Skatteflyktsdirektivets införlivande - En träffsäker adaption eller ett rättsosäkert steg i fel riktning?

Sammanfattning: When the European Union's (EU) directive against tax avoidance was incor-porated into Swedish law in 2016, legislators merely stated that no further changes needed to be made to the Swedish tax evasion law. Within juris-prudential doctrine, however, it has been questioned whether the Swedish law against tax evasion really complies with the Union's directive. The incorporat-ion has been discussed partly in relation to the fact that the law already differs from the directive on an objective level, partly because the principle of prohibition of abuse of rights is not further mentioned in the Swedish law against tax evasion. In this essay, the question of whether the implementation of the directive has affected the legal certainty guarantees of the principle of legality and, by extension, the individual's possibilities for a foreseeable trial has been examined in more detail. The investigative part of the essay has shown that it is not possible to establish with certainty that the linguistic differences between the Swedish law against tax evasion and the European Union's directive against tax avoidance alone affect the legal certainty guarantees of the principle of legality. However, the difference has negatively affected the individual's opportunities for a fore-seeable trial. With regard to the fact that Swedish legislators have not taken wider account of the principle of prohibition of abuse when incorporating the directive, this means that the legal certainty guarantees of the principle of lega-lity, as well as the predictability of the individual, have been affected in a ne-gative direction.