Tax Brief. 24 March OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids. 1. Background
|
|
- Clarissa Jackson
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Tax Brief 24 March 2014 OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids Another piece of the base erosion puzzle has appeared with the release of the OECD s recommendations for addressing cross-border hybrids. This Tax Brief analyses the 2 OECD Public Discussion Drafts on neutralising the effects of hybrid mismatch arrangements and their implications, both for Australia s future treaty practice and for some common cross-border structures and instruments. If these recommendations are pursued, Australia s tax law could become much more contingent, and structurally dependent on the policies and practices of other governments. 1. Background The wide-ranging OECD project on base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) which emerged during 2013 listed 15 Action Items to be pursued during 2014 and One of the items listed in the OECD s Action Plan on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (July 2013) involved developing measures to, neutralise the effects of hybrid mismatch arrangements. These measures (along with measures directed at CFC rules, interest deductibility and tax incentives), were intended to contribute to the broader goal of establishing, a fundamentally new set of standards designed to establish international coherence in corporate income taxation. The measures targeting hybrid arrangements were envisaged as having two distinct dimensions: possible revisions to the OECD Model treaty, to ensure that hybrid instruments and entities (as well as dual resident entities) are not used to obtain the benefits of treaties unduly. This aspect is explored in a 14 page document (the Treaty Draft) which proposes changes to the OECD Model treaty, and recommendations about domestic law changes to address the effects of mismatches. This aspect is explored in a 79 page document (the Domestic Draft). The need to pursue changes in domestic laws was acknowledged as necessary because the other alternatives trying to secure harmonisation of entity and transaction classification between countries, or invoking some kind of specific or general anti-avoidance rule would be less likely to succeed. 1 OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids
2 With regard to domestic law, the July 2013 Action Plan envisaged three potential changes: removing an exemption to the recipient where a payment is deductible by the payer for example, switching off the participation exemption for a payment which would ordinarily be treated as a dividend in the recipient country, but is treated as interest in the paying country; denying a deduction to the payer if a payment is not assessable income of the recipient (and is not subject to taxation under controlled foreign company rules or similar anti-deferral rules) for example, denying a deduction for a payment which would ordinarily be treated as interest in the paying country, but is treated as a dividend in the recipient country; and denying a deduction to the payer for a payment that is also deductible in another jurisdiction for example, denying a deduction to one of the companies involved if interest is being claimed as a deduction by the subsidiary and by the parent (typically through the effects of the US check-the-box rules). These approaches would make national tax laws much more contingent and inter-dependent. For example, interest might be deductible if paid to Country A but not if paid to Country B, or a dividend might be exempt from tax if received from a subsidiary resident in Country C but not if the subsidiary is resident in Country D. The domestic consequences would be driven by the treatment abroad from time to time. The July 2013 Action Plan recognised that it would be necessary to provide, guidance on co-ordination or tie-breaker rules if more than one country seeks to apply such rules to a transaction or structure. 2. The practical, conceptual and geo-political problem The driver of all cross-border mismatches in tax is different views between sovereign states about the best way to approach a particular situation, instrument or entity. Countries rarely consider alignment with the tax laws of other countries as an important policy objective when designing their own law. Australian tax law is full of instances of significant misalignment with other countries approaches to the same issue: our debt / equity rules are highly idiosyncratic, our tax consolidation system has many features that are unique, even among countries with consolidation systems, our formal conduit foreign income rules are uncommon (although other countries may achieve similar outcomes, in whole or in part, through a combination of rules), 2 OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids
3 our views about the circumstances when a partnership or a trust is, and can remain, transparent and when it is to be taxed as a company (Divisions 5A, 6B and 6C) are not likely to match the classifications that other countries are applying to these entities, our notion of the border between a lease and a sale with vendor finance will not always correspond with the border drawn by other countries, our treatment of fringe benefits formally taxes the wrong person and our approach to taxing personal services income that is diverted to entities or family members is not universally followed, our retirement income system adopts income tax treatment (taxed-taxed-exempt) while other countries commonly employ a consumption tax model (exempt-exempt-taxed), other countries may view a payment for the use of intellectual property simply as a royalty which we treat as including a payment for services or as involving such a significant limitation of owner rights that it amounts to a sale, and so on. A moment s reflection suggests the potential for cross-border mismatches is enormous. If the solution to mismatches lies in changes to the domestic law of a country, obvious questions include, which country is to change its treatment, will it agree to do so if change would adversely affect its revenue, if the change will increase its revenue, will the other country accept that outcome? Will there be a rush to get-in-first and what action will this provoke in response? The incentive for opportunistic and strategic behaviour is obvious. As will appear below, these recommendations can render domestic law subservient to the policy decisions of other governments. A recent article in the Financial Times put it this way: a leading tax expert described draft measures aimed at dismantling hybrid tax structures, which exploit differences between countries tax rules, as almost the tax world s equivalent of Big Bang. the proposals would allow foreign governments to block the check-the-box tax planning used by some US multinationals to route profits to tax havens, even without the co-operation of the US Congress. Surrendering sovereignty over tax matters to other countries is not something governments are used to, or are likely to enjoy. One would also have to wonder whether Australia would be a net winner or net loser from these measures one hopes Treasury has modelled these matters and knows the answer. If Australia would be a net loser, why would we act on these recommendations? In the same vein, will these measures increase the cost of capital for Australian companies? If so, is this a good idea and why? It is instructive that while the recent UK Budget included a statement supportive of the BEPS 3 OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids
