Understanding the OECD Model of Tax Convention: The Lesson of History
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
An important recent development in international taxation is the publication of the OEEC (the forerunner of the OECD when it was a purely European organization, although representatives from the United States and Canada were also present at the discussions on tax treaties) archives on the development of tax treaties in a website http://www.taxtreatieshistory.org/ organized by the Institute for Austrian and International Tax Law, Vienna, IBFD, Universith Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Piacenza, Italy, IFA Canadian Branch and the Canadian Tax Foundation. While this may sound like a rarefied topic, the OEEC period from 1956 to 1961 is the story of the making of the current OECD Model. Previously there was a gap in the published sources after the end of the League of Nations Mexico and London Models of 1943 and 1946, which suffered from the wartime domination by the South Americans of the Mexico Model, and the Europeans doing what they could in the London Model to reverse some of the worst excesses. By the time of the OEEC it was accepted that this was not the way of the future. After the London Model there was previously a complete gap in the history until the publication of the 1963 OECD Draft, which is essentially the OECD Model as we have it today. True there have been many changes in the meantime, particularly to the Commentary, but when compared to the whole edifice these are merely tinkering. The 1963 OECD Draft seemed to have arrived from nowhere and one wondered how this arose. Now, with the publication of the OEEC archives, we know. It was the work of (ultimately) 15 Working Parties (plus another dealing with estate taxes) of the Fiscal Committee each comprising delegates from two countries working on a separate article of the Model and reporting to the other countries at regular meetings of the Fiscal Committee. The results were most impressive and one can trace how the articles developed. The minutes are available as transcribed versions in English and French together with a pdf file of the original minutes so that, for example, alterations can be seen. A few of the current problems can be traced to the technique of working on each article separately with, for example, the definitions article being started late and not being published in any of the Fiscal Committee's four reports. In that respect the League of Nations method of working was superior. For example, the other income article, which is effectively the general rule that had come first in the original League of Nations drafts, appears at the end because Working Party 14 started much later. I believe that we still have a mutual agreement provision in the tie-breaker for individuals because that article was drafted before the mutual agreement article. In addition some of the less obvious overlaps were not considered.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,018 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,007 | 0,030 |
| Communication savante | 0,020 | 0,026 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,011 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».