With promises of “Make America Great Again” and tax reform for “middle-class” Americans, the current federal government administration has implied that the average American would become more prosperous under this tax system. It is no surprise that most middle-class Americans view a college education as a requirement for achieving a better life. However, under the TCJA, education has not fared well, and in reality, students from many low-and moderate-income families will face reduced scholarships from elite schools, thereby reducing diversity on these campuses. Other proposed changes to education in the original tax bill, which were later removed, are also addressed as future legislative changes may revisit them.
{"title":"Education Has Been 'Dumbed-Down' in Tax Reform","authors":"Melanie G. McCoskey, Doron Narotzki","doi":"10.5744/ftr.2019.1585","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5744/ftr.2019.1585","url":null,"abstract":"With promises of “Make America Great Again” and tax reform for “middle-class” Americans, the current federal government administration has implied that the average American would become more prosperous under this tax system. It is no surprise that most middle-class Americans view a college education as a requirement for achieving a better life. However, under the TCJA, education has not fared well, and in reality, students from many low-and moderate-income families will face reduced scholarships from elite schools, thereby reducing diversity on these campuses. Other proposed changes to education in the original tax bill, which were later removed, are also addressed as future legislative changes may revisit them.","PeriodicalId":54058,"journal":{"name":"EJournal of Tax Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75054798","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this Article, the author discusses the difficulty in many valuation cases of determining a definite valuation point by the required degree of persuasion (more likely than not in most civil cases). This point was made cogently in Cede & Co. v. Technicolor, Inc., a frequently cited opinion by the Delaware Court of Chancery, a forum for significant litigation involving corporate valuations: [I]t is one of the conceits of our law that we purport to declare something as elusive as the fair value of an entity on a given date. . . . [V]aluation decisions are impossible to make with anything approaching complete confidence. Valuing an entity is a difficult intellectual exercise, especially when business and financial experts are able to organize data in support of wildly divergent valuations for the same entity. For a judge who is not an expert in corporate finance, one can do little more than try to detect gross distortions in the experts’ opinions. This effort should, therefore, not be understood, as a matter of intellectual honesty, as resulting in the fair value of a corporation on a given date. The value of a corporation is not a point on a line, but a range of reasonable values, and the judge’s task is to assign one particular value within this range as the most reasonable value in light of all the relevant evidence and based on considerations of fairness. Corporate valuations for estate tax are just one context of tax litigation, but there are many other contexts. A prominent example for some time now has been transfer pricing. Sometimes when ranges are identified, arbitrary conventions (such as the midpoint in trades as in the case of publicly-traded stock) can be used to determine the value in tax litigation. But when there is no such convention that should be applied, the burden of persuasion can resolve the valuation issue by identifying the range. The party bearing the burden of persuasion (or risk of non-persuasion) then has persuaded only as to the end of the range that does not favor that party; the value, based on persuasion, is determined accordingly. The party bearing the burden of persuasion in tax cases is usually the taxpayer. In this Article, the author discusses interesting features of the burden and how, at least before the Tax Court, the burden of persuasion might shift to the Service under the Supreme Court’s decision in Helvering v. Taylor, which the author urges is often misunderstood. Another benefit of identifying a range of values is that, if it is determined on appeal that the trier of fact misapplied the burden of persuasion but did identify the range, the court of appeals can resolve the case by picking the other end of the range (unless a successful attack is made on the trial court’s choice for the ends of the range).
