The general anti-abuse rule in Estonian tax law: stretching the limits of the principle of legal certainty
By: Kaido Künnapas and Elisabeth Lauri
References
- Balestieri, S. (2025) The General Anti-Abuse Rule under the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD): a critical examination of its role in combating tax abuse within the internal market and the legal implications of its transposition across EU Member States. Doctoral thesis. Maastricht University.
- ‘Cadbury Schweppes plc and Cadbury Schweppes Overseas Ltd v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue’ (2006) Case C-196/04. Judgement of the Court.
- ‘Commission recommendation 2012/772/EU of 6 December 2012 on aggressive tax planning’ (2012) Official Journal L 338/41, 12 December.
- Constitution of the Republic of Estonia 1992. Eesti Vabariigi põhiseadus. RT 1992, 26, 349; RT I, 11 April 2025, 1.
- ‘Council directive 2011/96/EU of 30 November 2011 on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States’ (2011) Official Journal L 345, pp. 8–16.
- ‘Council directive (EU) 2016/1164 of 12 July 2016 laying down rules against tax avoidance practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market (ATAD)’ (2016) Official Journal L 193, pp. 1–14.
- de Broe, L. and Beckers, D. (2017) ‘The General Anti-Abuse Rule of the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive: an analysis against the wider perspective of the European Court of Justice’s case law on abuse of EU law’, EC Tax Review, 26(3), pp. 133–144. Available at: https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2017015
- de Wilde, M.F. (2018) ‘Is the ATAD’s GAAR a Pandora’s box?’, in P. Pistone and D. Weber (eds) The implementation of anti-BEPS rules in the EU: a comprehensive study. IBFD, pp. 135–157. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3040709
- Explanatory memorandum to Draft law No. 705 SE amending the Estonian Income Tax Act (2018). Available at: https://www.riigikogu.ee/tegevus/eelnoud/eelnou/97180f59-7b6f-4797-aa2d-d6604039633b/ (Accessed: 8 September 2026).
- ‘Halifax plc, Leeds Permanent Development Services Ltd and County Wide Property Investments Ltd v. Commissioners of Customs & Excise’ (2006) Case C-255/02. Judgement of the Court.
- Income Tax Act (Estonia) 1999. Tulumaksuseadus (TMS). RT I 1999, 101, 903; RT I, 18 December 2025, 3.
- ‘Itelcar – Automóveis de Aluguer Lda v. Fazenda Pública’ (2013) Case C-282/12. Judgement of the Court.
- Künnapas, K. (2020) ‘Dysfunctionality from the sovereignty conflict in the ATAD GAAR’, TalTech Journal of European Studies, 10(1), pp. 97–122. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2020-0006
- Künnapas, K. and Jõks, A. (2018) ‘Allar Jõks: rahandusministeerium peaks vähemalt vabandama’, Ärileht, 15 December.
- Liiva, S. (2018) ‘Riik tahtis ettevõtjatele seadusega salakavala lõksu seada’, Ärileht, 8 December.
- Madise, Ü., Kalmo, H., Kask, O. and Pruks, P. (2020) Commentaries to the Estonian Constitution. Revised edition. Available at: https://pohiseadus.ee/ (Accessed: 8 September 2026).
- Moreno, A.B. (2017) ‘GAARs and treaties: from the guiding principle to the principal purpose test. What have we gained from BEPS Action 6?’, Intertax, 45(6/7), pp. 432–446. Available at: https://doi.org/10.54648/taxi2017036
- ‘OAO Neftyanaya Kompaniya Yukos v. Russia’ (2011) Application No. 14902/04. Judgement of the European Court of Human Rights, 20 September.
- OECD (1987) International tax avoidance and evasion: four related studies. Issues in International Taxation, No. 1. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/1987/04/international-tax-avoidance-and-evasion_g1ghgbf6/g2ghgbf6-en.pdf (Accessed: 8 September 2026).
- Öner, C. (2020) ‘Comparative analysis of the General Anti-Abuse Rule of the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive: an effective tool to tackle tax avoidance?’, EC Tax Review, 29(1), pp. 38–52. Available at: https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2020005
- ‘Part Service Srl v. Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze’ (2008) Case C-425/06. Judgement of the Court.
