Petitions to the Chamber of Deputies

OBJECT : I. Subject of the petition The petition asks the Chamber of Deputies to amend the law of 10 August 1915 on commercial companies (the "Company Law") in order to expressly recognise the possibility, for an existing shareholder, to contribute equity to a Luxembourg company without receiving new shares in return. This practice, common in Luxembourg, is currently provided for only by accounting law, and not by company law. The absence of a statutory framework creates legal uncertainty for companies, shareholders, and creditors. The petition further asks that the tax treatment of such contributions be clarified, either by way of an amendment to the law of 4 December 1967 on income tax, or through a circular issued by the tax authorities. II. Background and current legal situation Contributing equity to a company without receiving new shares in return is a common operation in Luxembourg, particularly within groups of companies. It allows the equity of a company to be increased quickly, without the costs of a traditional capital increase by notarial deed. Yet this operation is only governed by accounting law (under capital account 115 of the Luxembourg Standard Chart of Accounts). Neither the Company Law nor any other company-law text sets out its legal effects, the conditions under which it may be carried out, the rights and duties of the contributing shareholders, or its consequences in the event of insolvency, liquidation or transfer of shares of the company. This absence of a legal framework has already given rise to unfavourable court decisions. In 2022, the Higher Administrative Court ruled that such contributions are not taken into account for the purposes of the parent-subsidiary tax regime. The result is a mismatch between the accounting treatment (which considers them as equity) and the tax treatment (which disregards them), to the detriment of legal certainty and the attractiveness of Luxembourg.

OBJECT : Au Luxembourg, en matière civile, chacun assume ses propres frais de justice, tandis qu'en Allemagne, la partie qui perd le procès doit supporter l'ensemble des frais de procédure. Bien que l'objectif au Luxembourg, tout comme en Allemagne, soit de permettre un accès aussi libre que possible de toutes les couches de la population aux institutions judiciaires, les coûts de procédure ont une influence certaine sur le déroulement des litiges, ce qui dissuade souvent les personnes à revenus normaux d'aller en justice. Un système tel qu'en Allemagne, où le perdant du litige prend en charge les frais de procédure, pourrait également être appliqué au Luxembourg. Ainsi, le « petit citoyen » aurait lui aussi une meilleure chance de faire valoir ses droits, plutôt que d'avoir à supporter ses propres frais de justice, même s'il obtient gain de cause devant le tribunal. Un avantage du système allemand est que celui qui est dans son droit et gagne obtient généralement le remboursement de ses frais (y compris les frais d'avocat) par la partie adverse. Un inconvénient est que des montants litigieux élevés peuvent entraîner des coûts considérables. Mais c'est la même chose au Luxembourg.

OBJECT : The purpose of this petition is to introduce, in Luxembourg, a legal framework for collective supplementary health insurance for employees in the private sector. This framework should provide for the following principles: 1. An obligation, for companies reaching a minimum employee threshold, to offer their employees collective supplementary health insurance; 2. A minimum employer contribution of 50% of the cost of the employee's basic coverage; 3. For companies with more than 100 employees, the possibility to offer three different levels of coverage adapted to employees' needs, provided that the price of the highest level does not exceed more than 100% above the lowest level; 4. Freedom of choice for employees, including: * joining the basic coverage; * optional extension to family members under negotiated conditions; * the possibility of exemption, exclusively where equivalent coverage already exists, notably through a spouse, another employer or a foreign scheme; 5. Tax neutrality, ensuring that the share paid by the employee benefits from tax treatment at least equivalent to that applicable to individually subscribed supplementary health insurance; 6. Adaptation according to company size, in order not to impose disproportionate administrative burdens on small and medium-sized enterprises; 7. Early application or specific mechanisms for companies employing staff in risk-related positions or under particularly demanding working conditions. These measures aim to improve access to healthcare, reduce household financial burden, strengthen fairness between employees, and reconcile social protection with economic competitiveness.