4 project, it also reiterated the government s strategy of reforming the corporate tax system to create the most competitive tax environment in the G20, and ensuring that, the banking sector [is not] unfairly advantaged or disadvantaged by the introduction of these rules arising from the BEPS project. 3. March 2014 reports 3.1 Treaty issues With regard to changes to the OECD Model (and, it can be expected, Australia s future treaty practice) the Treaty Draft focuses on three issues: dual resident entities, transparent entities and reconciling the recommendations in the Domestic Draft with the terms of the OECD Model. Dual resident entities. The Treaty Draft repeats the proposal already made in the Discussion Draft on tax treaty abuse (which will be the subject of a separate Tax Brief), to replace the current tie-breaker rule in art 4(3) of the OECD Model for a person other than an individual. The current rule allocates the place of residence for treaty purposes exclusively to the place of effective management. The Treaty Draft proposes replacing that rule with a requirement that residence be resolved by the competent authorities on a case-by-case basis, having regard to a variety of factors place of effective management, place of incorporation and any other relevant factors. If the competent authorities are unable to agree, the entity is not entitled to any tax relief or exemption provided by the treaty. The Treaty Draft notes that this recommendation will not solve all dual residence problems. It will not solve the problem that the tie breaker rule only applies for the purposes of the relevant treaty. This means a company can be a resident of one country under its domestic law (and enjoy the benefits domestic law gives to a resident) while being a resident of the other country for the purposes of the treaty (and enjoy the benefits afforded by treaty to a resident of the other State). The Draft recommends that countries adopt, as a matter of domestic law, the position that a company which, is considered to be a resident of another State under a tax treaty will be deemed not to be a resident under domestic law. (A recommendation to this effect was made by the Board of Taxation in its 2003 report on Australia s international tax regime but the recommendation was never acted upon. Instead, Australian domestic law contains a targeted rule for prescribed dual residents which has an impact, among other things, on the CFC and consolidation regimes.) Transparent entities. One valuable output from this project is the proposal in the Treaty Draft that the OECD will amend the OECD Model to formalise the recommendations of the 1999 Partnerships Report, and extend it to other entities commonly treated as transparent such as trusts. The Treaty Draft recommends a simple clause which would treat the income earned by or through an entity that is viewed by either State as fiscally transparent as income of a resident provided it is taxed in the hands of a resident. Extensive passages explaining the effect of the new clause would be added to the Commentary to Article 1. Australia already has a rule of this kind in its 2009 treaty with New Zealand. 4 OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids
5 Reconciling the domestic proposals with the OECD Model. The Treaty Draft then examines whether there will be any tension between the recommendations for changes to domestic law in the Domestic Draft and the text of the OECD Model. There appears to be two concerns that the recommendations could challenge the paradigms currently embedded in the Treaty Draft, or that the domestic law changes could be rendered ineffective by the terms of the Model. The Treaty Draft concludes that: measures which would be implemented by denying deductions to a resident entity would not appear to offend the treaty, none of the measures being recommended appear to involve the imposition of tax on a non-resident with no permanent establishment in the State (which might have been a problem), the current drafting of the exemption method (art 23A) does not require amending, as it excludes dividends. However, countries whose treaty practice departs from the Model, and extend an exemption from tax to dividends received from a subsidiary in the other State, should change their practice employing a tax credit method for these dividends, the current drafting of the credit method (art 23B) does not require amending as the amount of the credit is already limited to the amount of tax payable after taking into account appropriate deductions, and none of the recommendations appear to involve practices that might invoke the non-discrimination provisions of the Model. 3.2 Recommended changes to domestic law The content of the Domestic Draft is not altogether unexpected it repeats much that was discussed in an earlier OECD document on Hybrid Mismatch Arrangements (2012). There has also been a parallel project undertaken by the European Commission on double non-taxation. The document proposes that States should enact rules described in the Domestic Draft in order to deal with the three identified targets, which give effect to some suggested solutions. What the rules would look like. The document sketches the rules a State should adopt in very general terms. They would be comprehensive and apply automatically. They would apply without the need to demonstrate that a State had lost revenue. No specific drafting is proposed but the document includes recommendations about the design, application and operation of three targeted rules: a hybrid financial instrument rule, a hybrid entity payments rule, and 5 OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids
6 an imported mismatches and reverse hybrids rule. Some of the rules would only be enlivened only for transactions between related parties. Targets. In order to get a sense of the transactions and structures these rules would attack and what their impact would be, it is necessary to look at the three targets. The Domestic Draft recommendations target three categories of hybrid mismatch arrangement: (a) (b) (c) Hybrid financial instruments (including transfers); where a deductible payment made under a financial instrument is not treated as taxable income under the laws of the payee s jurisdiction; Hybrid entity payments; where differences in the characterisation of the hybrid payer result in a deductible payment being disregarded or triggering a second deduction in the other jurisdiction; and Reverse hybrid and imported mismatches; which cover payments made to an intermediary payee that are not taxable on receipt. There are two kinds of arrangement targeted by these rules: (i) (ii) arrangements where differences in the characterisation of the intermediary result in the payment being disregarded in both the intermediary jurisdiction and the investor s jurisdiction (reverse hybrids); and arrangements where the intermediary is party to a separate hybrid mismatch arrangement and the payment is set-off against a deduction arising under that arrangement (imported mismatches). The meaning of these classifications is not self-evident and they receive more than a little explanation in the document. We discuss below some examples of each of these categories. Remedies. The document proposes that some of these measures would be addressed by multiple remedies a primary rule, one or more fall-back rules and (sometimes) information reporting. For example, for the hybrid financial instruments class (principally a dividend that is deductible to the payer and not assessable to the recipient) the document proposes: a primary rule, which would operate in the country where the payer resides, to deny a deduction to the payer, and a secondary rule, which would operate in the country where the recipient resides, which would include the dividend in the recipient s assessable income. This rule would only be triggered if the primary rule was not invoked by the country where the payer was resident. 6 OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids
7 (But there are also passages in the document which suggest that countries with a participation exemption should in any event modify their laws to exclude deductible dividends from the scope of the rule, in which case neither the primary nor the secondary rule would be needed.) However, the document then examines whether to restrict these rules in various ways for example, to remove from the scope of the rules plain vanilla loans or transactions involving individuals, to limit their operation just to transactions between related parties (or parties acting in concert) and to the parties to a structured arrangement, to exclude widely-held instruments or instruments that are traded on an exchange, and to exclude instruments that are hybrid instruments but which have hybrid features in order to satisfy the requirements of a financial system regulator. For the class of structure referred to as imported mismatches and reverse hybrids, the recommendation involves multiple remedies: a primary approach which would operate in the country where the owners reside: implementing CFC rules, FIF rules or targeted anti-avoidance rules or strengthening the existing regimes to tax the income accruing in a foreign jurisdiction on a current basis, a secondary rule which would operate in the jurisdiction where the intermediary was formed: requiring that jurisdiction to treat the entity as a taxpayer rather than as transparent, a third rule which would operate in the country from which amounts are paid to the intermediary: denying a deduction for those payments, and greater levels of information gathering and sharing required in the intermediary jurisdiction. 4. Implications for some structures and instruments We discuss below just how these approaches might be applied to some instruments and structures, and what the effect on Australian law might be. Example 1. Hybrid financial instrument rule inbound investment Dutch Co holds redeemable preference shares in Aus Co which qualify as debt interests for Australian tax purposes. Aus Co claims a deduction for the dividends it pays. Dutch Co is entitled to the benefit of the participation exemption and does not pay Dutch tax on the dividends it receives. 7 OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids
8 Dutch Co receipt treated as a dividend Diagram 1 NL AUS $ payment Aus Co payment treated as interest Under the proposed hybrid financial instruments rule, Australia would deny the deduction to Aus Co. If Australia failed to implement that rule, the Netherlands would deny Dutch Co the benefit of the dividend exemption. Of course, if the Netherlands changes its participation exemption so that deductible dividends are not entitled to tax relief, Australia would presumably allow the interest deduction. However, the relevant rule (presumably in both countries) might not be applicable if the companies were not related or the instrument was widely held etc. Example 2. Hybrid financial instrument rule outbound investment DOC ID Aus Co subscribes for a class of shares in a company resident in Country B (B Co) which represent a 10% interest in the company. Under the law of Country B, the returns on these particular shares are deductible in Country B. Under current Australian law, even though the instrument is regarded as a debt interest under Australia s debt / equity rules, the dividends on these shares are treated as non-assessable non-exempt income of Aus Co. Aus Co receipt treated as a dividend Diagram 2 AUS Country B $ payment B Co payment treated as interest Under the proposed hybrid financial instruments rule, Aus Co s entitlement to the dividend exemption would depend upon whether Country B retained or removed the tax deduction for B Co. If Country B retains the deduction, Australia would turn off the exemption; if not, Australia would permit the exemption to remain. Notice that if the proposal in the 2013 Budget (to limit the exemption only to dividends on instruments that are classified as equity under Australia s debt/equity rules) were subsequently implemented, there would be a different set of outcomes for B Co: Aus Co might no longer be entitled to a dividend exemption, which would mean that Country B should reinstate the tax deduction for B Co. 8 OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids
9 Example 3. Hybrid entity payments rule Aus Co is a company incorporated and resident in Australia, and the head entity of the Aus Co consolidated group (comprising Aus Co and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Aus Sub). Aus Co is a wholly-owned subsidiary of US Co and under the US check-the-box rules, Aus Co (but not Aus Sub) is a disregarded entity for US tax purposes. Aus Co borrows funds from Bank and pays interest on the borrowed funds. Aus Co (as head entity of the consolidated group) deducts the interest in Australia, in effect reducing the tax payable on the income of Aus Sub. In the US, US Co is regarded as the borrower and is entitled to deduct the same interest payment. US Co payer is USCo (which includes disregarded AusCo) Diagram 3 US AUS Aus Co $ interest Bank payer is AusCo group Aus Sub Under the proposed hybrid entity payment rule, the US would deny US Co a deduction for the interest to the extent it shelters Aus Sub s income from Australian tax. If, however, the US did not act to deny US Co the deduction, Australia would deny Aus Co a deduction for the interest payment. Other elements of the proposed rule try to adjust the outcomes if, for example, some of the income of Aus Co was being included in both countries simultaneously, and to allow the carry forward of losses if US Co could demonstrate to the IRS that the deduction it is being denied cannot be set-off against the income of any entity in Australia. Example 4. Reverse hybrid Aus Co is one of a number of investors in a corporate limited partnership (LP) in Country C. LP manufactures and sells products to an entity in Country D which then pays the price to LP. Under the laws of Country C, the income of LP is to be taxed in the hands of the partners (Aus Co and the other investors). Under Australian law, the entity in Country C, rather than the partners, is viewed as properly taxable on the income it receives (assuming LP is not a CFC and Aus Co has not made an election under s to treat LP as a foreign hybrid). 9 OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids
10 AUS Aus Co Australia views LP as proper taxpayer Diagram 4 other investors LP Country C views AusCo and investors as proper taxpayer Country C Country D $ price D Co Under the series of rules proposed for reverse hybrids some or all of the following should then occur: Australia should ensure its FAF rules would include in the assessable income of the Aus Co a share of the income of LP, if necessary, Country C should impose tax on the LP if the amounts it derives will not be taxed in the hands of Aus Co and the other partners, if necessary, Country D should deny a deduction for the price paid to LP, and Country C should gather substantial information from LP and make it available to Aus Co and the tax authorities in Australia. 5. Some comments Given how prevalent mismatches are, the document actually has quite a narrow focus. It does not purport to address all mismatches; instead, it is clearly preoccupied with just a few key issues in the current international tax order, principally disagreements about drawing the debt equity distinction and disagreements about entity recognition (eg check-the-box and consolidation systems). The paper does not address simple situations where a payment is deductible in one country at a relatively high rate (say 35% or 30%) and assessable in another country at a relatively low rate (say, 5% or 10%). Nor does the paper address situations where deductible payments may effectively be non-assessable because of the operation of an imputation/dividend franking system, such as the one we have in Australia. There are other indications in the document that it is not as ambitious as it might seem. Parts of the document convey mixed messages: 10 OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids
11 most of the discussion suggests these rules would operate for all transactions and structures; other parts suggest the rules would operate only between related parties, some of the discussion suggests that the rules are to be self-executing but other passages suggest they should only be triggered if revenue has been lost, some passages suggest that the rules should be triggered if there is either a permanent loss of revenue or simply deferral, although none of the examples presented in the paper involve instances of deferral, and while the rules are meant to be comprehensive, some things will be apparently be immune from attack. The example given is, rules that entitle taxpayers to a unilateral tax deduction for invested equity without requiring the taxpayer to accrue any expenditure (such as regimes that grant deemed interest deductions for equity capital) in other words, an allowance for corporate equity is meant to be immune from these rules even though it treats debt like equity and in one country only. These and other qualifications may possibly end up constraining the final scope of the project just to the most egregious and deliberate structures the kinds of structures which have been associated in the press and in parliaments with prominent players in the IT industry. 6. Next steps The two draft documents are being released for comment. Comments are due by 2 May A summary of the OECD s questions for consultation is attached as an Appendix to this Tax Brief. * * * * * 11 OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids
