International Tax Law

EN: Curtailment of aggressive tax planning (ATP) has become a critical matter for international taxation. Mandatory disclosure rules (MDR) work as an early warning system for ATP strategies. They allow tax authorities to respond quickly to tax risks “through informed risk assessment, audits, or changes to legislation or regulations” while deterring taxpayers and tax advisers from designing, promoting or implementing ATP. MDR have become a significant trend, of which the EU Council Directive 2018/822 (DAC6) represents the most topical development. In light of the above, this study addresses the questions MDR raise regarding their “value rationality” and, therefore, its adequacy for protecting tax advisers’ and taxpayers’ rights. The article warns of the risk of MDR becoming a way of haunting legal tax planning, along with tax advisers and their business, and therefore a threat to the “hard core” of taxpayers’ rights to legal tax planning, legal aid and nemo tenetur, along with severe limitations to the economic freedoms of both taxpayers and tax advisers. The article also discusses the audi alteram partem issues arising from the taxpayers’ lack of involvement in the qualification as ATP of a given scheme, and the siege against the (legal) professional privilege that MDR represent. Finally, the article tackles the severe doubts raised by the sanctions for non-compliance with MDR, regarding legally protected rights, proportionality and culpability, as well as the use of non-monetary penalties and the communicability of evidence obtained through MDR in criminal proceedings.

ES: El artículo aborda las cuestiones que las reglas de reporte obligatorio de esquemas fiscales potencialmente agresivos ("Mandatory Disclosure Rules", o MDR) plantean sobre su "racionalidad valorativa" y, por tanto, su adecuación para proteger los derechos de los asesores fiscales y de los contribuyentes. El artículo advierte del riesgo de que los MDR se conviertan en una forma de persecución de la planificación fiscal legal, junto con la de los asesores fiscales y su negocio, y, por tanto, en una amenaza para el "núcleo duro" de los derechos de los contribuyentes a la planificación fiscal legal, la asistencia jurídica y el nemo tenetur, junto con graves limitaciones a las libertades económicas tanto de los contribuyentes como de los asesores fiscales. El artículo también analiza los problemas de audi alteram partem derivados de la falta de participación de los contribuyentes en la calificación como planificación fiscal «agresiva» de un determinado régimen, y el asedio al secreto profesional que las MDR representa. Por último, el artículo aborda las severas dudas que suscitan las sanciones por incumplimiento de los MDR, en relación con los derechos jurídicamente protegidos, la proporcionalidad y la culpabilidad, así como la utilización de sanciones no pecuniarias y la comunicabilidad de las pruebas obtenidas a través de los MDR en los procesos penales.

It is a wellknown
principle that a taxpayer has the right to manage his affairs within the parameters of the law to his best advantage to pay
the least amount of tax.
This principle is further endorsed in the constitution. Section 22 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 provides that every
citizen has the right to choose their trade, occupation or profession freely. Section 25(1) provides that "no one may be deprived of property
except in terms of law of general application, and no law may permit arbitrary deprivation of property".
Accordingly, where a taxpayer has arranged his affairs within the ambit of existing laws, and without an active purpose of defrauding the
relevant revenue authorities, a retrospective amendment to tax legislation prima facie infringes on that taxpayer's right to economic freedom
and the right to property.
In Krok v Commissioner, South African Revenue Service (2015 (6) SA 317 (SCA)), the supreme court of appeal was called upon to rule on
the correctness of a preservation order that was granted by the high court (Commissioner, South African Revenue Service v Krok 2014 (3) SA
453 (GP)) in terms of the doubletax
agreement between the Republic of South Africa and Australia in respect of taxes that arose before the
amendments to the agreement took effect. Simply put, the court was called upon to rule on the retrospective effect of the said amendments.
In the course of the litigation the validity of the transfer of property situated in South Africa, but allegedly transferred under an agreement
concluded in the British Virgin Islands, also had to be considered. The supreme court of appeal did not explicitly recognize this as a conflict of
law or private international law problem and applied South African common law. The approach followed by the court will be critically evaluated.

Decoding the concept of exit taxation <<The aim of this paper is to explain the concept of exit taxation and its evolution over period of time. The paper also highlights the position of model conventions and the EU law with regard to exit taxation. It further describes how issues related to exit taxation can be resolved >>

What a chance to discuss with economics and legal experts about the possible consequences of the adoption of Pilar 1 and 2 on EU law and tax treaties. In fact, while questions remain unanswered, some proposals can be made to improve the potential consequences of such adoption.

