Download Free Tax Treaties And Abuse The Effectiveness Of The Principal Purpose Test And Some Of Its Shortcomings Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Tax Treaties And Abuse The Effectiveness Of The Principal Purpose Test And Some Of Its Shortcomings and write the review.

In this article, the author sets out his views on the abuse of tax treaties and the effectiveness of the provisions contained in article 29(9) of the OECD Model regarding the principal purpose test (PPT), together with a consideration of some of the drawbacks of the PPT.
As the struggle to combat tax abuse and tax avoidance gains momentum, ways of making a tax jurisdiction ‘manipulation-proof’ continue to proliferate, from new or revised provisions in model tax treaties to a dramatic increase in the number and variety of anti-abuse and anti-avoidance rules at all levels of government. These measures interact with national tax systems, general anti-abuse clauses and tax treaties. The conflicts and other legal difficulties that inevitably result deserve intensive scrutiny. This book provides an in-depth analysis of current issues concerning the relations of various anti-abuse rules to each other and their impact on the application of tax treaties. The topics include the following: domestic general anti-avoidance rules (GAARs); domestic specific anti-avoidance rules (SAARs) (including controlled foreign company rules); minimum holding periods; indirect transfers of immovable property, shares, and rights; limitation on benefits; residence criteria in tax treaties; tax treatment of sportspersons and entertainers; the principal purpose test of Article 29 (9) OECD Model (2017); and influence of European Union Law on tax treaty abuse. The chapters are revised and expanded versions of papers presented at the 30th Viennese Symposium on International Tax Law held on 12 June 2023 at Vienna University of Economics and Business. Each author offers an in-depth analysis of a particular topic, drawing on the most recent scientific research. This is the only book available to offer such a wide-ranging, detailed, and practical analysis of how the full range of anti-abuse rules interacts with tax treaties. It will prove of immeasurable value to practitioners and law firms active in tax planning, tax consultants, academics and researchers in international tax law and counsel for companies involved in international business.
Analysis of notion, roots und measures of treaty abuse The OECD initiative on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting has put the issue of treaty abuse and the means to counter it on top of the global political agenda. Preventing treaty abuse is therefore currently one of the most debated topics in international tax law. Diverging national legal traditions in combatting abuse both under domestic and tax treaty law have led to a globally diversified legal framework in this respect and make the OECD’s agenda to harmonize these attempts even more challenging. The aim of this book is to analyze the notion of treaty abuse, its historical roots and the measures to counter it. The book’s topics cover a wide range of both policy and legal issues. The contributions’ main focus lies onanalyzing the proposals put forward by the OECD in BEPS action items 6 and 7. In addition, this book analyzes the lessons which can be learnt from the US tax treaty policy and elaborates on the effects the intensified fight against treaty abuse will have from a Non-OECD member state perspective. Also EU law is taken into account and the question raised which impact the fundamental freedoms might have on the development of new anti-avoidance rules. Finally the relation between domestic and treaty based anti-avoidance is analyzed in great detail, identifying the methodical problems of ensuring a sound and abuse safe legal framework. With this book, the authors and editors hope to contribute to the discussion on selected issues of preventing treaty abuse and the challenges they present to policy makers, judges, tax administrations and tax advisers.
This study contains a comprehensive, in-depth analysis of the principal purpose test (PPT) designed by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) as part of the BEPS Action 6 Final Report, "Preventing the Granting of Treaty Benefits in Inappropriate Circumstances". Unsurprisingly, the PPT was adopted by all signatories to the Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (MLI), setting out a minimum standard in accordance with the Action 6 Final Report. Once the MLI is ratified by the legislatures of signatories, it will apply to more than 2,000 treaties. From this perspective, not only does the PPT constitute the most important anti-treaty abuse rule under the MLI, but it also secures a 100% match between the tax treaties of the signatories. All the same, one may ask whether the PPT will prevent treaty abuse with a sufficient degree of precision and without giving too much discretion to tax authorities. If this is not the case, the principles of legal certainty and legality of taxation may be jeopardized, and the June 2017 victory of the executives may turn into a failure at the level of legislatures and/or jurisprudence in the near future. This article represents an attempt to map this unexplored terrain by undertaking a comprehensive analysis of the PPT in Action 6 and in the MLI with a view to examining the potential challenges arising from its legal implementation and application in respect of the PPT. Where appropriate throughout the article, alternative solutions will be proposed.
The Multilateral Convention To Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures To Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting came into force on 1 July 2018, and has been signed by more than 80 jurisdictions, including Canada. This multilateral instrument (MLI) has been described as "an historical turning point in the area of international taxation"; it introduces a third layer of rules for the taxation of cross-border transactions, in addition to domestic tax law and bilateral tax treaties. Of the many provisions of the MLI, the most important are the preamble text in article 6(1) and the general anti-avoidance provision - the so-called principal purpose test (PPT) - in article 7(1). Both of these provisions have been adopted by all signatories to the MLI in order to satisfy the OECD's minimum standard on tax treaty abuse under BEPS action 6. This two-part article considers the structure and potential application of the PPT in the context of pre-BEPS responses to perceived tax treaty abuses, the OECD's work on BEPS action 6, and other provisions of the MLI, including the preamble text in article 6(1). The first part of the article reviewed pre-BEPS responses to perceived tax treaty abuses, providing necessary background and context for understanding BEPS action 6, the MLI, and the PPT. This second part examines the PPT in light of this background and in the context of BEPS action 6 and other provisions of the MLI, considering the relationship of the PPT to other anti-avoidance doctrines, principles, and rules; the various elements that constitute its basic structure; the kinds of transactions or arrangements to which it may be expected to apply; and the consequences of its application.
The Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting or Multilateral Instrument (MLI) has been described as “an historical turning point in the area of international taxation” which introduces a third layer of tax rules for the taxation of cross-border transactions in addition to domestic tax law and bilateral tax treaties. Of the many provisions of the MLI, the most important are the preamble text in Article 6(1) and the so-called principal purpose test (PPT) in Article 7(1), both of which have been adopted by all signatories to the MLI in order to satisfy the OECD's minimum standard on tax treaty abuse under BEPS Action 6. This two-part article considers the structure and potential application of the PPT in the context of pre-BEPS responses to perceived tax treaty abuses, the OECD's work on BEPS Action 6, and other provisions of the MLI including the preamble text in Article 6(1). The first part, in the previous issue of the Journal, reviewed pre-BEPS responses to perceived tax treaty abuses, providing necessary background and context for understanding BEPS Action 6, the MLI and the PPT. The second part, in this issue of the Journal, examines the PPT in light of this background and in the context of BEPS Action 6 and other provisions of the MLI, considering its relationship to other anti-avoidance doctrines, principles and rules, the various elements that comprise its basic structure, the kinds of transactions or arrangements to which it may be expected to apply, and the consequences of its application.
This article discusses the implementation, operation and application of Article 7(1) of the 'Multilateral Convention', which contains provisions related to the prevention of treaty abuse, including treaty shopping, that correspond to changes proposed in the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Action 6 Final Report. The wording of the comparable Covered Tax Agreements between the United Kingdom and China, India, Russia and South Africa, vis-à-vis the wording of Article 7(1) of the Multilateral Instrument (MLI), is analysed, where 'purpose provisions' are included with respect to specific benefits, generally royalties, interests and dividends, although there is no "catch-all provision". The provisions in these double taxation agreements might be replaced by the 'Principal Purpose Test' provision of Article 7(1). Nonetheless, mismatched choices and unpredictable asymmetries in practice will arise, resulting in further inconsistencies and complexities that may cause uncertainty about which tax treaty wording is of value. To overcome these issues, the compatibility clause in Article 7(2) of the MLI will come into play, supplemented by the lex posterior principle of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT).
The line between tax avoidance and tax evasion is indistinct. The classification of a transaction makes the difference between full taxation and reduced/ non-taxation. How this matches a treaty and how this is interpreted by tax authorities and courts makes it problematic. The issue of treaty abuse has its roots from the start of tax and the OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Action Plans tries to close this gap. A proposed solution is the principal purpose test (PPT). This thesis examines whether the PPT is a solution. It looks at the players - countries/states and improper users of treaties. It explains the PPT and analyses the effect of the PPT with reference to case law.
This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the framework of the principal purpose test (PPT) included in the Multilateral Convention (MLI) designed by the OECD as part of the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Action 6 Final Report, "Preventing the Granting of Treaty Benefits in Inappropriate Circumstances", included in the BEPS Project. This article maps the primary and secondary elements generally used in a general antiavoidance rule (GAAR) to check the feasibility of these concepts in the PPT. Potential weaknesses are pointed out, as well as challenges for its legal implementation, application and interpretation. The article assesses the feasibility of the main features of the PPT as a general anti-treaty avoidance rule (GATAR) to be included in the tax treaties of the states and jurisdictions that joined the MLI. From this perspective, whether the PPT will prevent treaty abuse, treaty avoidance or aggressive tax planning without creating uncertainty and shifting too much discretionary power to tax administrations is one of the issues. Ultimately, the strengths of this provision will depend on the legislatures and courts in the near future.
The Multilateral Convention To Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures To Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (MLI) came into force on 1 July 2018, and has been signed by more than 80 jurisdictions, including Canada. This MLI has been described as "a historical turning point in the area of international taxation"; it introduces a third layer of rules for the taxation of cross-border transactions, in addition to domestic tax law and bilateral tax treaties. Of the many provisions of the MLI, the most important are the preamble text in article 6(1) and the general anti-avoidance provision - the so-called principal purpose test (PPT) - in article 7(1). Both of these provisions have been adopted by all signatories to the MLI in order to satisfy the OECD's minimum standard on tax treaty abuse under BEPS Action 6. This two-part article considers the structure and potential application of the PPT in the context of pre-BEPS responses to perceived tax treaty abuses, the OECD's work on BEPS Action 6, and other provisions of the MLI, including the preamble text in article 6(1). This first part of the article reviews pre-BEPS responses to perceived tax treaty abuses, providing necessary background and context for understanding BEPS Action 6, the MLI, and the PPT. The second part examines the PPT in light of this background and in the context of BEPS Action 6 and other provisions of the MLI, considering the structure of this provision and the kinds of transactions or arrangements to which it might apply.