Rowe: A Symmetry Cemetery?

D. Schabe, M. Walpole
{"title":"Rowe: A Symmetry Cemetery?","authors":"D. Schabe, M. Walpole","doi":"10.53300/001C.6589","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The author examines the decision in FCT v Rowe for the concept of symmetry in tax matters which appears to underlie the equitable operation of the system. They conclude that, if there is such a principle, it certainly has not been applied in Rowe's case. According to the authors, this is probably correct in law, but does not necessarily serve the interests of fairness in tax matters. The authors draw on the experience of the UK and South Africa in dealing with similar situations. They conclude that the UK system has no better answers than the Australian, but that statutory intervention in South Africa has meant that the dispute in Rowe, despit the general similarity of the South African tax law, could never arise.","PeriodicalId":306257,"journal":{"name":"Revenue Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revenue Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001C.6589","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The author examines the decision in FCT v Rowe for the concept of symmetry in tax matters which appears to underlie the equitable operation of the system. They conclude that, if there is such a principle, it certainly has not been applied in Rowe's case. According to the authors, this is probably correct in law, but does not necessarily serve the interests of fairness in tax matters. The authors draw on the experience of the UK and South Africa in dealing with similar situations. They conclude that the UK system has no better answers than the Australian, but that statutory intervention in South Africa has meant that the dispute in Rowe, despit the general similarity of the South African tax law, could never arise.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
罗:对称墓地?
作者考察了FCT诉Rowe案中关于税收事务中对称概念的决定,这似乎是该制度公平运作的基础。他们的结论是,如果存在这样的原则,那么在罗的案件中肯定没有得到应用。根据作者的说法,这在法律上可能是正确的,但并不一定符合税收公平的利益。作者借鉴了英国和南非处理类似情况的经验。他们得出的结论是,英国的税制没有比澳大利亚更好的答案,但南非的法定干预意味着,尽管与南非税法总体上相似,但在罗的争议永远不会出现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
How Botswana and Mauritius Exited the EU High-Risk Third Country List by Adapting Their Approaches to Beneficial Ownership and Residence A Curious Concession? Australia’s Withholding Tax Exemption for Franked Dividends Australian Transfer-Pricing in the Aftermath of Glencore Investment Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Australia (2019) A Review of How America was Tricked on Tax Policy: Secrets and Undisclosed Practices by Bret N. Bogenschneider Australia’s Tax Law Policy of the Past and that of the Post Digital Revolution
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1