Disguised profit distribution as part of Abolished 5422 number Corporate Tax Law has
started to fall short in terms of national and international operations in time. Applications that are
carried out in the systems of many developed countries were wanted to be included in Turkish Tax
System. Being valid from 01.01.2007, “Transfer pricing” application has been included in Turkish Tax
Law after being arranged in scope of 5520 numbered Corporate Tax Law. On the other hand, transfer
pricing that was included in Income Tax Law with 5315 number Law, has gained significance not only
in terms of corporations, but also for natural entities that have commercial earning.
Transfer pricing, that has been applied in many developed countries particularly America
and Japan, is an issue that is as important as to require a special proficiency and it has a wide and
detailed field of application. Transfer pricing is an application that is basically used and developed in
order to take tax avoidances during operations of international entities between countries under
control, and in order to prevent tax evasions.
Arm’s Length Principle that is the focal point of the application is managed by various
methods based on OECD regulations. In other words, some methods are applied in order to determine
arm’s length principle and calculations used during these methods creates a significant point.
Taxpayers who transact with the methods have the chance to benefit from “Advance Pricing
Agreements” in order to prevent any hesitations and comply with the instructions of tax
administration. In this way, they guarantee preventing tax penalties and they can prepare their budgets
by making price plannings easily.
In this study, by taking OECD arrangements into consideration, the concept of transfer
pricing, its importance, application and especially Advance Pricing Applications will be analyzed and
evaluated.

Num mundo globalizado, marcado pelas novas tecnologias, pela mobilidade, pela preocupação com o desenvolvimento e por espaços de integração económica profunda, os acordos para evitar e/ou eliminar a dupla tributação defrontam-se com golpes certeiros na sua vitalidade. Equacionar este desafio dos instrumentos bilaterais de resolução da dupla tributação é tarefa fundamental para a auto-suficiência do Direito Internacional Fiscal. Não se defende a perda de vigor das funções desempenhadas pelos acordos bilaterais, antes se aponta para a inadequação dos meios por esses utilizados. Lançar a reflexão sobre quais as respostas possíveis para os desafios colocados aos acordos para evitar e eliminar a dupla tributação numa era de fiscalidade global é o pretendido.

In international business, competitiveness is the crux of success, which means every effort has to be made to reduce the cost of production and marketing. Every single penny saved matters a lot and adds to an exporter’s global competitiveness. One such area that needs to be looked into is refund of VAT from the business expenses incurred abroad by the international businessmen. Depending upon the size of business, cost reduction through this method may vary from a few hundred or thousand Euros/Dollars to several million Euros/Dollars. These VAT refunds constitute about 2% to 6% of international business travel-related spending and a large corporation which incurs about $6 Million in international spending could save approximately $1,80,000 through this route. It is interesting to note that with substantial funds locked in VAT refunds, as high as 25% in EU, this particular cost of international business remains unexploited and businesses knowingly or unknowingly have been simply booking VAT expenses as costs and ignoring the real potential of making savings by recovering VAT frequently from the authorities. An attempt has been made in this paper to elaborate upon the various aspects of VAT refunds so that the international businessmen may explore the full potential of such a facility and recover their legitimate dues from the foreign governments and become more competitive in global trading. The paper not only describes the concept of VAT with its background particularly with reference to EU VAT legislation but also underscores the VAT rates, details of recoverable VAT expenses and related matters, required documentation and lists out a few VAT recovery agencies such as VAT Recovery Group (VRG), Corporate VAT Management (CVM), American Express and CVM, Deloitte and CVM, Gelco Expense Management (GEM) and (CVM), and CVM and InterplX, etc. which provide VAT refund services to their corporate clients.

Dodatkowe zobowiązanie podatkowe w podatku od towarów i usług nie może być kwalifikowane jako kara w rozumieniu przepisów prawa karnego. Jest ono publicznoprawnym zobowiązaniem podatkowym. Dodatkowemu zobowiązaniu podatkowemu przyświecają inne funkcje i cele niż np. grzywnom i karom pieniężnym.

Among the other rationales underlying the existence of corporate income tax (CIT) as a standalone tax on the profits derived by legal entities, some scholars have underlined its regulatory function, i.e. its potential to steer the behaviour of private sector actors. In this regard, it has to be noted that significant constraints on the use of CIT as a regulatory tool have emerged in the aftermath of the base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) project. One example may be found in the new 'modified nexus approach' with regard to tax incentives for R&D activities. This article takes a regulatory perspective regarding the recent attempts to overhaul the 'international corporate tax regime', resulting in the adoption of new hard-and soft-law rules. The regulatory perspective is understood here as the capacity of the rules of international tax law to affect the behaviour of both corporate taxpayers in arranging their cross-border activities and the States in designing their CIT systems. The BEPS initiative, being an unprecedented exercise in tax coordination aimed at widespread avoidance practices, serves as a prime example of how international tax law fulfils its regulatory function, by guiding the behaviour of both governments and taxpayers. Accordingly, the paper argues that the international corporate tax regime post-BEPS exhibits two sides of the same regulatory coin: on the one hand, taxpayers are disincentivized to resort to particular types of international tax planning; on the other, the incentives for individual States to engage in corporate tax competition are significantly reduced. It is further argued that the most far-reaching proposal in this area relates to 'global minimum tax', drawn under Pillar Two of the 'BEPS 2.0' initiative.

