1. Hybrid mismatch means a situation involving a taxpayer or an entity where:
(a) a payment under a financial instrument gives rise to a deduction without inclusion outcome and: 
(i) such payment is not included within a reasonable period of time; and 
(ii) the mismatch outcome is attributable to differences in the characterisation of the instrument or the payment made under it. 
For the purposes of the first subparagraph, a payment under a financial instrument shall be treated as included in income within a reasonable period of time where: 
(i)	the payment is included by the jurisdiction of the payee in a tax period that commences within 12 months of the end of the payer's tax period; or 
(ii)	it is reasonable to expect that the payment will be included by the jurisdiction of the payee in a future tax period and the terms of payment are those that would be expected to be agreed between independent enterprises; 
A payment representing the underlying return on a transferred financial instrument shall not give rise to a hybrid mismatch where the payment is made by a financial trader under an on-market hybrid transfer provided the payer jurisdiction requires the financial trader to include as income all amounts received in relation to the transferred financial instrument;
(b) a payment to a hybrid entity gives rise to a deduction without inclusion and that mismatch outcome is the result of differences in the allocation of payments made to the hybrid entity under the laws of the jurisdiction where the hybrid entity is established or registered and the jurisdiction of any person with a participation in that hybrid entity; 
(c) a payment to an entity with one or more permanent establishments gives rise to a deduction without inclusion and that mismatch outcome is the result of differences in the allocation of payments between the head office and permanent establishment or between two or more permanent establishments of the same entity under the laws of the jurisdictions where the entity operates; 
(d) a payment gives rise to a deduction without inclusion as a result of a payment to a disregarded permanent establishment; 
(e) a payment by a hybrid entity gives rise to a deduction without inclusion and that mismatch is the result of the fact that the payment is disregarded under the laws of the payee jurisdiction; 
(f) a deemed payment between the head office and permanent establishment or between two or more permanent establishments gives rise to a deduction without inclusion and that mismatch is the result of the fact that the payment is disregarded under the laws of the payee jurisdiction; or 
(g) a double deduction outcome occurs.
A hybrid mismatch shall only arise under points (e), (f) or (g) of the first subparagraph to the extent that the payer jurisdiction allows the deduction to be set off against an amount that is not dual-inclusion income;
A mismatch outcome shall not be treated as a hybrid mismatch unless it arises between associated enterprises, between a taxpayer and an associated enterprise, between the head office and permanent establishment, between two or more permanent establishments of the same entity or under a structured arrangement.

2. In cases (b), (c), (d), (e), (g) ‘associated enterprise’ means: 
(a) an entity in which the taxpayer holds directly or indirectly a participation in terms of voting rights or capital ownership of 25 percent or more or is entitled to receive 25 percent or more of the profits of that entity; 
(b) an individual or entity which holds directly or indirectly a participation in terms of voting rights or capital ownership in a taxpayer of 25 percent or more or is entitled to receive 25 percent or more of the profits of the taxpayer; 
If an individual or entity holds directly or indirectly a participation of 25 percent or more in a taxpayer and one or more entities, all the entities concerned, including the taxpayer, shall also be regarded as associated enterprises.

3. To the extent that a hybrid mismatch results in a double deduction: (a) the deduction shall be denied in the Member State at the level of the investor; and (b) where the deduction is not denied in the investor jurisdiction, the deduction shall be denied at the level of the payer. Nevertheless, any such deduction shall be eligible to be set off against dual inclusion income whether arising in a current or subsequent tax period.
 
4. To the extent that a hybrid mismatch results in a deduction without inclusion: (a) the deduction shall be denied at the level of the payer; and (b) where the deduction is not denied in the payer jurisdiction, the amount of the payment that would otherwise give rise to a mismatch outcome shall be included in income at the level of the payee jurisdiction.

5. A deduction for any payment by a taxpayer is denied to the extent that such payment directly or indirectly funds deductible expenditure giving rise to a hybrid mismatch through a transaction or series of transactions between associated enterprises or entered into as part of a structured arrangement except to the extent that one of the jurisdictions involved in the transaction or series of transactions has made an equivalent adjustment in respect of such hybrid mismatch.

6. To the extent that a hybrid mismatch involves disregarded permanent establishment income which is not subject to tax, the taxpayer is required to include the income that would otherwise be attributed to the disregarded permanent establishment. This applies unless the exemption is given under a double taxation treaty with a third country. 

7. To the extent that a hybrid transfer is designed to produce a relief for tax withheld at source on a payment derived from a transferred financial instrument to more than one of the parties involved, the benefit of such relief is limited in proportion to the net taxable income regarding such payment.’;

8. To the extent that a deduction for payment, expenses or losses of a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes in two or more jurisdictions is deductible from the tax base in both jurisdictions, the deduction to the extent that the other jurisdiction allows the duplicate deduction to be set off against income that is not dual-inclusion income is denied. If the taxpayer is resident in two jurisdictions and the other jurisdiction is a Member State, the deduction is denied, where the taxpayer is not deemed to be a resident according to the double taxation treaty between the two Member States.

9. Where one or more associated non-resident entities holding in aggregate a direct or indirect interest in 50 per cent or more of the voting rights, capital interests or rights to a share of profit in a hybrid entity that is incorporated or established in Greece are located in a jurisdiction or jurisdictions that regard the hybrid entity as a taxable person in Greece, the hybrid entity shall be regarded as a resident of Greece and taxed on its income to the extent that that income is not otherwise taxed under the Greek laws or any other jurisdiction.

10. The above paragraph shall not apply to a collective investment vehicle. For the purposes of these provisions, “collective investment vehicle” means an investment fund or vehicle that is widely held, holds a diversified portfolio of securities and is subject to investor-protection regulation in the country in which it is established.