12 For further information, please contact Sydney Melbourne Perth Tony Frost phone Tim Kyle tim.kyle@gf.com.au phone Cameron Blackwood cameron.blackwood@gf.com.au phone Toby Eggleston toby.eggleston@gf.com.au phone Cameron Rider cameron.rider@gf.com.au phone Nick Heggart nick.heggart@gf.com.au phone G&F document ID _1.docx These notes are in summary form designed to alert clients to tax developments of general interest. They are not comprehensive, they are not offered as advice and should not be used to formulate business or other fiscal decisions. Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation Greenwoods & Freehills Pty Limited (ABN ) Sydney Melbourne Perth ANZ Tower, 161 Castlereagh Street, Sydney NSW 2000 Australia Ph , Fax Collins Street, Melbourne VIC 3000, Australia Ph Fax QV.1 Building, 250 St Georges Terrace, Perth WA 6000, Australia Ph Fax OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids
13 Appendix Summary of the OECD s questions for consultation 1 Design of Hybrid Mismatch Rules 1 Are the objectives and design principles of the hybrid mismatch arrangements clear? 2 If further clarification is required, then where is this required and how could it best be provided? 2. Hybrid Financial Instruments & Transfers 1 Is it clear what elements need to be present in order for the rules neutralising hybrid financial instruments or hybrid transfers to apply? 2 Is the outcome of the rules operation clear? 3 Are there any arrangements which should be caught by the rules but are not addressed in the recommendations? 4 This document sets out two possible approaches to drafting a scoping rule and summarises the possible advantages and disadvantages. Are the advantages and disadvantages accurately described and are there any other advantages and disadvantages of the two approaches? (a) What is the perceived impact of a bottom-up or top-down approach in terms of tax compliance and tax administration? 5 This part includes a number of examples: (a) (b) What commercial or legal difficulties might these examples give rise to where the parties to an arrangement are unconnected and have no knowledge of the counterparties position? In this context are there any examples or situations that are more problematic than others? If so please explain why problems arise and what constraints or restrictions the parties might face in obtaining relevant information on the treatment of the counterparty? 1 OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids
14 (c) (d) To the extent that there are difficulties, do these apply equally to both the holder and issuer in the context of hybrid financial instruments? Are there any other situations or examples, not covered here that give rise to difficulties? In particular are there any specific problems for regulated businesses (see also Q. 8 below)? 6 What definition could be used to capture the concept of widely-held or regularly traded whilst also addressing concerns that any exemption should not be available to related parties, parties acting in concert or parties to a structured arrangement (i.e. an arrangement designed to obtain the benefit of a mismatch). 7 If the rule exempted certain traded instruments then how could it be drafted so that it still applied to structured arrangements? 8 In relation to regulatory capital (a) (b) (c) What are the regulatory requirements for banks' to issue/manage capital at top holding company level, and what arrangements are used to pass this down the group? For example, what use is made of identical and traceable instruments and under what conditions would the arrangement be funded by a market issuance at top holding company level? Are special provisions needed to create parity between a banking group issuing hybrid regulatory capital indirectly to the market through its holding companies and a banking group (or another industry group) issuing hybrid regulatory capital directly to the market? Are hybrid regulatory capital instruments sufficiently different as to justify a full carve-out from hybrid mismatch rules? Are there inherent safeguards in place against the use of these instruments for tax-planning purposes or what safeguards could be introduced to ensure that any exemption from the general hybrid mismatch rules could not be abused? 3. Hybrid Entity Payments 1 Is it clear what elements need to be present in order for the rules neutralising deductible hybrid entity payments to apply? 2 Is the outcome of the rules operation clear? 3 Are there any arrangements which should be caught by the rules but are not addressed in the recommendations? 4 Are there any related party structures where the hybrid entity may have difficulty in knowing or obtaining information about the position of the investor? 2 OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids
15 9 If so when would these arise and what difficulties or constraints would the hybrid entity face? 4. Imported Mismatches and Reverse Hybrids 1 Are there any arrangements which should be caught by the rules but are not addressed in the recommendations? 2 Is it clear what elements need to be present in order for the defensive rule neutralising reverse hybrids and imported mismatches to apply? 3 How could an anti abuse provision be drafted so that it prevents otherwise unrelated parties from entering into arrangements to exploit mismatch arrangements? 5. Further Technical Discussion and Examples 1 Do these technical recommendations assist in understanding and applying the rules? 2 Are there further technical recommendations that should be addressed in the final report? Reference: Public Discussion Draft, BEPS Action 2: Neutralise the Effects of Hybrid Mismatch Arrangements (recommendations for Domestic Laws), 19 March May 2014, page 78 see aft-domestic-laws-recommendations-march-2014.pdf 3 OECD Recommendations on Cross-border Hybrids
Tax Brief. 29 May New International Tax Measures. Re-written Interest Withholding Tax Exemption. Background
Tax Brief 29 May 2007 New International Tax Measures The Government introduced the Tax Laws Amendment (2007 Measure No 3) Bill 2007 ("the Bill") into Parliament on Thursday 10 May. The Bill contains a
More informationTax Brief. 8 September Withholding Tax on Interest Paid to US and UK Financial Institutions - The ATO's Opening Gambit.
Tax Brief 8 September 2004 Withholding Tax on Interest Paid to US and UK Financial Institutions - The ATO's Opening Gambit On 1 September 2004, the ATO issued its preliminary view in the form of Draft
More informationThe Orica decision and its Implications
14 December 2015 The Orica decision and its Implications The first instance decision of Justice Pagone in Orica Limited v Commissioner of Taxation [2015] FCA 1399 represents a significant win by the ATO
More informationTax Brief. 20 April The income of a trust Taxation Ruling 2012/D1. 1. The big picture
Tax Brief 20 April 2012 The income of a trust Taxation Ruling 2012/D1 On 28 March, the ATO issued a draft Ruling, TR 2012/D1 ( the Ruling ) dealing with the meaning of the word income in connection with
More informationTax Brief. 8 April Participation Exemption and Reform of the CFC Rules. Summary
Tax Brief 8 April 2004 Participation Exemption and Reform of the CFC Rules On April Fools Day the second tranche of legislation arising out of the Review of International Taxation was introduced into Federal
More informationTax Brief. 23 April Investment Manager Regime Element 3. 1 Background
Tax Brief 23 April 2013 Investment Manager Regime Element 3 Treasury has released an Exposure Draft of the legislation needed to enact Element 3 of the Investment Manager Regime. The major beneficiaries
