Lithuania

There are no deviations from the Directive.

There are no differences.

In case individual person (employed by an entity) performs an action on behalf of the entity (i.e. employer) that falls under the definition of „intermediary“, the entity would be considered as an intermediary.In case there is no intermediary involved (as defined in the Directive), the reporting obligation in respect of a reportable cross-border arrangement lies with the relevant taxpayer).

These actions are not defined.

There are no deviations from the Directive.

There are no deviations from the Directive.

There are no deviations from the Directive.

There are no deviations from the Directive.

There are no deviations from the Directive.

There are no deviations from the Directive.If there are multiple reporting obligations, the intermediary shall be exempt from filing the information if it has proof, in accordance with national law, that the same information has been filed in another Member State.

There are no deviations from the Directive.An intermediary shall be exempt from filing the information only to the extent that it has proof, in accordance with national law, that the same information has already been filed by another intermediary.

There are no deviations from the Directive.If there are multiple reporting obligations, the relevant taxpayer shall be exempt from filing the information if it has proof, in accordance with national law, that the same information has been filed in another Member State.

There are no deviations from the Directive.Any relevant taxpayer shall only be exempt from filing the information to the extent that it has proof, in accordance with national law, that the same information has already been filed by another relevant taxpayer.

The intermediary or relevant taxpayer can prove the exemption by referring the number of the tax arrangement assigned by the competent authority.

National tax arrangements are not subject to report.

There are no deviations from the Directive.

There are no deviations from the Directive.

There are no deviations from the Directive.

The main benefit test will be satisfied if it can be established that the main benefit or one of the main benefits which, having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, a person may reasonably expect to derive from an arrangement is the obtaining of a tax advantage.

There is no definition of a tax advantage provided in the Order. However, following the provisions of the Lithuanian Law on Tax Administration, the tax advantage is defined as the deferral of the deadline for tax payment, reduction of the payable tax amount, avoidance of payable tax, an increase of tax overpayment, etc.

There are no deviations from the Directive.

There is no white list defining arrangements explicitly excluded from a reporting obligation.

There are no deviations from the Directive.

It is considered that conditions for implementation tax arrangement are in place or tax arrangement is ready for implementation when tax arrangement is sufficiently well designed, developed, considered and a decision to implement the tax arrangement can be taken.For tax arrangement to be considered as reportable, which is made available for implementation, it is not necessary to provide detailed information on the agreement to the taxpayer concerned, if the substance of tax arrangement could be understood from the proposal. If a reportable tax arrangement has been prepared and offered to the taxpayer concerned but the taxpayer has refused to implement it, the reportable tax arrangement shall be deemed to have been submitted for implementation and the obligation to report such arrangement arise to the intermediary.

It is considered that conditions for implementation tax arrangement are in place or tax arrangement is ready for implementation when tax arrangement is sufficiently well designed, developed, considered and a decision to implement the tax arrangement can be taken.For tax arrangement to be considered as reportable, which is made available for implementation, it is not necessary to provide detailed information on the agreement to the taxpayer concerned, if the substance of tax arrangement could be understood from the proposal. If a reportable tax arrangement has been prepared and offered to the taxpayer concerned but the taxpayer has refused to implement it, the reportable tax arrangement shall be deemed to have been submitted for implementation and the obligation to report such arrangement arise to the intermediary.

The first step in the implementation of a tax arrangement is the first change in the factual or legal status resulting from the reportable tax arrangement, given which occurs first. The first step in the implementation of a reportable tax arrangement may include the establishment of a legal entity, the signing of the agreement, the decision of the management board to approve the prepared reportable tax arrangement.

There are no deviations from the Directive.

Online reporting, data should be submitted under the form of xml file.

Intermediary as well as the relevant taxpayer can be obliged to provide the report.

There are no deviations from the Directive.

The number of reportable cross-border arrangement – the number which is assigned by the Lithuanian Tax Authorities to the intermediary or relevant taxpayer, when he submit information on such arrangement for the first time.

28 February 2021.

The start date of the 30-day reporting deadline is 1 January 2021.

There is no specific guidance, a general deadline of 30 days from the relevant reporting trigger shall be applied.

Sanctions are imposed in case of:- omission to report;- breach of reporting obligation (e.g. lack of reporting, late reporting, incomplete reporting, etc.).It should be noted that each violation is assessed by the Tax Authorities individually.

Administration fine from EUR 1,820 to EUR 5,590;Administration fine for repeated violations from EUR 3,770 to EUR 6,000.

No distinction is made between intermediaries and relevant taxpayers.

This case is not specifically mentioned in the Lithuanian law. Therefore, there are no sanctions for redundant reports.

The local law does not specify any gradations for different breaches of the reporting obligation. Determining the sanction is at the discretion of the Tax Authorities.

The penalties do not differ.

DAC 1, DAC 2, DAC 3, DAC4, DAC 5 implemented into the Lithuanian legislation.

There are no other deviations from the Directive.

State Tax Inspectorate under the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Lithuania.

There are no other obligations.

The intermediary is primarily obliged to report. The taxpayer is obliged to report in the following cases:- there is no intermediary;- intermediary is subject to a legal professional privilege under Lithuanian law.The intermediary could be waived from his reporting obligation if the reporting obligation would breach the legal professional privilege under Lithuanian legislation. If the intermediary notifies the relevant taxpayer or another intermediary of a waiver, the reporting obligation lies with the other notified intermediary, or if there is no such intermediary, with the relevant taxpayer.

Yes.

Professional secrecy is defined in the Lithuanian Civil Code.

There is no guidance.

Following the written comments related to the implementation of the Directive prepared by the Tax Authorities, the professional privilege could be applied to the lawyers.

The reporting obligation could be in breach of the legal professional privilege under Lithuanian legislation (no regulatory definition yet). Also, such an intermediary is obliged to inform another intermediary or taxpayer that he will use a legal privilege. Hence, the reporting obligation lies with the other notified intermediary, or if there is no such intermediary, with the relevant taxpayer.

Regulation of the procedure for notification has not been established yet.

No.