Inspiration, purpose and the context of this contribution
In the article “The PPT in Post-BEPS Tax Treaty Law: It Is a GAAR but Just a GAAR!”, Professor Robert Danon convincingly demonstrated that …
In last month’s blog I promised to address the treaty aspects of Davies and Others v HMRC [2020] UKUT 67 (TCC). The case concerned UK resident individuals who each took out a life insurance policy…
We have all become familiar with the expression in the PPT set out in article 7(1) of the MLI and article 29(9) of the 2017 OECD Model where “obtaining that benefit was one of the principal purposes…
Many States have incorporated General Anti-Avoidance Rules (GAARs) into their tax laws to prevent tax avoidance; within the EU, a GAAR is even mandatory for corporate taxation since 1 January 2019 …
The Canadian Federal Court of Appeal has upheld the Tax Court of Canada decision in Canada v. Alta Energy Luxembourg S.A.R.L., 2020 FCA 43 (CanLII). The case is of some significance because the…
India recently notified a Protocol that amends the India-China tax treaty and incorporates some of the OECD recommendations put forth as part of its BEPS project. The changes would apply from the…
Background
Action 6 of BEPS introduced the principal purpose test (PPT) as one of the Minimum Standards to be implemented by the countries/jurisdictions taking part in the BEPS Inclusive Framework…
BEPS Action Plan 6 observes that corporations are misusing Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) provisions by indulging in treaty shopping. A typical example of treaty abuse that BEPS Action…
In 1789, Benjamin Franklin wrote in a letter to French scientist Jean-Baptiste Leroy: “Our new Constitution is now established, and has an appearance that promises permanency; but in this world…