More informationBEPS ACTION 2: NEUTRALISE THE EFFECTS OF HYBRID MISMATCH ARRANGEMENTS
Public Discussion Draft BEPS ACTION 2: NEUTRALISE THE EFFECTS OF HYBRID MISMATCH ARRANGEMENTS (Treaty Issues) 19 March 2014 2 May 2014 Comments on this note should be sent electronically (in Word format)
More informationTax Brief. 19 December Foreign Exchange Rules Become Law and the Countdown to 16 January 2004 Begins. The Six Elections and Choices
Tax Brief 19 December 2003 Foreign Exchange Rules Become Law and the Countdown to Begins On Wednesday 17 December, 2003, the Governor General gave Royal Assent to the legislation enacting the new foreign
More informationTax Brief. Sovereign Wealth Funds. 8 December, Background. Treasury Paper
Tax Brief 8 December, 2009 Sovereign Wealth Funds The tax treatment of sovereign wealth funds (SWFs) in domestic and international tax law has recently been occupying the minds of tax officials in Australia
More informationEXPOSURE DRAFT TREASURY LAWS AMENDMENT (OECD HYBRID MISMATCH RULES) BILL 2017 EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
EXPOSURE DRAFT TREASURY LAWS AMENDMENT (OECD HYBRID MISMATCH RULES) BILL 2017 EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM Table of contents Glossary... 1 Chapter 1 OECD hybrid mismatch rules... 3 Chapter 2 Other effects of
More informationTax Brief. 11 May Budget Measures - Superannuation. New Personal Income Tax Rates
Tax Brief 11 May 2004 2004-05 Budget Measures - Superannuation The Treasurer s 2004-05 Budget will no doubt be remembered for its generosity to families, not to mention the size and speed of the cash handouts
More informationProposal for a COUNCIL DIRECTIVE. amending Directive (EU) 2016/1164 as regards hybrid mismatches with third countries. {SWD(2016) 345 final}
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Strasbourg, 25.10.2016 COM(2016) 687 final 2016/0339 (CNS) Proposal for a COUNCIL DIRECTIVE amending Directive (EU) 2016/1164 as regards hybrid mismatches with third countries {SWD(2016)
More informationGlobal Tax Alert. OECD releases report under BEPS Action 2 on hybrid mismatch arrangements. Executive summary
23 September 2014 EY Library Access both online and pdf versions of all EY Global Tax Alerts. Copy into your web browser: http://www.ey.com/gl/en/ Services/Tax/International- Tax/Tax-alert-library#date
More informationHybrid and branch mismatch rules
August 2018 A special report from Policy and Strategy, Inland Revenue Hybrid and branch mismatch rules Sections FH 1 to FH 15, EX 44(2), EX 46(6)(e), EX 46 (10)(db), EX 47B, EX 52(14C), EX 53(16C), RF
More informationTax Brief. 5 April A Bet Each Way. Facts. Sherlinc Enterprises Pty Ltd v FCT (2004) AATA 113
Tax Brief 5 April 2004 A Bet Each Way Sherlinc Enterprises Pty Ltd v FCT (2004) AATA 113 The AAT has found that a purported choice to apply the now repealed replacement asset rollover under Div 123 was
More informationBEPS Targets Commonly Used Canada-U.S. Hybrid Structures
BEPS Targets Commonly Used Canada-U.S. Hybrid Structures Abraham Leitner aleitner@dwpv.com Reprinted from Tax Notes Int l Tax Analysts (2015) www.dwpv.com Volume 77, Number 6 February 9, 2015 BEPS Targets
More informationTax Brief. 12 August IMR and MIT: A going-away present? 1. Investment Manager Regime
Tax Brief 12 August 2013 IMR and MIT: A going-away present? The centrepiece of business tax policy that the Labor Party carried into the 2007 federal election was to make Australia an Asian funds management
More informationTax Brief. 16 November Exposure Draft on Share Buybacks. Off-market buybacks
Tax Brief 16 November 2011 Exposure Draft on Share Buybacks Treasury has released exposure draft legislation to rewrite the share buyback rules into the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997. The draft gives
More informationTax Brief. 9 April Changes to Superannuation. Background. Earnings on assets set aside to meet pension liabilities
Tax Brief 9 April 2013 Changes to Superannuation The Treasurer has put an end to the frenzied pre-budget speculation by announcing the government s plans for changing superannuation. This Tax Brief examines
More informationTax Brief. 3 November Transitionally GST-Free Contracts 1 July 2005 Legislative Fix. STOP PRESS: 11 February Summary
Tax Brief 3 November 2004 Transitionally GST-Free Contracts 1 July 2005 Legislative Fix STOP PRESS: 11 February 2005 The legislation giving effect to the end of GST-free transitional relief passed through
More informationGlobal Tax Alert. OECD releases final report on Hybrid Mismatch Arrangements under Action 2. Executive summary
11 October 2015 Global Tax Alert EY OECD BEPS project Stay up-to-date on OECD s project on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting with EY s online site containing a comprehensive collection of resources, including
More informationProposal for amending the Parent-Subsidiary Directive: European Commission is waging war against double non-taxation
Proposal for amending the Parent-Subsidiary Directive: European Commission is waging war against double non-taxation David Ledure/Frederik Boulogne/Pieter Deré On 25 November 2013, the European Commission
More information25 October Draft Ruling on the Taxation of Earn out Arrangements. 1. Sale on credit v. a sale for an earn out right
25 October 2007 Draft Ruling on the Taxation of Earn out Arrangements On 17 October 2007, the Australian Taxation Office (the ATO ) released a new Draft Taxation Ruling (the Draft Ruling ) on the tax treatment
More informationthere should be a separate taxation regime for qualifying MITs, instead of the current trust rules in Div 6, and
10 April 2015 The New Attribution MIT Regime The government has finally released to the public an Exposure Draft (ED) of the regime for taxing income derived through attribution managed investment trusts
More informationAdjusting Consolidation, Again 1. Background
Tax Brief 9 October 2012 Adjusting Consolidation, Again The Board of Taxation has released another Discussion Paper in its ongoing review of the consolidation regime. One special focus of this paper is
More informationTax Brief. 15 December Tax Consolidation: Transitional Elections to be Finalised by 31 December More Changes Introduced
Tax Brief 15 December 2004 Tax Consolidation: Transitional Elections to be Finalised by 31 December 2004 - More Changes Introduced STOP PRESS 20 DECEMBER 2004 On Monday 20 September 2004, the Minister
More informationTax Brief. 21 December New ATO Views on Absolute Entitlement. Background
Tax Brief 21 December 2004 New ATO Views on Absolute Entitlement Background It has taken just under 20 years, but the Australian Taxation Office [ ATO ] has finally released a Draft Ruling outlining its
More informationCOMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the document. Proposal for a Council Directive
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Strasbourg, 25.10.2016 SWD(2016) 345 final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the document Proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive (EU) 2016/1164 as regards
More informationBudget 2006 Personal Tax and Fringe Benefits Tax Personal Income Tax
Tax Brief 9 May 2006 Budget 2006 Every year there is frenzied speculation about the likely content of the upcoming Budget. And, as is usually the case, some of the speculation proved to be close to the
More informationTax Management International Forum
Tax Management International Forum Comparative Tax Law for the International Practitioner Reproduced with permission from Tax Management International Forum, 38 FORUM 14, 6/5/17. Copyright 姝 2017 by The
More informationAustralia releases draft anti-hybrids law
28 November 2017 Global Tax Alert Australia releases draft anti-hybrids law EY Global Tax Alert Library Access both online and pdf versions of all EY Global Tax Alerts. Copy into your web browser: www.ey.com/taxalerts
More informationHybrid Entities; avoidance of double (non-) taxation under the Parent-Subsidiary Directive and the OECD Model Tax Convention
29 September 2015 Seminar: Hybrid Entities; avoidance of double (non-) taxation under the Parent-Subsidiary Directive and the OECD Model Tax Convention Conference chairman: Prof. A.J.A. (Ton) Stevens www.europesefiscalestudies.nl