- Prebble, Z.M. and Prebble, J. (2008) ‘Comparing the General Anti-Avoidance Rule of income tax law with the civil law doctrine of abuse of law’, Bulletin for International Taxation, April. Victoria University of Wellington Legal Research Paper No. 133/2017. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1473612 (Accessed: 8 September 2026).
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2001) ‘Kõrgesaare v. Tax Authority of Tartu City’, Case No. 3-3-1-57-00. Judgement of the Administrative Chamber, 15 January.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2002) ‘Peipus OÜ v. Ida-Viru County’, Case No. 3-3-1-54-02. Judgement of the Administrative Chamber, 13 November.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2005) ‘Application by Tallinn Circuit Court’, Case No. 3-4-1-16-05. Judgement of the Constitutional Review Chamber, 15 December.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2007) ‘Niiter OÜ v. Tax and Customs Board’, Case No. 3-3-1-22-07. Judgement of the Administrative Chamber, 30 May.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2009a) ‘Jüri Ilvest v. Tax and Customs Board’, Case No. 3-3-1-59-09. Judgement of the Administrative Chamber, 4 November.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2009b) ‘Ülo Kriisa et al. v. Tax and Customs Board (Sylvester)’, Case No. 3-3-1-23-09. Judgement of the Administrative Chamber, 17 June.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2009c) ‘Urmas Leeman v. Tax and Customs Board’, Case No. 3-3-1-52-09. Judgement of the Administrative Chamber, 4 November.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2011a) ‘Marge Sirge v. Tax and Customs Board’, Case No. 3-3-1-15-11. Judgement of the Administrative Chamber, 25 April.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2011b) ‘Review of Penal Code Section 87²(2)’, Case No. 3-4-1-16-10. Judgement of the General Chamber, 21 June.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2012) ‘Maret Lilleorg v. Tax and Customs Board’, Case No. 3-3-1-79-11. Judgement of the Administrative Chamber, 13 February.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2015a) ‘Rubla & Luterma v. Tax and Customs Board’, Case No. 3-2-1-82-14. Judgement of the General Chamber, 12 May.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2015b) ‘Sirowa v. Tax and Customs Board’, Case No. 3-3-1-25-15. Judgement of the Administrative Chamber, 11 September.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2016) ‘Application by Kõpu et al.’, Case No. 3-4-1-3-16. Judgement of the Constitutional Review Chamber, 20 December.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2020) ‘Vallaste & Partnerid v. Tax and Customs Board’, Case No. 3-18-1740. Judgement of the Administrative Chamber, 4 March.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2022a) ‘AS Tere’, Case No. 1-18-158. Judgement of the Criminal Chamber, 19 April.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2022b) ‘Tartu Mill’, Case No. 3-17-523. Judgement of the Administrative Chamber, 27 September.
- Supreme Court of Estonia (2023) ‘Justiitsminister’ [Minister of Justice], Case No. 5-23-35. Judgement of the Constitutional Review Chamber, 6 November.
- Tallinn Circuit Court (2009) ‘WASP Project OÜ v. Tax and Customs Board’, Case No. 3-08-364. Judgement, 4 March.
- Taxation Act (Estonia) 2002. Maksukorralduse seadus (MkS). RT I 2002, 26; RT I, 2 October 2025, 1.
- Velthoven, M. (2024) ‘The ATAD GAAR: a little older, but are we wiser?’, EC Tax Review, 33(3), pp. 109–125. Available at: https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2024014
- Zimmer, F. (2019) ‘In defence of general anti-avoidance rules’, Bulletin for International Taxation, 73(4), pp. 218–226. Available at: https://doi.org/10.59403/3nmccmj
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/bjes-2026-0026 | Journal eISSN: 2674-4619 (formerly 2228-0596) | Journal ISSN: 2674-4600 (formerly 2228-0596)
Language: English
Page range: 311 - 332
Published online: Oct 25, 2026
Published in print: Dec 1, 2026
Published by: Tallinn University of Technology
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Keywords:
Related subjects:
© 2026 Kaido Künnapas, Elisabeth Lauri, published by Tallinn University of Technology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.