Investor-state dispute settlement and tax matters: limitations on state’s sovereign right to tax

IF 1 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW Asia Pacific Law Review Pub Date : 2022-07-28 DOI:10.1080/10192557.2022.2102588
Prabhash Ranjan
{"title":"Investor-state dispute settlement and tax matters: limitations on state’s sovereign right to tax","authors":"Prabhash Ranjan","doi":"10.1080/10192557.2022.2102588","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\n More and more countries are coordinating at the international level to implement taxation measures to counter the problem of tax avoidance by multinational corporations (MNCs). This has led to increasing internalization of taxation measures, which, in turn, will lead to greater normative dialogue between international taxation and other branches of public international law such as international investment law (IIL). This paper argues that MNCs and foreign investors have not shied from using the IIL framework to challenge sovereign taxation measures of States before investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) tribunals. These challenges, part of the increasing judicialization of international tax measures, have generated a rich body of case law. While ISDS tribunals are generally deferential towards State’s sovereign right to tax, they clearly recognize certain limits on this sovereign power. ISDS tribunals have not hesitated from laying down principles where abuse of taxation powers or imposition of taxes that are not reasonable or proportionate have been held to be inconsistent with the country’s investment treaty obligations. Even carving-out taxation measures from the ambit of the investment treaty are no surety that an ISDS tribunal will not exercise jurisdiction over such tax measures especially when they are not exercised in a bona fide manner. As countries find ways to tax MNCs to counter the problem of tax avoidance, they should keep these important jurisprudential principles in mind.","PeriodicalId":42799,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Law Review","volume":"31 1","pages":"219 - 234"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia Pacific Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10192557.2022.2102588","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT More and more countries are coordinating at the international level to implement taxation measures to counter the problem of tax avoidance by multinational corporations (MNCs). This has led to increasing internalization of taxation measures, which, in turn, will lead to greater normative dialogue between international taxation and other branches of public international law such as international investment law (IIL). This paper argues that MNCs and foreign investors have not shied from using the IIL framework to challenge sovereign taxation measures of States before investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) tribunals. These challenges, part of the increasing judicialization of international tax measures, have generated a rich body of case law. While ISDS tribunals are generally deferential towards State’s sovereign right to tax, they clearly recognize certain limits on this sovereign power. ISDS tribunals have not hesitated from laying down principles where abuse of taxation powers or imposition of taxes that are not reasonable or proportionate have been held to be inconsistent with the country’s investment treaty obligations. Even carving-out taxation measures from the ambit of the investment treaty are no surety that an ISDS tribunal will not exercise jurisdiction over such tax measures especially when they are not exercised in a bona fide manner. As countries find ways to tax MNCs to counter the problem of tax avoidance, they should keep these important jurisprudential principles in mind.
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
投资者-国家争端解决和税务问题:对国家税收主权的限制
摘要越来越多的国家正在国际层面协调实施税收措施,以解决跨国公司的避税问题。这导致税收措施日益内部化,这反过来又将导致国际税收与国际公法的其他分支,如国际投资法之间进行更大的规范性对话。本文认为,跨国公司和外国投资者没有回避使用IIL框架在投资者-国家争端解决法庭上挑战国家的主权税收措施。这些挑战是国际税收措施日益司法化的一部分,产生了丰富的判例法。虽然ISDS法庭通常对国家的税收主权表示尊重,但他们明确承认对这一主权权力的某些限制。ISDS法庭毫不犹豫地制定了一些原则,在这些原则中,滥用税收权力或征收不合理或不相称的税款被认为不符合该国的投资条约义务。即使在投资条约的范围内制定税收措施,也不能保证ISDS法庭不会对此类税收措施行使管辖权,尤其是当这些措施没有以善意的方式行使时。各国在设法向跨国公司征税以解决避税问题时,应牢记这些重要的法理原则。
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
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
期刊最新文献
Constitutional foundings in Northeast Asia Constitutional democracy in Indonesia Authoritarianism and legality Asia-Pacific trusts law Volume 1 theory and practice in context Varieties of authoritarian legality
×
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