Breaking news

Cyprus Tax Reform Ushers In Revised Deductions And Elevated Penalties

by THEFUTURE.TEAM

February 12, 2026

Effective January 1, Cyprus has implemented significant changes to its tax legislation. The reform adjusts rates and deductions and imposes substantially higher penalties, signaling a robust commitment to boosting compliance and deterring evasion.

Enhanced Deterrence Measures

The revised framework significantly raises administrative fines across a wide range of activities. One of the most notable changes concerns the obligation to accept credit card payments. The penalty for non-compliance has increased to €6,000, up from €4,000 previously and €2,000 when the requirement was first introduced in 2021. The rule applies across retail, services, hospitality, and leisure sectors and forms part of broader efforts to limit undeclared transactions and protect public revenue.

Follow THE FUTURE on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, X and Telegram

Adjustments To Reporting And Submission Deadlines

Penalties for failures related to tax filings and data submissions have also been tightened. The daily fine for a continuing violation has risen from €17 to €20, while the penalty for unjustifiably omitting income from a tax return now reaches €5,000, compared with €2,000 under the previous regime. Non-compliance with invoicing and receipt requirements is subject to the same ceiling, replacing the earlier fine of €450. These measures reinforce stricter expectations around accurate reporting and documentation.

Graduated Consequences For Late Payments And Serious Breaches

A tiered penalty system now applies to late submissions. Individuals face a fine of €150, small companies with a turnover below €1 million are charged €250, and larger businesses incur a fine of €500. If deadlines set by the tax commissioner are missed, the penalties escalate further to €300, €500, or €1,000, respectively. No fine is imposed, however, when an official extension is granted, and returns along with self-assessed taxes are filed within the approved timeframe, typically by July 31 or January 31.

Strict Penalties For Serious Tax Offenses

The reform also strengthens sanctions for more serious violations. Where business premises are sealed due to breaches such as failure to issue lawful receipts or outstanding tax debts, any attempt to tamper with the seal constitutes a criminal offense. Such actions may result in fines of up to €30,000 and imprisonment of up to two years. In cases of unpaid taxes, company executives, board members, or financial officers may also be held personally liable.

Penalties linked to the extraordinary defence contribution have been significantly increased. A first conviction may lead to a fine of up to €5,000, together with payment of up to double the amount owed. A second conviction carries far heavier consequences, including fines of up to €100,000, imprisonment of up to two years, and payment of up to four times the original contribution. Offences related to defence procurement or associated financial benefits are punishable by fines of up to €30,000, rising to €100,000 when a public official or person acting on behalf of the Republic is involved.

The Future Forbes Realty Global Properties

by News Editor

August 24, 2026

Courts Are Still Applying Old Copyright Rules To AI

AI companies train models on enormous amounts of published material, including books, articles and academic research. Whether using that content without authors’ permission violates copyright law remains unresolved.

Much of the debate centres on fair use, which allows copyrighted material to be used without permission in certain circumstances. Courts consider factors such as the purpose of the use, how much material was involved and its impact on the original market.

Follow THE FUTURE on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, X and Telegram

Anthropic Case Sets An Important Precedent

A major case involving Anthropic and a group of authors provided one of the clearest rulings so far. Judge William Alsup found that using copyrighted books to train AI models was lawful, comparing the process to people reading and studying literature before creating something new.

Anthropic was nevertheless ordered to pay $1.5 billion in a settlement. The penalty concerned books the company had obtained from illegal online libraries rather than the AI training itself.

For AI companies, that distinction could prove significant because it separates studying copyrighted material from directly copying it.

Competition Could Be The Key Issue

A case involving Thomson Reuters and Ross Intelligence offers a different perspective. A court ruled that Ross could not claim fair use after using Reuters’ copyrighted material to develop a competing AI-powered legal research platform.

The decision suggests courts may be less willing to consider AI training fair use when copyrighted content is used to build a product that directly competes with the original.

For authors, an unresolved question is whether AI-generated content should be considered competition for the works used to train these models.

The Law Has Yet To Catch Up

US copyright law predates generative AI by decades, leaving courts to apply old principles to new technology. Questions also remain over copyright protection for AI-generated works. In Thaler v. Perlmutter, a court ruled that material created entirely by AI cannot receive copyright protection.

Major AI companies remain involved in copyright litigation, and different courts could reach different conclusions. For now, there is no universal rule: the legality of AI training will depend on the circumstances of each case and how courts ultimately interpret copyright and fair use.