在本文中，作者讨论了在许多估价案件中，通过所需的说服程度来确定确定的估价点的困难(在大多数民事案件中更有可能)。这一点在Cede & Co. v. Technicolor, Inc.一案中得到了有力的阐述，这是特拉华州衡平法院(一个涉及公司估值的重大诉讼的论坛)经常引用的一项意见:[I]我们的法律的一个设想是，我们声称要宣布一个实体在给定日期的公允价值这样难以捉摸的东西. . . .[V]评估决策是不可能在任何接近完全自信的情况下做出的。对一个实体进行估值是一项困难的智力练习，尤其是当商业和金融专家能够组织数据，以支持对同一实体的截然不同的估值时。对于一个不是公司财务专家的法官来说，除了试图发现专家意见中的严重扭曲之外，他能做的也不多。因此，这种努力不应被理解为智力上的诚实，不应被理解为在给定日期得出一家公司的公允价值。公司的价值不是一条线上的一个点，而是一个合理的价值范围，法官的任务是根据所有相关证据并基于公平考虑，在这个范围内指定一个特定的价值作为最合理的价值。遗产税的公司估值只是税务诉讼的一种情况，但还有许多其他情况。一段时间以来，一个突出的例子就是转让定价。有时，当范围确定时，可以使用任意约定(例如公开交易股票的交易中点)来确定税务诉讼中的价值。但是，当不存在这种应适用的惯例时，说服责任可以通过确定范围来解决估值问题。承担说服责任(或不说服风险)的一方只说服了不利于该方的范围的末端;基于说服的价值是相应确定的。在税务案件中承担说服责任的一方通常是纳税人。在本文中，作者讨论了责任的有趣特征，以及至少在税务法院之前，根据最高法院对Helvering v. Taylor的判决，说服的责任如何转移到服务部门，作者认为这经常被误解。确定价值范围的另一个好处是，如果在上诉中确定事实审判官滥用了说服责任，但确实确定了范围，上诉法院可以通过选择范围的另一端来解决案件(除非对初审法院选择的范围的末端进行了成功的攻击)。
{"title":"Burden of Proof in Tax Cases: Valuation and Ranges — An Update","authors":"John A. Townsend","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3489925","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3489925","url":null,"abstract":"In this Article, the author discusses the difficulty in many valuation cases of determining a definite valuation point by the required degree of persuasion (more likely than not in most civil cases). This point was made cogently in Cede & Co. v. Technicolor, Inc., a frequently cited opinion by the Delaware Court of Chancery, a forum for significant litigation involving corporate valuations: \u0000 \u0000[I]t is one of the conceits of our law that we purport to declare something as elusive as the fair value of an entity on a given date. . . . [V]aluation decisions are impossible to make with anything approaching complete confidence. Valuing an entity is a difficult intellectual exercise, especially when business and financial experts are able to organize data in support of wildly divergent valuations for the same entity. For a judge who is not an expert in corporate finance, one can do little more than try to detect gross distortions in the experts’ opinions. This effort should, therefore, not be understood, as a matter of intellectual honesty, as resulting in the fair value of a corporation on a given date. The value of a corporation is not a point on a line, but a range of reasonable values, and the judge’s task is to assign one particular value within this range as the most reasonable value in light of all the relevant evidence and based on considerations of fairness. \u0000 \u0000Corporate valuations for estate tax are just one context of tax litigation, but there are many other contexts. A prominent example for some time now has been transfer pricing. \u0000 \u0000Sometimes when ranges are identified, arbitrary conventions (such as the midpoint in trades as in the case of publicly-traded stock) can be used to determine the value in tax litigation. But when there is no such convention that should be applied, the burden of persuasion can resolve the valuation issue by identifying the range. The party bearing the burden of persuasion (or risk of non-persuasion) then has persuaded only as to the end of the range that does not favor that party; the value, based on persuasion, is determined accordingly. \u0000 \u0000The party bearing the burden of persuasion in tax cases is usually the taxpayer. In this Article, the author discusses interesting features of the burden and how, at least before the Tax Court, the burden of persuasion might shift to the Service under the Supreme Court’s decision in Helvering v. Taylor, which the author urges is often misunderstood. \u0000 \u0000Another benefit of identifying a range of values is that, if it is determined on appeal that the trier of fact misapplied the burden of persuasion but did identify the range, the court of appeals can resolve the case by picking the other end of the range (unless a successful attack is made on the trial court’s choice for the ends of the range).","PeriodicalId":54058,"journal":{"name":"EJournal of Tax Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87243729","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Spanish abstract: En este trabajo se abordan cuestiones referidas análisis de comparabilidad en operaciones de préstamo intragrupo en el marco de la normativa sobre operaciones vinculadas de la Ley del Impuesto sobre sociedades. La finalidad que se persigue es el establecimiento de un marco adecuado de buenas prácticas a partir del análisis crítico de las recomendaciones de la OCDE, la jurisprudencia española y la doctrina que ha tenido ocasión de abordar esta materia.