More informationNeutralising the Effects of Hybrid Mismatch
OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project Neutralising the Effects of Hybrid Mismatch Arrangements ACTION 2: 2015 Final Report OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project Neutralising the
More informationTax Brief. 22 May Final Withholding for Managed Investment Trust Distributions. Background. Proposed legislation and regulations for payers
Tax Brief 22 May 2008 Final Withholding for Managed Investment Trust Distributions The Government has made further progress toward delivering one of its election promises, repeated in last week s Budget
More informationa) Title of proposal Proposal for a Council Directive amending Council Regulation (EU) 2016/1164 as regards hybrid mismatches with third countries
Unofficial translation of the assessment by the Dutch government of the proposal of the European Commission regarding hybrid mismatches with third countries Leaflet 2: Directive on hybrid mismatches with
More informationMore ruminations on valuation issues
4 December 2017 More ruminations on valuation issues The market value of an asset is a pervasive feature of tax law, and when it is in dispute it is almost always problematic. The value of a particular
More informationTax Insights Hybrid Mismatch and Multinational Group Financing Integrity Rules. Snapshot. 22 June 2018 Australia 2018/12
22 June 2018 Australia 2018/12 Tax Insights Hybrid Mismatch and Multinational Group Financing Integrity Rules Snapshot On 21 June 2018, the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) released draft Practical Compliance
More informationWORKING PAPER. Brussels, 03 February 2017 WK 1119/2017 REV 1 LIMITE FISC ECOFIN
Brussels, 03 February 2017 WK 1119/2017 REV 1 LIMITE FISC ECOFIN WORKING PAPER This is a paper intended for a specific community of recipients. Handling and further distribution are under the sole responsibility
More informationOECD BEPS final reports have implications for sovereign wealth and pension funds
14 January 2016 Global Tax Alert OECD BEPS final reports have implications for sovereign wealth and pension funds EY Global Tax Alert Library Access both online and pdf versions of all EY Global Tax Alerts.
More informationUK Anti-Hybrid Rules: Some challenges for corporate groups and a limited opportunity for improvements
UK Anti-Hybrid Rules: Some challenges for corporate groups and a limited opportunity for improvements The UK s complex new regime for counteracting hybrid and other mismatches came into force on 1 January
More informationUS Tax Reform and its Implications for Australia
13 February 2018 US Tax Reform and its Implications for Australia This tax brief discusses those aspects of the US tax reform which have most relevance to Australian corporate and international taxation,
More informationTax Brief. 24 August ATO continues the distribution confusion
Tax Brief 24 August 2011 ATO continues the distribution confusion The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) has released two draft fact sheets relating to the 2010 amendments to corporate law and the income
More informationEU Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive 2: hybrid mismatches with third countries
EU Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive 2: hybrid mismatches with third countries On February 21, 2017 the EU Member States reached agreement on a Directive that will amend the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (Council
More informationOECD releases final BEPS package
6 October 2015 Tax Flash OECD releases final BEPS package On 5 October 2015, the OECD published the final reports of the OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting ( BEPS ) project, which consist of a package
More informationTax Brief. 17 December CGT Treatment for MITs Draft Legislation. 1. Background
Tax Brief 17 December 2009 CGT Treatment for MITs Draft Legislation The Government has taken another step on the long road to reform of the tax rules for managed investment trusts ( MITs ). On 10 December,
More informationGST & Property Update End of GST Transitional Relief
Tax Brief 13 October 2005 GST & Property Update Given the volume of cases, legislative change and new or revised rulings relating to GST & property that have issued or been enacted since our last GST &
More informationPUBLIC INTRODUCTION /15 AS/FC/mpd 1 DG G 2B LIMITE EN. Council of the European Union Brussels, 23 November 2015 (OR. en) 14302/15 LIMITE
Conseil UE Council of the European Union Brussels, 23 November 2015 (OR. en) PUBLIC 14302/15 LIMITE FISC 159 ECOFIN 883 REPORT From: To: Subject: Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation) Permanent Representatives
More informationThe OECD s 3 Major Tax Initiatives
The OECD s 3 Major Tax Initiatives 1. The Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes Peer review of ~ 100 countries International standard for transparency and exchange of
More informationNew Australia- Germany Tax Treaty enters into force
12 December 2016 Global Tax Alert New Australia- Germany Tax Treaty enters into force EY Global Tax Alert Library Access both online and pdf versions of all EY Global Tax Alerts. Copy into your web browser:
More informationRoundup of Australia s BEPS developments
TaxTalk Insights Global Tax Roundup of Australia s BEPS developments 12 April 2017 In brief Since its presidency of the G20 in 2014, Australia has been at the forefront of efforts to combat tax avoidance
More informationTax Brief. 10 August Minerals Resource Rent Tax. 1. Background
Tax Brief 10 August 2011 Minerals Resource Rent Tax On 10 June, the government released for public comment preliminary and still incomplete Exposure Draft legislation for the proposed minerals resource
More informationPrevious OECD work on hybrids concluded that hybrid mismatch arrangements:
BEPS and Hybrids Panelists Achim Pross, Head of International Cooperation and Tax Administration, OECD Martin Kreienbaum, Director General International Taxation, Germany Douglas Poms, Senior Tax Counsel,
More informationPreventing Tax Treaty Abuse
Papers on Selected Topics in Protecting the Tax Base of Developing Countries Draft Outline - Paper No. 5 May 2014 Preventing Tax Treaty Abuse Graeme S. Cooper Professor of Tax Law, University of Sydney,
More informationOECD releases final report under BEPS Action 6 on preventing treaty abuse
20 October 2015 Global Tax Alert EY OECD BEPS project Stay up-to-date on OECD s project on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting with EY s online site containing a comprehensive collection of resources, including
More informationDraft hybrid mismatch rules: potential impacts for real estate and infrastructure investments
TaxTalk Insights Real Estate and Infrastructure Draft hybrid mismatch rules: potential impacts for real estate and infrastructure investments 7 December 2017 In brief As currently drafted, the proposed
More informationOverview of OECD Action Plan on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS)
Overview of OECD Action Plan on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Monia Naoum, IBFD Research Associate Emily Muyaa, IBFD Research Associate 18 June 2015 1 Introduction: Globalization and its impact
More informationExposure Draft Bill: Treasury Laws Amendment (OECD Hybrid Mismatch Rules) Bill 2017
The Manager Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Unit Corporate Income Tax Division, Revenue Group The Treasury Langton Crescent PARKES ACT 2600 22 December 2017 By Email BEPS@Treasury.gov.au Dear Sir/Ms,
More informationBOARD OF TAXATION REPORT DELUGE
BOARD OF TAXATION REPORT DELUGE THURSDAY, 11 JUNE 2015 Tony Frost, Managing Director, +61 2 9225 5982, Tony.Frost@greenwoods.com.au 510603576 AGENDA 1. Review of tax arrangements applying to collective
More informationEuropean Commission publishes Anti Tax Avoidance Package
28 January 2016 - Number 65 Brazil Desk e-mail bulletin European Commission publishes Anti Tax Avoidance Package On 28 January 2016 the European Commission published an Anti Tax Avoidance Package containing
More informationTax Brief. 19 December Transfer Pricing Consultation Paper. Do tax treaties confer an independent transfer pricing adjustment power?