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) under Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Action 2 indicated that tax arbitrage via hybrid mismatch arrangements “result in a substantial erosion of the taxable bases of the countries concerned” and “have an overall negative impact on competition, efficiency, transparency and fairness.” The relevant action allowing for neutralising the effects of hybrid mismatch arrangements is therefore needed and justified. To achieve that purpose, the OECD developed different anti-hybrid rules under BEPS Action 2. In that regard, however, one may ask whether addressing tax arbitrage via hybrid mismatches as proposed by the OECD is of interest and relevance for developing countries. This paper aims to map that unexplored research area by means of a comparative analysis in four developing countries – Uruguay, Colombia, Brazil, and South Africa.

􏰨􏰊􏰝􏰅􏰁􏰑􏰃 􏰮􏰄􏰆􏰑􏰆􏰁􏰍 􏰨􏰍􏰄􏰃􏰃􏰓􏰃􏰁􏰂 􏰟􏰨􏰮􏰨􏰥 􏰆􏰋 􏰇􏰁􏰃 􏰇􏰗 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰜􏰋􏰑􏰅􏰈 􏰆􏰁􏰋􏰂􏰄􏰐􏰓􏰃􏰁􏰂􏰋 􏰗􏰇􏰄 􏰓􏰆􏰁􏰆􏰓􏰆􏰔􏰆􏰁􏰍 􏰂􏰄􏰅􏰁􏰋􏰗􏰃􏰄 􏰘􏰄􏰆􏰑􏰆􏰁􏰍 􏰊􏰆􏰋􏰘􏰐􏰂􏰃􏰋􏰙 􏰀􏰁 􏰀􏰁􏰊􏰇􏰁􏰃􏰋􏰆􏰅􏰕 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰄􏰃􏰍􏰐􏰈􏰅􏰂􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰇􏰗 􏰨􏰮􏰨 􏰖􏰅􏰋 􏰆􏰁􏰆􏰂􏰆􏰅􏰈􏰈􏰎 􏰅􏰊􏰇􏰘􏰂􏰃􏰊 􏰆􏰁 􏰀􏰁􏰑􏰇􏰓􏰃 􏰚􏰅􏰧 􏰯􏰅􏰖 􏰎􏰃􏰅􏰄 􏰡􏰢􏰢􏰢 􏰅􏰄􏰂 􏰣􏰬􏰟􏰰􏰅􏰥􏰙 􏰯􏰅􏰂􏰃􏰄􏰕 