 

The rationale was that the latter had the right to utilise losses, applicable to the terms and conditions of its country of establishment. Only ‘definite’ losses due to cessation of a foreign branch could be transferred to Greece for utilisation, in case of: 

  • Non-deduction of losses in the branch’s country of establishment; and

  • Exhaustion of available possibilities for the utilisation of losses abroad. 

The taxpayer bore the burden to prove that the above conditions were met.

In July 2019, the European Commission (EC) addressed its opinion to the Greek Authorities [reasoned opinion C (2019) 4841 Final], stating that the above rule is against the EU law on freedom of establishment, per Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. 

The EC considers that tax treatment of foreign branch losses according to Circular 1200/2016 of the Greek tax administration fails to respect EU legislation, on the basis that it provides a restrictive interpretation of Article 27, paragraph 4 of the GITC, resulting to the non-utilisation of losses incurred in an EU/EEA country, through a branch located thereto. 

Furthermore, the interpretation provided by said Circular differentiates tax treatment with respect to tax loss recognition, between Greek resident taxpayers and Greek resident taxpayers with at least part of their enterprises established in other EU/EEA countries. In essence, while business profits originating domestically and those originating in another EU/EEA state are both subject to taxes in Greece, the treatment of losses incurred abroad is limited. 

Ιt has been further ruled that the need to prevent the double deduction of losses concerns cases where, in order to avoid double taxation, a country uses the method of exemption of income stemming from foreign branches, and not the credit method. It is noted that the rationale behind the ‘definite’ criterion, was the prevention of the double deduction of losses. As regards tax paid abroad, Greece generally applies the tax credit method, which stipulates that foreign income is also taxed in Greece and the tax paid abroad for said income is credited against domestic tax. 

Therefore, the EC concluded that, given that Greece applies the tax credit method, no risk of double deduction of losses exists. Circular 2100/2021 followed the opinion of the EC, and the Greek tax administration aligned with EU legislation. 

The direct impact of this development is that Greek businesses that incur expenses abroad through a branch established thereto, are now entitled to use such losses at the time they incur and offset them against profits incurred in Greece, whereas the ‘definite’ criterion has now been abolished. 

For Greek businesses to be eligible to use such losses, the latter should be monitored separately per country in the Greek entity’s books, in order for their origin to be easily identifiable (already a prerequisite).

In conclusion, the above change settles the issue of deductibility of losses incurred abroad through a branch, for Greek companies, in line with EU legislation. However, whether the above provisions refer to tax or accounting losses generated from a branch established in an EU/EEA country, remains to be further clarified.

 

Eirini Theodoropoulou

Lawyer, EY Greece

E: eirini.theodoropoulou@gr.ey.com

 

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The new office on the fourth floor of 4 More London will span 14,230 square feet, with the potential to expand to the first and second floors
MNEs now face a shift from modelling to execution as the side‑by‑side deal forces tax teams to upgrade systems, harmonise data, and prevent costly pillar two mismatches
As recent surveys suggest a disconnect between AI adoption and employee engagement, the big four risk digging themselves into a strategic hole
Almost three-quarters of surveyed tax professionals are concerned about inaccurate AI outputs; in other news, Dentons hired a partner from CMS to lead its Belgian tax team
Long-running, high-value and complex enquiries are a significant reason for HM Revenue and Customs’s increased TP yield, experts suggest
Landmark legal updates in India have led companies to prioritise specialised tax advisers over accountants, ITR has found
Brazil’s shift to a nationwide consumption tax is more than conceptual; it fundamentally transforms municipal revenue, enforcement, and administrative disputes
While some advisers praised the ruling’s definition of a ‘voucher’ for VAT purposes, a UK partner said the case left unanswered questions
While pillar two has been enacted on paper in Brazil, companies are encountering a range of practical compliance issues, ITR has heard
Moore, founding partner of the Chicago tax boutique which bears her name, shares her career wisdom for ITR’s new Women in Tax interview series
Gift this article