Tax Brief 19 December 2011 Transfer Pricing Consultation Paper On Tuesday 1 November 2011 when the foreigners were taking over the Melbourne Cup, the Assistant Treasurer put out a Press Release and Consultation
More informationAmCham EU s position on the Commission Anti-Tax Avoidance Package
AmCham EU s position on the Commission Anti-Tax Avoidance Package Executive summary AmCham EU welcomes attempts to ensure that adoption of the OECD s recommendations is consistent across the EU and with
More informationGENERAL TAX ISSUES. represents. income and gains
GENERAL TAX ISSUES Income tax represents approximately 70 percent of the total tax revenue of the Australian Federal Government Income tax represents approximately 70% of the total tax revenue of the Australian
More informationTax Brief. 27 November Novelties in New Zealand Treaty. Fiscally transparent entities
Tax Brief 27 November 2009 Novelties in New Zealand Treaty International Tax Agreements Amendment Bill (No 2) 2009 was introduced into Parliament on 25 November 2009 to give effect to the new tax treaty
More informationNew Zealand to implement wide ranging international tax reforms
15 August 2017 Global Tax Alert New Zealand to implement wide ranging international tax reforms EY Global Tax Alert Library Access both online and pdf versions of all EY Global Tax Alerts. Copy into your
More informationProposed hybrid mismatch rules: impact on Australian securitisation industry
Chris Dalton Chief Executive Officer 3 Spring Street, Sydney NSW 2000 T +61 (0)2 8243 3906 M +61 (0)403 584 600 E cdalton@securitisation.com.au www.securitisation.com.au 29 March 2018 William Potts Senior
More informationTax Brief. 7 June GST-Free Supplies of Services to Non Residents Court Supports Commissioner s Draft Ruling. The Facts
Tax Brief 7 June 2004 GST-Free Supplies of Services to Non Residents Court Supports Commissioner s Draft Ruling Fiduciary Ltd & Ors v Morningstar Research Pty Ltd & Ors [2004] NSWSC 381 (11 May 2004) For
More informationNew Financial Year, New Tax Developments for Inbound Financing
TaxTalk Insights Financial Services New Financial Year, New Tax Developments for Inbound Financing What should Inbound Real Estate Entities look out for? 24 August 2017 In brief Recent changes to the tax
More informationMultilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting
Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting A briefing note prepared for the Finance and Expenditure Committee Policy and Strategy, Inland
More informationKPMG Centre 18 Viaduct Harbour Avenue P.O. Box 1584 Auckland New Zealand
KPMG Centre 18 Viaduct Harbour Avenue P.O. Box 1584 Auckland New Zealand Telephone +64 (9) 367 5800 Fax +64 (9) 367 5875 Internet www.kpmg.com/nz GST - Current issues Deputy Commissioner, Policy and Strategy
More informationTax Brief. 24 July Proposed Amendments for Managed Investment Funds. 1. Background. 2. Thrust of the proposed amendments
Tax Brief 24 July 2008 Proposed Amendments for Managed Investment Funds The Assistant Treasurer released a draft of proposed amendments to Division 6C of Part III of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936
More informationtaxnotes U.S. Tax Reform: The End of the LLC? international by Elan Harper and Azam Rajan Reprinted from Tax Notes Interna onal, July 30, 2018, p.
taxnotes U.S. Tax Reform: The End of the LLC? by Elan Harper and Azam Rajan Reprinted from Tax Notes Interna onal, July 30, 2018, p. 465 international Volume 91, Number 5 July 30, 2018 U.S. Tax Reform:
More informationFinance Bill 2016 summary of key changes for fund managers
Finance Bill 2016 summary of key changes for fund managers On 24 March 2016 the Government published the Finance (No. 2) Bill 2016. One of the most relevant aspects of the finance bill for alternative
More informationThis Tax Brief analyses the details of the DPT as set out in the Bill and then comments on its broader significance.