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰆􏰓􏰘􏰈􏰃􏰓􏰃􏰁􏰂􏰅􏰂􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰄􏰃􏰍􏰐􏰈􏰅􏰂􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰖􏰅􏰋 􏰆􏰋􏰋􏰐􏰃􏰊 􏰂􏰌􏰄􏰇􏰐􏰍􏰌 􏰱􏰆􏰄􏰃􏰑􏰂􏰇􏰄􏰅􏰂􏰃 􏰲􏰃􏰁􏰃􏰄􏰅􏰈 􏰇􏰗 􏰚􏰅􏰧􏰃􏰋 􏰳􏰃􏰍􏰐􏰈􏰅􏰂􏰆􏰇􏰁􏰕 􏰮􏰦􏰳 􏰴􏰇􏰙 􏰵􏰶􏰷􏰮􏰸􏰷􏰡􏰢􏰣􏰢􏰙 􏰹􏰇􏰖􏰃􏰝􏰃􏰄􏰕 􏰊􏰐􏰄􏰆􏰁􏰍 􏰂􏰌􏰅􏰂 􏰘􏰃􏰄􏰆􏰇􏰊 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰆􏰓􏰘􏰈􏰃􏰓􏰃􏰁􏰂􏰅􏰂􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰇􏰗 􏰨􏰮􏰨 􏰆􏰁 􏰀􏰁􏰊􏰇􏰁􏰃􏰋􏰆􏰅 􏰖􏰅􏰋 􏰋􏰂􏰆􏰈􏰈 􏰇􏰁 􏰝􏰃􏰄􏰎 􏰈􏰇􏰖 􏰘􏰄􏰇􏰍􏰄􏰃􏰋􏰋􏰙 􏰀􏰁 􏰡􏰢􏰣􏰺 􏰱􏰆􏰄􏰃􏰑􏰂􏰇􏰄􏰅􏰂􏰃 􏰲􏰃􏰁􏰃􏰄􏰅􏰈 􏰇􏰗 􏰚􏰅􏰧􏰅􏰂􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰟􏰱􏰲􏰚􏰥 􏰌􏰅􏰋 􏰁􏰇􏰂 􏰑􏰇􏰁􏰑􏰈􏰐􏰊􏰃􏰊 􏰂􏰇 􏰅􏰍􏰄􏰃􏰃 􏰇􏰁 􏰅􏰁􏰎 􏰨􏰮􏰨 􏰐􏰁􏰂􏰆􏰈 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰈􏰅􏰋􏰂 􏰄􏰃􏰝􏰆􏰋􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰇􏰗 􏰨􏰮􏰨 􏰄􏰐􏰈􏰃 􏰂􏰌􏰄􏰇􏰐􏰍􏰌 􏰻􏰆􏰁􏰆􏰋􏰂􏰃􏰄 􏰇􏰗 􏰼􏰆􏰁􏰅􏰁􏰑􏰃 􏰳􏰃􏰍􏰐􏰈􏰅􏰂􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰴􏰇 􏰤􏰷􏰮􏰻􏰽􏰙􏰢􏰰􏰷􏰡􏰢􏰣􏰺􏰙 􏰚􏰌􏰆􏰋 􏰄􏰃􏰋􏰃􏰅􏰄􏰑􏰌 􏰐􏰂􏰆􏰈􏰆􏰔􏰃􏰋 􏰅 􏰊􏰃􏰋􏰑􏰄􏰆􏰘􏰂􏰆􏰝􏰃 􏰾􏰐􏰅􏰈􏰆􏰂􏰅􏰂􏰆􏰝􏰃 􏰓􏰃􏰂􏰌􏰇􏰊􏰇􏰈􏰇􏰍􏰎 􏰖􏰌􏰃􏰄􏰃 􏰊􏰅􏰂􏰅 􏰆􏰋 􏰑􏰇􏰈􏰈􏰃􏰑􏰂􏰃􏰊 􏰂􏰌􏰄􏰇􏰐􏰍􏰌 􏰅 􏰄􏰃􏰝􏰆􏰃􏰖 􏰇􏰗 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰈􏰆􏰂􏰃􏰄􏰅􏰂􏰐􏰄􏰃 􏰅􏰁􏰊 􏰋􏰃􏰓􏰆􏰛􏰋􏰂􏰄􏰐􏰑􏰂􏰐􏰄􏰃􏰊 􏰆􏰁􏰛􏰊􏰃􏰘􏰂􏰌 􏰆􏰁􏰂􏰃􏰄􏰝􏰆􏰃􏰖􏰋 􏰖􏰆􏰂􏰌 􏰞􏰃􏰎 􏰋􏰂􏰅􏰞􏰃􏰌􏰇􏰈􏰊􏰃􏰄􏰋􏰙 􏰚􏰌􏰃 􏰄􏰃􏰋􏰐􏰈􏰂 􏰇􏰗 􏰂􏰌􏰆􏰋 􏰄􏰃􏰋􏰃􏰅􏰄􏰑􏰌 􏰋􏰌􏰇􏰖􏰋 􏰂􏰌􏰅􏰂 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰊􏰃􏰝􏰃􏰈􏰇􏰘􏰓􏰃􏰁􏰂 􏰇􏰗 􏰨􏰮􏰨 􏰆􏰓􏰘􏰈􏰃􏰓􏰃􏰁􏰂􏰅􏰂􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰅􏰗􏰂􏰃􏰄 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰆􏰋􏰋􏰐􏰅􏰁􏰑􏰃 􏰇􏰗 􏰻􏰆􏰁􏰆􏰋􏰂􏰃􏰄 􏰇􏰗 􏰼􏰆􏰁􏰅􏰁􏰑􏰃 􏰳􏰃􏰍􏰐􏰈􏰅􏰂􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰴􏰇 􏰤􏰷􏰮􏰻􏰽􏰙􏰢􏰰􏰷􏰡􏰢􏰣􏰺 􏰌􏰅􏰋 􏰆􏰁􏰑􏰄􏰃􏰅􏰋􏰃􏰊􏰙 􏰪􏰅􏰋􏰃􏰊 􏰇􏰁 