Korrigeringsregeln kontra Ränteavdragsbegränsningarna

Sammanfattning: This thesis begins by accounting for some important court-cases and principles of EU-law. It will then describe the international predecessor of the current 'correction-rule', the Arms Lenght Principle in Article 9, together with the OECD guidelines, under which the correction-rule to some extent abide. The thesis moves forward to describe the correction-rule in swedish law and the important court-case Diligentia. An area of application is extracted from those rules. The legislative process of the swedish interest-deduction-limitation rules is illustrated. Another area of application is extracted from those rules. The construction of the interest-deduction-limitation rules leads to either the allowing for or the prohibition of a transaction. Thus it is possible to say there are two different interest-deduction-limitation rules. The counter-application is designed to expand on a surface within the original area of application. The correction-rule and the interest-deduction-limitation rules respective area of applications fallout in a conflict surface. The main question of this thesis is whether this will lead to conflict of norms, in the different modalities of the rules. The conclusion is there might be a conflict of norms, if the interest-deduction-limitation rules would allow for a deduction and the correction rule at the same time would disallow it. The thesis then asks whether these conflicts can be solved. The conclusion is they can, by giving the interest-limitation-deduction rules precedence.