The early years

Laura Lamas-Abraira
{"title":"The early years","authors":"Laura Lamas-Abraira","doi":"10.4324/9781003180807-12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter complements the previous one by considering the other end of negotiations, in a lowerincome country. One of the few negotiations between the UK and a lowerincome country during the 1970s that was initiated by the lowerincome country itself was the 1972 treaty with Zambia. In comparison with other agreements signed by the UK at the time, this was an easy negotiation for the UK, in which Zambia did not gain an outcome that protected many of its source taxing rights. Zambia permits us a withincase comparison, by looking at two dif ferent time periods: the 1970s, when Zambia was an enthusiastic negotiator, and the 2000s and 2010s, when it was not. This first UK agreement was part of a flurry of negotiations at the beginning of the 1970s, and during that de cade Zambia signed ten tax treaties, with countries of Western Eu rope and Japan. No other subSaharan country signed as many: Kenya and Tanzania, the next closest by number of signatures, signed six each.1 Yet as figure 6.1 shows, on average, Zambia’s early 1970’s treaties imposed far greater restrictions on its source taxing rights than those signed by other African countries, and also Zambia’s later treaties. In Zambia in the 1970s, a context where nobody in the bureaucracy had a detailed knowledge of international tax, the tax treaties myth took hold, but without the commensurate negotiating capability. The large tax revenue from Zambia’s mining industry during the early 1970s meant that the tax costs of the treaties Zambia was negotiating were less impor tant to those driving the negotiations. In contrast, from democ ratization in 1991 until the Movement for Multiparty Democracy (MMD) fi nally lost power in 2011, a period when subSaharan 6 ZAMBIA","PeriodicalId":326340,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Transnational Families","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Transnational Families","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003180807-12","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

This chapter complements the previous one by considering the other end of negotiations, in a lowerincome country. One of the few negotiations between the UK and a lowerincome country during the 1970s that was initiated by the lowerincome country itself was the 1972 treaty with Zambia. In comparison with other agreements signed by the UK at the time, this was an easy negotiation for the UK, in which Zambia did not gain an outcome that protected many of its source taxing rights. Zambia permits us a withincase comparison, by looking at two dif ferent time periods: the 1970s, when Zambia was an enthusiastic negotiator, and the 2000s and 2010s, when it was not. This first UK agreement was part of a flurry of negotiations at the beginning of the 1970s, and during that de cade Zambia signed ten tax treaties, with countries of Western Eu rope and Japan. No other subSaharan country signed as many: Kenya and Tanzania, the next closest by number of signatures, signed six each.1 Yet as figure 6.1 shows, on average, Zambia’s early 1970’s treaties imposed far greater restrictions on its source taxing rights than those signed by other African countries, and also Zambia’s later treaties. In Zambia in the 1970s, a context where nobody in the bureaucracy had a detailed knowledge of international tax, the tax treaties myth took hold, but without the commensurate negotiating capability. The large tax revenue from Zambia’s mining industry during the early 1970s meant that the tax costs of the treaties Zambia was negotiating were less impor tant to those driving the negotiations. In contrast, from democ ratization in 1991 until the Movement for Multiparty Democracy (MMD) fi nally lost power in 2011, a period when subSaharan 6 ZAMBIA
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
早年
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
The grown-ups Settings of family solidarity and reciprocity Growing responsibilities and growing differences Chinese migration to Spain Conclusions
×
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