􏰋􏰂􏰅􏰂􏰆􏰋􏰂􏰆􏰑􏰋 􏰇􏰗 􏰨􏰮􏰨 􏰆􏰁 􏰀􏰁􏰊􏰇􏰁􏰃􏰋􏰆􏰅 􏰅􏰗􏰂􏰃􏰄 􏰡􏰢􏰣􏰵 􏰂􏰌􏰃􏰄􏰃 􏰖􏰅􏰋 􏰅􏰁 􏰆􏰁􏰑􏰄􏰃􏰅􏰋􏰃 􏰆􏰁 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰨􏰮􏰨 􏰋􏰐􏰒􏰓􏰆􏰋􏰋􏰆􏰇􏰁􏰋 􏰅􏰁􏰊 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰱􏰲􏰚 􏰌􏰅􏰋 􏰋􏰐􏰑􏰑􏰃􏰋􏰋􏰗􏰐􏰈􏰈􏰎 􏰑􏰇􏰁􏰑􏰈􏰐􏰊􏰃􏰊 􏰋􏰇􏰓􏰃 􏰨􏰮􏰨􏰋􏰙 􏰚􏰌􏰃 􏰈􏰅􏰂􏰃􏰋􏰂 􏰨􏰮􏰨 􏰆􏰓􏰘􏰈􏰃􏰓􏰃􏰁􏰂􏰅􏰂􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰆􏰁 􏰀􏰁􏰊􏰇􏰁􏰃􏰋􏰆􏰅 􏰌􏰅􏰋 􏰗􏰇􏰈􏰈􏰇􏰖􏰃􏰊 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰊􏰆􏰋􏰘􏰐􏰂􏰃 􏰄􏰃􏰋􏰇􏰈􏰐􏰂􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰍􏰐􏰆􏰊􏰃􏰈􏰆􏰁􏰃􏰋 􏰅􏰋 􏰘􏰄􏰇􏰘􏰇􏰋􏰃􏰊 􏰒􏰎 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰿􏰄􏰍􏰅􏰁􏰆􏰔􏰅􏰂􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰗􏰇􏰄 􏰦􏰑􏰇􏰁􏰇􏰓􏰆􏰑 􏰠􏰇􏰇􏰘􏰃􏰄􏰅􏰂􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰅􏰁􏰊 􏰱􏰃􏰝􏰃􏰈􏰇􏰘􏰓􏰃􏰁􏰂 􏰟􏰿􏰦􏰠􏰱􏰥 􏰂􏰌􏰄􏰇􏰐􏰍􏰌 􏰪􏰅􏰋􏰃 􏰦􏰄􏰇􏰋􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰅􏰁􏰊 􏰮􏰄􏰇􏰜􏰂 􏱀􏰌􏰆􏰗􏰂􏰆􏰁􏰍 􏰟􏰪􏰦􏰮􏱀􏰥 􏰘􏰄􏰇􏱁􏰃􏰑􏰂 􏰅􏰋 􏰘􏰄􏰇􏰘􏰇􏰋􏰃􏰊 􏰆􏰁 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰨􏰑􏰂􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰮􏰈􏰅􏰁 􏰣􏱂􏰙 􏰹􏰇􏰖􏰃􏰝􏰃􏰄􏰕 􏰂􏰌􏰃􏰄􏰃 􏰅􏰄􏰃 􏰆􏰋􏰋􏰐􏰃􏰋 􏰘􏰃􏰄􏰂􏰅􏰆􏰁􏰆􏰁􏰍 􏰂􏰇 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰆􏰓􏰘􏰈􏰃􏰓􏰃􏰁􏰂􏰅􏰂􏰆􏰇􏰁 􏰇􏰗 􏰨􏰮􏰨 􏰋􏰐􏰑􏰌 􏰅􏰋 􏰂􏰄􏰅􏰁􏰋􏰘􏰅􏰄􏰃􏰁􏰑􏰎 􏰅􏰁􏰊 􏰑􏰃􏰄􏰂􏰅􏰆􏰁􏰂􏰎 􏰄􏰃􏰈􏰅􏰂􏰃􏰊 􏰂􏰇 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰨􏰮􏰨 􏰘􏰄􏰇􏰑􏰃􏰋􏰋􏰙 􏰳􏰃􏰋􏰘􏰇􏰁􏰊􏰆􏰁􏰍 􏰂􏰇 􏰂􏰌􏰃􏰋􏰃 􏰆􏰋􏰋􏰐􏰃􏰋 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰱􏰲􏰚 􏰌􏰅􏰋 􏰓􏰅􏰊􏰃 􏰋􏰃􏰝􏰃􏰄􏰅􏰈 􏰅􏰂􏰂􏰃􏰓􏰘􏰂􏰋 􏰋􏰐􏰑􏰌 􏰅􏰋􏰕 􏰆􏰓􏰘􏰄􏰇􏰝􏰆􏰁􏰍 􏰌􏰐􏰓􏰅􏰁 􏰄􏰃􏰋􏰇􏰐􏰄􏰑􏰃􏰋 􏰅􏰁􏰊 􏰋􏰂􏰄􏰃􏰁􏰍􏰂􏰌􏰃􏰁􏰆􏰁􏰍 􏰂􏰌􏰃 􏰄􏰃􏰍􏰐􏰈􏰅􏰂􏰇􏰄􏰎􏰙