English abstract: In this paper the author examines transfer pricing issues referred to intra-group loan agreements in the framework of the Spanish corporate tax law. The aim is to establish an adequate framework of best practices through the critical analysis of OECD recommendations, Spanish case law and literature on the subject matter.
{"title":"Préstamos intragrupo en la normativa española sobre operaciones vinculadas del Impuesto sobre sociedades (Intra-group Loans within the Spanish Transfer Pricing Regulations)","authors":"Aitor Navarro","doi":"10.2307/j.ctv102bk7q.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv102bk7q.7","url":null,"abstract":"<b>Spanish abstract:</b> En este trabajo se abordan cuestiones referidas análisis de comparabilidad en operaciones de préstamo intragrupo en el marco de la normativa sobre operaciones vinculadas de la Ley del Impuesto sobre sociedades. La finalidad que se persigue es el establecimiento de un marco adecuado de buenas prácticas a partir del análisis crítico de las recomendaciones de la OCDE, la jurisprudencia española y la doctrina que ha tenido ocasión de abordar esta materia.<br><br><b>English abstract:</b> In this paper the author examines transfer pricing issues referred to intra-group loan agreements in the framework of the Spanish corporate tax law. The aim is to establish an adequate framework of best practices through the critical analysis of OECD recommendations, Spanish case law and literature on the subject matter.","PeriodicalId":54058,"journal":{"name":"EJournal of Tax Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84812899","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The paper focuses on possible policy responses that imply forms of multilateral governance to address tax competition that go beyond the current bilateralism of tax treaties. After clarifications on the nature of countervailing measures in the area of direct taxation, the paper develops a discussion of the impacts of tax competition on the global and local level and an inquiry about the shift from value creation to global taxation of multinational enterprises (MNEs), minimum standards for the taxation of MNEs in light of the fact that these entities fragment their tax liabilities across different territorial jurisdictions while their profits are truly planetary. The article then extends to issues of institutional design and develops an analysis of potential avenues for promoting multilateral policies aiming at the establishment of defensive coalitions of Governments again the impacts of tax competition. global tax governance, tax competition, countervailing measures, OECD Pillar 1 and 2, BEPS, aggressive tax strategies
{"title":"How Countervailing Measures Could Be Used to Limit Strategic Tax Competition. An International Overview","authors":"C. Garbarino","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3620087","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3620087","url":null,"abstract":"The paper focuses on possible policy responses that imply forms of multilateral governance to address tax competition that go beyond the current bilateralism of tax treaties. After clarifications on the nature of countervailing measures in the area of direct taxation, the paper develops a discussion of the impacts of tax competition on the global and local level and an inquiry about the shift from value creation to global taxation of multinational enterprises (MNEs), minimum standards for the taxation of MNEs in light of the fact that these entities fragment their tax liabilities across different territorial jurisdictions while their profits are truly planetary. The article then extends to issues of institutional design and develops an analysis of potential avenues for promoting multilateral policies aiming at the establishment of defensive coalitions of Governments again the impacts of tax competition.\u0000global tax governance, tax competition, countervailing measures, OECD Pillar 1 and 2, BEPS, aggressive tax strategies","PeriodicalId":54058,"journal":{"name":"EJournal of Tax Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82707481","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Residential solar systems are becoming commonplace in many regions of the United States. Use of such systems raises issues in tax doctrine and policy that are not well appreciated and have not yet been systematically analyzed. The goals of this article are threefold: (1) to identify the main issues and to organize them into a coherent framework, (2) to analyze the doctrinal and policy ramifications of present law, and (3) to suggest improvements to present law.
