Chapter 17: The Relation between Investment Treaties and Tax Treaties: Some considerations based on articles 30 and 59 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Why this book?Dispute Resolution under Tax Treaties and Beyond is a detailed and comprehensive study on tax dispute resolution mechanisms, with a specific focus on tax treaty disputes. It includes the reports presented at the annual conference held in Milan in November 2022, together with four selected issues addressed solely in ad hoc contributions delivered by younger academics and practitioners and individual country reports.First, the book thoroughly examines the mutual agreement procedure (MAP) and arbitration under article 25 of the OECD Model. Beginning with article 25(1), the book first focuses on (i) persons entitled to make a MAP request; (ii) cases that can be the subject of a MAP request; and (iii) acceptance or denial of a MAP request and related remedies. The book then moves to article 25(2), where interaction between MAP and domestic procedures and involvement of domestic courts in the MAP process are scrutinized. The book then highlights the differences between the MAP provided for by article 25(1) and (2) and those provided for by article 25(3) and the interpretative value of MAPs concluded under paragraph 3. The way in which competent authorities may consult together for the resolution by mutual agreement of a case under article 24(4) is also examined. The scope of arbitration under the OECD and UN Model provisions is also discussed, including an in-depth analysis of the coordination with the EU Dispute Resolution Directive and the EU Arbitration Convention.Furthermore, the book deals with the resolution of disputes arising from the interpretation and application of the GloBE rules relating to Pillar Two, as well as suggestions to improve taxpayers’ rights in the context of both MAPs and tax treaty arbitration and, more in general, to improve the whole procedure by drawing inspiration from dispute resolution mechanisms adopted in other domestic or non-tax treaty rules. Finally, as mentioned earlier, individual country reports provide an in-depth analysis of the whole set of treaty dispute resolution mechanisms related to taxes of several EU and non-EU Member States, namely Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, India, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States.This book provides a unique and detailed analysis of some of the most important issues concerning tax dispute resolution mechanisms, with a special focus on tax treaty disputes. As such, it is an essential reference for international tax students, practitioners and academics.Chapters and Authors Insights This book is part of the EC and International Tax Law SeriesView other titles in the seriesDownloadsSample excerpt, including table of contentsList of Contributor(s)Timothée Affolter, Philip Baker, Rhys Bane, Joachim M. Bjerke, Alexander Bosman, Mukesh Butani, Mateus Calicchio Barbosa, Matteo Cataldi, Giuseppe Corciulo, Robert Danon, Bo Darling Larsen, Julian Davidsen, Filip Debelva, Nir Fishbien, Ricardo García Antón, Barry Ger, Bruno Gibert, Daniel Gutmann, Lenni Hangaard Jensen, Werner Haslehner, Johann Hattingh, Arthur Kristoffersen, Daniel Liebchen, Michael H. Lubetsky, Guglielmo Maisto, Ascención Maldonado García-Verdugo, Benjamin Malek, Adolfo Martín Jiménez, Philippe Martin, Ryan McMahon, Arne Møllin Ottosen, Céline Pasquier, Pasquale Pistone, Frank Pötgens, Merja Raunio, Francesco Ricci, Valentin Rolle, Jacques Sasseville, Luís Eduardo Schoueri, Jonathan Schwarz, Mirko Severi, Lukasz Stankiewicz, Noemi Strotkemper, Alessandro Turina, Michele Vannucci, Stef van Weeghel, Dominic Vines
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».