Despite the recent developments grounded on constitutional arguments, the current country-by-country approaches to treaty override still fail to qualify the overriding as an unacceptable attempt to extend taxation beyond the limits agreed with treaty partners. Accordingly, treaty override has been seen as a problem the solution of which would depend on each country's view on the role of international law. This article suggests that such failure is due to limitations inherent to this misleading reasoning with respect to the relation between domestic legislation and international law. After describing the main approaches to treaty override, the author proposes that treaty override must be addressed as an issue of jurisdiction, instead of a matter of hierarchy. The proposed approach is consistent with the actual purpose of double tax conventions and with the need to preserve the jurisdictional limitations agreed under tax treaties.

Domestic tax measures are treated by investment tribunals as a fundamental attribute of sovereignty and constitute lex specialis in relation to the general rule on expropriation under customary international law. Although both direct and indirect expropriation is possible through the imposition of tax measures, in practice such a finding is rare and is further restricted by joint tax vetoes and tax exclusion clauses in BITs and bilateral tax treaties. This inclination in favour of host states is further confirmed by the requirement that the conduct requirements for expropriation be satisfied, although the role of conduct requirements is to differentiate between lawful and unlawful expropriation. The lex specialis character of tax measures suggests, particularly as a result of cases such as Burlington, that investment tribunals are unlikely to lower the threshold of state liability for expropriation arising from tax measures and are in fact likely to view the substantial deprivation standard very strictly and in a manner that requires a total deprivation of property.

The tax system is central to the operation of states and to the ways in which states interact with individual citizens. Taxes are used by states to fund the provision of public goods and public services, to engage in direct or indirect forms of redistribution, and to mould the behaviour of individual citizens through incentivizing certain activities (such as charitable giving, or investment in new technology) through tax breaks, or to dissuade people from engaging in other activities by means of Pigouvian taxes, including ‘sin taxes’ (such as those associated with the consumption of alcohol or tobacco). Given the absolute centrality of the tax system to some of the main functions of the state, the analysis of conceptual and normative issues relating to taxation should be at the heart of political philosophy. The shape of the tax system is
an unavoidably and irreducibly normative matter, and one which implicates a number of core concerns of social justice.² When we think about issues of social justice in practice, we cannot avoid thinking at the same time about tax.

Given that taxation is one of the most significant mechanisms for interaction between states and individual citizens, it is perhaps surprising that there has not been as much work on taxation within political philosophy as one might have expected. This is not, of course, to say that political philosophy has been silent about tax. But as the chapters in this volume show, there are a number of pressing and significant
philosophical issues relating to the tax system, and these issues often connect in fascinating ways with foundational questions regarding property rights, democracy, public justification, state neutrality, stability, political psychology, and a range of other issues. Many of these deep and fascinating philosophical questions about tax have not always received as much sustained attention as they clearly merit. Our hope
is that this book will advance the debate along a number of these philosophical fronts, and be a welcome spur to further work.
 
Go here to order with 30% off: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/taxation-9780199609222?cc=gb&lang=en&promocode=AAFLYG6

Using objective measures of investor protections in 170 countries, I establish that the level of investor protection matters for cross-country differences in GDP growth: countries with stronger protections tend to grow faster than those with poor investor protections.

This book deepens the study of the law of treaties by offering specific solutions to current legal problems. It provides a high-level theoretical and practical approach, touching upon all major current issues of the law of treaties. It is noteworthy that each subject-matter discussed in this work was thoroughly analyzed and supported by a rigorous methodology, including the use of the most accurate terminology and a well-reasoned explanation of each of the issues addressed in accordance with the most authoritative legal scholarly writings. This work is also a helpful reference for governmental and diplomatic officials, legal practitioners and the legal academia at large in trying to understand how international acts are negotiated and adopted, what the rules are for the formulation of reservations and introduction of amendments to conventional texts, how a State is definitely deemed to be bound by an international act or treaty, which the effects are of a treaty that came into force and how treaties should be applied at the international level, etc.

The game Prisoner’s Dilemma provides a helpful tool for understanding international tax competition. Nations would be best served by cooperating with each other to keep corporate income tax rates high. But fearing defection by other nations, many nations often unilaterally lower their corporate income tax rates and in the process they shift the tax burden onto labor and consumers. International coordination of tax law is the optimal solution to the problems caused by international tax competition rather than reductions in or elimination of the corporate income tax.