16 February 2017 Diverted Profits Tax It is almost impossible these days to get bipartisan policy on anything in Australia from marriage equality to energy with the significant exception of the taxation
More informationTax Brief. 3 March Stamp Duty Tail Wags CGT Dog? The Facts
Tax Brief 3 March 2005 Stamp Duty Tail Wags CGT Dog? Whilst the High Court decision in Chief Commissioner of State Revenue v Dick Smith Electronics Holdings Pty Ltd ( Dick Smith ) involves NSW stamp duty,
More information20 October Debt-equity Amendments. 1. A bit of history
20 October 2016 Debt-equity Amendments The good news is the Government has finally released a draft of the rules which will repeal the muchmaligned s.974-80. The bad news is that the replacement is a disappointing
More informationThe EU draft anti-avoidance directive (ATAD) A focus on CFC rules from a Swiss perspective
The EU draft anti-avoidance directive (ATAD) A focus on CFC rules from a Swiss perspective Prof. Dr. Robert Danon Professor of Swiss and International Tax Law at the University of Lausanne Of counsel,
More informationIFA Conference. Hybrid Instruments Olivier Van Ermengem May 2016, Nice. A and A
IFA Conference. Hybrid Instruments Olivier Van Ermengem May 2016, Nice A31877602 and A31886727 OECD BEPS Report - Action 2 Neutralising the Effects of Hybrid Mismatch Arrangements. Luxembourg General principles
More informationBEAT s Impact on Transfer Pricing Alternative Dispute Resolution
Reproduced with permission from Daily Tax Report, 33 DTR 18, 2/16/18. Copyright 2018 by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. (800-372-1033) http://www.bna.com Transfer Pricing BEAT s Impact on Transfer
More informationTax Brief. 9 February TOFA: What you need to consider now. Deciding when to apply Division 230. Electing into the TOFA regime
Tax Brief 9 February 2009 TOFA: What you need to consider now The Tax Laws Amendment (Taxation of Financial Arrangements) Bill 2008, ( Bill ) which contains the final stages of the taxation of financial
More informationBase erosion & profit shifting (BEPS) 25 May 2016
Base erosion & profit shifting (BEPS) 25 May 2016 Introduction Important to distinguish between: Tax avoidance Using legal provisions to minimise tax liability Covers interventions that are referred to
More informationBEPS Multilateral Instrument (MLI), India s Corresponding Positions, Implementation (GAAR)
BEPS Multilateral Instrument (MLI), India s Corresponding Positions, Implementation (GAAR) Dr. Parthasarathi Shome Chairman International Tax Research and Analysis Foundation (ITRAF) www.itraf.org Visiting
More informationADDRESSING BASE EROSION AND PROFIT SHIFTING IN SOUTH AFRICA DAVIS TAX COMMITTEE INTERIM REPORT
ADDRESSING BASE EROSION AND PROFIT SHIFTING IN SOUTH AFRICA DAVIS TAX COMMITTEE INTERIM REPORT ACTION 2: NEUTRALISE THE EFFECTS OF HYBRID MISMATCH ARRANGEMENTS 1 INTRODUCTION The OECD 2013 BEPS report
More informationIRS Releases Proposed Anti-Hybrid Regulations
Legal Update January 2, 2019 IRS Releases Proposed Anti-Hybrid Regulations The US Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 ( TCJA ) 1 added new sections 245A(e) and 267A to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the
More informationOECD issues Action Plan on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS)
22 July 2013 OECD issues Action Plan on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Executive summary On 19 July 2013, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) issued its much-anticipated
More informationPreventing the Granting of Treaty Benefits in Inappropriate Circumstances
OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project Preventing the Granting of Treaty Benefits in Inappropriate Circumstances ACTION 6: 2014 Deliverable OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project
More informationBEPS nears the finish line. The inevitable BEPS changes are close to the final stages of implementation.
13 December 2017 Regular commentary from our experts on topical tax issues Issue 2 The inevitable BEPS changes are close to the final stages of implementation. BEPS nears the finish line Snapshot The Taxation
More informationTax Brief. 28 April The ATO s Approach to Administering the Promoter Penalty Regime. Background
Tax Brief 28 April 2008 The ATO s Approach to Administering the Promoter Penalty Regime Background It is now 5 years since the promoter penalty regime was first mooted by the former government and 2 years
More informationInternational Tax Cooperation
UK Sets Out Its Priorities for the OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Project SUMMARY The UK government has published a paper setting out in detail its position on the OECD s Action Plan on Base
More informationKICK-START Guest Wifi instructions and Passwords are in the packs on your chairs FRIDAY, 2 FEBRUARY 2018
KICK-START 2018 Guest Wifi instructions and Passwords are in the packs on your chairs FRIDAY, 2 FEBRUARY 2018 AGENDA Overview and unenacted measures CCIV regime & AMIT impacts Anti-hybrids legislation
More informationCOMMENTARY ON THE ARTICLES OF THE ATAF MODEL TAX AGREEMENT FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO
COMMENTARY ON THE ARTICLES OF THE ATAF MODEL TAX AGREEMENT FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME 2 OVERVIEW The ATAF Model Tax Agreement
More informationTrust losses Remain Idle Background
Tax Brief 6 October 2004 Trust losses Remain Idle The Federal Court has held in Idlecroft Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2004] FCA 1087 that a trust stripping scheme was caught by reimbursement agreement
More informationAustralian government introduces bill to combat multinational tax avoidance
Australian government introduces bill to combat multinational tax avoidance The Australian Treasurer introduced a bill to combat multinational tax avoidance into parliament on 16 September 2015. The proposals
More informationKICK-START FEBRUARY 2015
KICK-START 2015 10 FEBRUARY 2015 WELCOME AND INTRODUCTION NICK HEGGART, DIRECTOR, PERTH INTRODUCTION Welcome! Speakers for today: Intro Nick Heggart Energy and Resources Nick Heggart Capital Management
More informationBUDGET BRIEFING 2019
BUDGET BRIEFING 2019 SYDNEY 4 APRIL 2019 BUDGET 2019-20 OVERVIEW GRAEME COOPER THE (ELECTION) ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM Budget is (most of) Coalition s election manifesto Decisions taken but not yet announced
More informationAustralian perspective on 2015 BEPS package
TaxTalk Insights BEPS Australian perspective on 2015 BEPS package 8 October 2015 In brief The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has released the 2015 Base Erosion and Profit
More informationCommittee of Experts on International Cooperation in Tax Matters Fourteenth session
Distr.: General * March 2017 Original: English Committee of Experts on International Cooperation in Tax Matters Fourteenth session New York, 3-6 April 2017 Agenda item 3(a)(ii) BEPS: Proposed General Anti-avoidance
More informationTax Brief. 6 October Accessing Corporate Losses. 1. Background. 2. Measuring continuity of ownership
Tax Brief 6 October 2009 Accessing Corporate Losses Treasury has released an Exposure Draft ( ED ) of legislation to facilitate access to corporate losses for companies with multiple classes of shares
More informationKPMG report: Initial impressions, proposed regulations implementing anti-hybrid provisions of new tax law
KPMG report: Initial impressions, proposed regulations implementing anti-hybrid provisions of new tax law December 21, 2018 kpmg.com 1 The U.S. Treasury Department and IRS on December 20, 2018, released
More informationIFA Conference. Hybrid Instruments Olivier Van Ermengem May 2016, Nice
IFA Conference. Hybrid Instruments Olivier Van Ermengem May 2016, Nice A31877602 and A31886727 OECD BEPS Report - Action 2 Neutralising the Effects of Hybrid Mismatch Arrangements. 1 General principles
More informationAnalysis of BEPS Action Plan 3 Strengthening CFC Rules
Analysis of BEPS Action Plan 3 Strengthening CFC Rules 1. Introduction Pavan R Kakade* Puneet Putiani** With the increase in globalization and foreign trade in the last century, taxpayers have been resorting
More information