배출권 거래의 부가가치세 과세에 관한 비교법적 연구

This article reviews VAT tax issues arising with relation to the introduction of the emission trading scheme in korea’s legislation system. In order to that purpose, this article uses comparative legal methodology which is comprised of analysis on the EU VAT directive and EU member state’s VAT legislation and temporary korea’s VAT act. Beforehand the comparative legal analysis of EU VAT related acts and korea’s VAT act, this article focuses on the legal nature of emission allowance. Therefore, first chapter in this article make a comparative study to understand the legal nature of emission allowance by reviewing EU ETS directive, EU member state ETS act and concludes that the legal nature of emission allowance is not subject to the scope of legal reasoning extent but to the scope of legislative policy choice. Thus although korea’s ETS act does not provide the legal nature of emission allowance, this article concludes that the legal nature of emission allowance is a subject right. On the basis of this conclusion, this article treats the emission allowance for VAT taxation purpose. Second chapter in this article make a comparative study of each issues arising in the VAT taxation on the emission allowance trading under the temporary VAT legal system of EU and korea. Concerning the VAT object issue, the emission allowance is service in the EU VAT directive but under korea’s VAT act, the emission allowance must be good. So the place of suppling of emission allowance is the place of suppliers in domestic trading but the place of customers in cross border trading under EU VAT directive. Similar to EU, the issue of VAT taxation of cross border emission trading is tax adjustment problem under the korea’s VAT system. Relate to issue of transferring emission allowance, EU and korea legislation would be same VAT consequence that transferring emission allowance between private entity is subject to taxation of VAT. Third chapter in this article treats the threaten of VAT carousel fraud trading by using emission allowances and the EU’ legislative response of that threaten. In fact, EU VAT system is susceptible to carousel fraud and a number of carousel fraud trading is increasing. Due to the small volume and relatively expensive value, VAT fraudsters prefer to use emission allowances as VAT carousel fraud instruments. In order to avoid carousel fraud at emission trading, EU commission introduced reverse charge mechanism in cross border emission allowance transactions in 2010. Under the reverse charge mechanism, the customer had to account for VAT. However, some EU member state authority introduced a VAT exemption or zero rate for the transfer of emission allowances. Therefore, the response of VAT carousel fraud at emission trading varied for each EU member states and the trend of legislative response would converge a VAT exemption for emission trading. There is the possibility of threaten of carousel fraud at emission trading in korea. And there are some problems that occurs in VAT taxation of emission allowance trading under korea’s VAT system. Thus this article emphatically asserts that emission allowance should be exempt VAT taxation. Also, non-VAT tax treatment of emission allowance can be justified for the purpose of supporting efforts of reducing GHG emissions by individual entity.