"The global economic scenario seems increasingly characterized by an integrated financial systems resulting from the processes of globalization and liberalization of foreign exchange (with the relative capillary movement of capitals also at transnational level). In addition there is an increasingly diversified spread of banking and quasi-banking services based in tax havens in order to offer the market operational tools to meet various needs, tax evasion included. Operations thus become "off-shore", that is carried out in legal/virtual spaces separating the real path of economic transactions by legal place in which they were conducted, removing the burden of taxation from the place where they actually took place and setting a new geography of movements of capitals completely decoupled from production sites.
That of tax havens is a growing phenomenon and the aim of the paper is to analyze its extent, to understand how this practice is helping to redefine the economic spaces, creating new geographies of financial assets.
"

Lo studio della tassazione dei dividendi internazionali tocca due problemi fondamentali del diritto tributario: la doppia imposizione economica e giuridica e la ripartizione dei redditi internazionali tra più Stati sovrani. Qui, si spiega perchè il regime di tassazione dei dividendi internazionali è antiquato e va quindi superato, da un lato, eliminando le ritenute alla fonte sui dividendi pagati a non residenti; dall'altro, eliminando - a livello interno - la doppia imposizione economica su alcuni dividendi di fonte estera.

SOMMARIO: 1. Premessa. - 2. La natura del trust. - 3. L'utilizzo di un trust. - 4. Il trust e le convenzioni bilaterali contro le doppie imposizioni. - 4.1. Principi generali sull'applicabilità delle convenzioni fiscali ai trust: qualificazione del trust come "persona". - 4.2. La residenza del trust ai fini convenzionali. - 4.3. Il "beneficiario effettivo" del trust ai fini convenzionali. - 5. Conclusioni.

The trust is undeniably a concept. È innegabile che il trust (la "fiducia", volendo tradurre il termine in italiano) sia un "concetto". Con questa affermazione - indubbiamente corretta, sul piano lessicale, anche nella nostra lingua - una voce autorevole nel campo del diritto internazionale del trust mette a dura prova le nostre capacità di poter inquadrare questo istituto giuridico, originario dei paesi di common law, utilizzando i classici canoni applicativi delle convenzioni bilaterali per evitare le doppie imposizioni. Come si arriva all'apodittica affermazione precedente? Per la tradizione giurisprudenziale anglo-sassone il trust non si può definire, può solo essere descritto. In effetti, sotto lo stesso nomen juris si celano complessi rapporti giuridici e strutture multiformi, che rispondono ad esigenze spesso molto lontane. Se le cose stanno effettivamente in questi termini, com’è possibile riuscire ad applicare una convenzione fiscale a un “concetto”? Inoltre, tale concetto è
sufficientemente uniforme da immaginare che le convenzioni fiscali possano trovarvi applicazione in tutte le sue varianti? Senza contare il fatto che il trust ha un’altra peculiarità che può rendere particolarmente problematico inquadrarlo nei canoni delle convenzioni bilaterali: la sua natura (almeno) trilaterale.

Апстракт
Даночен рај нуди на странски инвеститори, правни и физички лица, ниски или никакви даночни обврски со дополнителна погодност да финансиските информации не се споделуваат со странски даночни служби. Даночен систем на една држава е начин на финансирање на државата , додека деградација на истиот, со нeплаќање и настојување на луѓето за избегнување на даночните обврски, поради можноста за едноставен и брз трансфер на капитал но и поради стабилниот правен систем, т.е преку давање на легалност на деловните операции, ги прави даночните раеви се попривлечни. Во овој труд ќе бидат бидат анализирани основите начела на даночните раеви како и специфичниот начин на работење преку истите, историскиот развој, улогата на Организацијата за економска соработка и развој во дефинирање на даночните раеви како и проблемот со даночната евазија која е присутна во истите. Клучни зборови: даночен рај, даночна евазија, offshore компании, деловни тајни, индекс на финансиска тајност

Abstract
Tax haven offers foreign investors, legal entities and individuals, low or no tax obligations with the additional convenience that financial information is not shared with foreign tax authorities. A state's tax system is a way of financing the state, while its degradation, by not paying and pushing people to evade taxes, also the possibility of simple and fast capital transfer and a stable legal system, i.e by giving the legality of business operations, makes tax havens more attractive. This paper will analyze the basic principles of tax havens as well as specific way of working through them, their historical development, the role of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in defining tax havens, and the tax evasion problem that is present there.

This article provides an analysis of a Portuguese decision on the taxation of payments for software.
The main questions addressed by the Court and assessed in this article are: Is the amount taxable? Who should be taxed? When and where should taxation take place? The case of the Portuguese Supreme Administrative Court under consideration here deals precisely with these issues.
Despite of its narrow object, and in contrast with other court cases, this decision ultimately reveals the position of the Supreme Administrative Court on key issues concerning the interpretation of tax treaties, such as the relation between tax treaties and domestic law; the legal value of the OECD Model, the Commentaries, its reservations and its observations; the concept of royalties in international taxation; and the specific value of a reservation included in a treaty. Even before any assessment, the author notes the gallantry of the decision: the Court avoids seeking shelter in any procedural issue, and assesses – directly and boldly – all the issues involved in the appeal, in some cases even going far beyond what would be strictly required to resolve the case.

