论文部分内容阅读
从1948年起欧洲就开始了欧盟范围内的融合,其目标是建立一个统一的内部市场。经济全球化也对公司的移动性提出了新的要求。从税法角度上看,某些情况下的迁移住所对企业也具有十分重要的意义。在欧盟范围内,各成员国根据各自的公司法规定了不同的公司类型。这些公司在很多方面存在着较大区别,如最低注册资本的配备、公司的成立以及领导与代表关系领域内的员工参与决定等方面。公司在迁移住所后,其公司属人法是否需要被迫改变,是一个长期以来较具争议性的问题,尤其是在经历了所谓的住所论与成立论之争以后。而且在欧盟内部,欧共体法律的有关规定使得这个问题似乎更为尖锐,因为根据《欧共体合同》第43条、48条,在共同体内部适用公司定居自由原则。因此,第48条中规定的公司在欧盟内原则上拥有与自然人相同的定居权。
Since 1948, Europe has embraced the EU-wide integration and its goal is to establish a unified internal market. Economic globalization has also set new demands on the mobility of companies. From tax law point of view, in some cases the relocation of residence to the enterprise is also of great significance. Within the European Union, member states define different types of companies according to their respective corporate laws. There are many differences between these companies in many aspects, such as the allocation of the minimum registered capital, the establishment of the company and the staff participation and decision-making in the field of leadership and representation. Whether the company’s subsidiary personal law needs to be forced to change after the company has moved home is a long-held and controversial issue, especially after it has undergone a dispute over the so-called dwelling theory and establishment theory. And within the European Union, the relevant provisions of the law of the European Community make this question appear even more acute because, according to Article 43 and Article 48 of the “EC Contract”, the principle of colonial freedom of the company applies within the Community. Thus, the companies provided for in Article 48 have, in principle, the same right of abode in the EU as natural persons.