{"title":"Taxing Residential Solar","authors":"E. Yale, Gregg D. Polsky","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3470135","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3470135","url":null,"abstract":"Residential solar systems are becoming commonplace in many regions of the United States. Use of such systems raises issues in tax doctrine and policy that are not well appreciated and have not yet been systematically analyzed. The goals of this article are threefold: (1) to identify the main issues and to organize them into a coherent framework, (2) to analyze the doctrinal and policy ramifications of present law, and (3) to suggest improvements to present law.","PeriodicalId":54058,"journal":{"name":"EJournal of Tax Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75375778","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Through this paper we want to highlight some aspects regarding the concerns of a Romanian author, under the aspect of the research undertaken on topics of Public Financial Law. For this, we will consider a last editorial appearance of it [I. Bostan, Specific problems of financial law. The replies of the delegate legislator (2014-2019) / RO: Probleme punctuale de drept financiar. Replici ale legiuitorului delegat (2014-2019), Tipo Moldova Publishing House, 2019].
{"title":"Perpetual Research: Financial Law Issues","authors":"Bogdan Chihai","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3469536","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3469536","url":null,"abstract":"Through this paper we want to highlight some aspects regarding the concerns of a Romanian author, under the aspect of the research undertaken on topics of Public Financial Law. For this, we will consider a last editorial appearance of it [I. Bostan, Specific problems of financial law. The replies of the delegate legislator (2014-2019) / RO: Probleme punctuale de drept financiar. Replici ale legiuitorului delegat (2014-2019), Tipo Moldova Publishing House, 2019].","PeriodicalId":54058,"journal":{"name":"EJournal of Tax Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78076940","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article is a reply to Martin Wichmann’s reply from a German perspective to John F. Avery Jones’s article ‘Why Can’t the English … ?’, both published in the Bulletin for International Taxation of the International Bureau of Fiscal Documentation (IBFD), 2019 (Volume 73), No. 6/7. It argues that Wichmann’s concerns against Avery Jones’s suggestion for English-speaking countries to follow the lead of non-English speaking countries in concluding tax treaties with an English prevailing text or only in English are unfounded, and that also the few remaining non- English speaking countries with a tendency not to conclude treaties with English prevailing texts should embrace the emerging global reality of English as lingua franca for tax treaties. The article is based on an analysis of 3,358 tax treaties currently in force or yet to come into force.
本文是对Martin wiichmann从德国角度对John F. Avery Jones的文章“为什么英国人不能……?”的回复，这两篇文章都发表在国际财政文件局(IBFD)的国际税收公报，2019(73卷)第6/7期。它认为，Wichmann对Avery Jones建议英语国家跟随非英语国家的领导，以英语为主导文本缔结税收协定或仅以英语缔结税收协定的担忧是没有根据的，并且少数剩余的非英语国家倾向于不以英语为主导文本缔结条约，应该接受英语作为税收协定通用语言的新兴全球现实。这篇文章是基于对3358项目前生效或尚未生效的税收协定的分析。
{"title":"Why Can't the Germans...? English as Lingua Franca for Tax Treaties","authors":"R. X. Resch","doi":"10.54648/taxi2019093","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/taxi2019093","url":null,"abstract":"This article is a reply to Martin Wichmann’s reply from a German perspective to John F. Avery Jones’s article ‘Why Can’t the English … ?’, both published in the Bulletin for International Taxation of the International Bureau of Fiscal Documentation (IBFD), 2019 (Volume 73), No. 6/7. It argues that Wichmann’s concerns against Avery Jones’s suggestion for English-speaking countries to follow the lead of non-English speaking countries in concluding tax treaties with an English prevailing text or only in English are unfounded, and that also the few remaining non- English speaking countries with a tendency not to conclude treaties with English prevailing texts should embrace the emerging global reality of English as lingua franca for tax treaties. The article is based on an analysis of 3,358 tax treaties currently in force or yet to come into force.","PeriodicalId":54058,"journal":{"name":"EJournal of Tax Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91206605","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article presents a new measure of the efficiency consequences of tax policies and explains how this new measure can shed light on a wide range of tax law debates. We build upon the “elasticity of taxable income” approach pioneered by public finance scholars over the last quarter century and extend that approach to address complex tax systems with multiple rates, multiple bases, and administrative and compliance costs. The resulting measure — the behavioral elasticity of taxable revenue, or BETR — captures the change in real resources available to society caused by any marginal change in tax rates, the tax base, or tax enforcement. We argue that the BETR can serve as a guide to a wide range of tax policy issues, and we illustrate the BETR’s utility by applying it to questions such as the proper treatment of mixed personal/business expenses, the appropriate aggressiveness of efforts to address tax shelters, and the optimal mix of audits, recordkeeping and reporting requirements, and penalties. We also consider the relationship between the BETR and the distributive aims of tax law. While the BETR is a measure of efficiency and not distribution, the BETR can aid policymakers in deciding both how much to redistribute and how to accomplish distributive objectives most efficiently. We end with reflections on the implications of the BETR for the design of non-tax legal rules.