This Dissertation discusses the transfer pricing provisions applicable to Intangible Assets as per the Indian Transfer Pricing Regime and the guidelines issued by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in this regard.

Dos de las principales áreas de estudio afrontadas por BEPS son los precios de transferencia y los intangibles. La acción 8 del Plan de Acción (Guidance on Transfer Pricing Aspects of Intangibles) aunaba esta preocupación y trataba de resolver los principales problemas que suscitaban los precios de transferencia en el ámbito de los intangibles, especialmente entre partes vinculadas. De hecho por todos es sabido que uno de los principales instrumentos al servicio de la erosión de bases imponibles y el traslado de beneficios ha sido la distribución interesada de los beneficios por intangibles de difícil valoración .
En concreto, el documento de la acción 8 publicado originalmente por la OCDE en septiembre de 2014 abordaba importantes cambios en el ámbito de los intangibles, especialmente en las Directrices sobre Precios de Transferencia de la OCDE (Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations) del año 2010. De este modo, mediante modificaciones a los capítulos I, II y VI de este documento la acción 8 pretendía clarificar la definición de intangibles contenida en estas Directrices, mejorar la identificación de operaciones en que estén implicados intangibles y, sobre todo, ofrecer ayuda adicional para la difícil determinación del valor de mercado o principio de plena competencia (arm’s length principle) en las operaciones con intangibles.
De cara a los informes finales del Paquete BEPS, el trabajo en el seno de los precios de transferencia, las acciones 8, 9 y 10, se ha unificado en un único documento final con una lógica común: asegurar que los resultados de los precios de transferencia están en línea con la creación de valor. En la primera fase, concluida en septiembre de 2014, la OCDE publicó los trabajos en relación a la acción 8, cuyo núcleo eran los cambios en los Capítulos I, II y VI de las Directrices sobre Precios de Transferencia de 2010. Posteriormente, a lo largo del año 2015 se han abordado las otras dos acciones sin las cuales el trabajo previo no tendría sentido. Tengamos presente que las fuertes interacciones entre la acción 8 (intangibles) y la atribución contractual de riesgos (acción 9) o las operaciones de alto riesgo o irreales que no existirían entre partes independientes (acción 10) hacían inviable tratar estas cuestiones de forma independiente y aislada .
Las normas de precios de transferencia, establecidas en el artículo 9 de los convenios fiscales basados en los Modelos de Convenio de la OCDE y de la ONU y en las Directrices de Precios de Transferencia, se emplean para determinar, de acuerdo al principio de plena competencia, las condiciones, incluyendo el precio, de las transacciones dentro de un grupo multinacional.
A pesar de ser aprobadas inicialmente en el seno de la Acción 8 de la BEPS lo cierto es que gran parte de las modificaciones introducidas en las Directrices tienen su raíz en un documento publicado dos años antes por la propia OCDE (2 de junio de 2012) en forma de borrador: (Discussion Draft) Revision of the Special Considerations for Intangibles in Chapter VI of the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines and Related Provisions en la que se proponían los primeros cambios a las Directrices aprobadas en 2010 . Poco después la OCDE publicó los comentarios recibidos al respecto de este primer borrador .
El 30 de julio de 2013, apenas diez días después de la salida a la luz del Plan de Acción de BEPS, la OCDE abría un nuevo proceso de consulta respecto a una versión revisada de este nuevo Capítulo VI de las Directrices sobre particularidades de los precios de transferencia en materia de intangibles . Como bien indica este documento, desde entonces los avances en este campo se han integrado con el trabajo de BEPS, especialmente con la Acción 8, hasta el punto que la primera versión final de este nuevo Capítulo VI se publicó en 2014 ya en el seno de la misma.
A salvo de los elementos que quedaron pendientes para el año 2015 y que ahora destacaremos, los cambios entre la última versión revisada de las Directrices (2013) y los contenidos en el documento final de la acción 8 (2014) eran mínimos. A pesar de que parezca que estamos ante una novedad relativa, la importancia de los elementos clarificados en el informe final sobre Precios de Transferencia de las acciones 8-10 y la relevancia y sensibilidad del tema tratado, las operaciones con intangibles, merece sobradamente el estudio que abordaremos en este capítulo. Conviene recordar además que esta nueva versión aprobada del Capítulo VI de las Directrices desarrolla de manera mucho más detallada la versión anterior de 2010, multiplicando por cuatro su extensión y afinando con mayor precisión numerosos aspectos conflictivos de este campo .

This article examines certain specific points relating to the protection of the rights of taxpayers within the context of the exchange of information for tax purposes, with emphasis on the Brazilian experience. In this respect, the author considers both automatic exchange and exchange on request.