{"title":"The Behavioral Elasticity of Tax Revenue","authors":"Daniel Hemel, D. Weisbach","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3462705","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3462705","url":null,"abstract":"This article presents a new measure of the efficiency consequences of tax policies and explains how this new measure can shed light on a wide range of tax law debates. We build upon the “elasticity of taxable income” approach pioneered by public finance scholars over the last quarter century and extend that approach to address complex tax systems with multiple rates, multiple bases, and administrative and compliance costs. The resulting measure — the behavioral elasticity of taxable revenue, or BETR — captures the change in real resources available to society caused by any marginal change in tax rates, the tax base, or tax enforcement. We argue that the BETR can serve as a guide to a wide range of tax policy issues, and we illustrate the BETR’s utility by applying it to questions such as the proper treatment of mixed personal/business expenses, the appropriate aggressiveness of efforts to address tax shelters, and the optimal mix of audits, recordkeeping and reporting requirements, and penalties. We also consider the relationship between the BETR and the distributive aims of tax law. While the BETR is a measure of efficiency and not distribution, the BETR can aid policymakers in deciding both how much to redistribute and how to accomplish distributive objectives most efficiently. We end with reflections on the implications of the BETR for the design of non-tax legal rules.","PeriodicalId":54058,"journal":{"name":"EJournal of Tax Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84478970","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-09-30DOI: 10.32721/ctj.2019.67.3.sym.thuronyi
Victor Thuronyi
A supplemental expenditure tax (SET) could be imposed at progressive rates in addition to the income tax, and income tax rates lowered correspondingly. The SET is a progressive cash flow consumption tax originally proposed by Nicholas Kaldor in 1955. Its enactment would facilitate income tax reform and simplification--for example, by taxing capital gains at the same rates as ordinary income--and would enable the alternative minimum tax to be repealed. It could be designed so as to facilitate compliance with little additional information required beyond what already has to be gathered for income tax purposes.
{"title":"A Supplemental Expenditure Tax for Canada","authors":"Victor Thuronyi","doi":"10.32721/ctj.2019.67.3.sym.thuronyi","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32721/ctj.2019.67.3.sym.thuronyi","url":null,"abstract":"A supplemental expenditure tax (SET) could be imposed at progressive rates in addition to the income tax, and income tax rates lowered correspondingly. The SET is a progressive cash flow consumption tax originally proposed by Nicholas Kaldor in 1955. Its enactment would facilitate income tax reform and simplification--for example, by taxing capital gains at the same rates as ordinary income--and would enable the alternative minimum tax to be repealed. It could be designed so as to facilitate compliance with little additional information required beyond what already has to be gathered for income tax purposes.","PeriodicalId":54058,"journal":{"name":"EJournal of Tax Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74275409","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article intend to analyze specifically and in a non-exhaustive format (i) the blockchain technology, (ii) discuss, in general terms, the obstacles in the use of this tool by tax authorities to obtain information and efficiently cross-check data and (iii) present the practical challenges to its implementation from the perspective of taxpayer rights and information security.
{"title":"Blockchain: Technology as a Tool for Tax Information Exchange or an Instrument Threatening the Taxpayer’s Privacy?","authors":"G. Bossa, Eduardo de Paiva Gomes","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3540277","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3540277","url":null,"abstract":"This article intend to analyze specifically and in a non-exhaustive format (i) the blockchain technology, (ii) discuss, in general terms, the obstacles in the use of this tool by tax authorities to obtain information and efficiently cross-check data and (iii) present the practical challenges to its implementation from the perspective of taxpayer rights and information security.","PeriodicalId":54058,"journal":{"name":"EJournal of Tax Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80526304","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：