THis is the second part of the IETL Summary notes I used for the preparation to the exam (Score 9.0). It contains all relevant case laws, references to the OECD Commentaries and examples. Please also see Parts 1, 3 and 4! :)
3)
Historical
historical development of provision, changes in
a
wording orpurpose
=
4)
systematical
See the law in its
position within the treaty; its
=
scope ; meaning
5)
Comparison
=
compare to other States /DTT
Problemsotlhlerpretation
→
Treaties are not a law assuch
a law is enacted
by a
legislator ,
whereas the Treaty is a
signed contract of two parties
1
depends on domestic law of the CS
,
whether the
Treaty is considered to be a lawandprevails over domestic law
↳
monoistic Ct)
system :
↳ dualistic
system Treaty is Treaty is on the same level
H
:
,
a contract which needs to be implemented into dom law
.
;
as
domestic law
;
no
hierarchy
stneinlentionofthepam.es#
Divorcing
starting point to determine the intention OHhe Parties
=
? acc to some dom laws the intention or purpose of the
. .
you
can
go beyond
the
wording ifyou can prove that
,
law can (
be different than the
wording take historical background into account)
Dimension !
?
Wording t intention
↳
circumventing the intention of the tax Treaty by sticking to the exact
wording
?since DTTare should
negotiated contracts ,
there be
meeting minutes
1no!Would restrict
free opinion exChang
, 37commentan.es
provideguidance on how to interpret the provisions
-
? not
binding
4)
domestica
AA 312 )
only if no definition within
treaty
-
.
Applicabkkalesandpnha.pl#1)lhKrnationalPUblicLaw
civiennaconvention
⇒ AA 31
.
-
33
recognizedinternational costumany law
-
binding for all MS and Non Ms
-
-
conflict between intention x wording notall &
be solved
by wording only tax meaning day use goodfaith
-
to ⇒
,
wording has priority over intention
it
prohibition to use
testimony/intention of the CS
; bilingualand multilingual agrmts are equally binding isin case of discrepancies
.
(
otherwise Treaties won'tfunction
properly if interpretation diHers between Cs)
, choose the one that reconciles all texts the best
blstataleotlntemationalcoun-otfastia-D.TT
don't need to be taken to KF, because their rules are self executing
-
-
DITprotect Taxpayer directly andprovides him with the
ability toclaim rightsprovidedin front of domestic court
A domestic court will have to decide like the Icf :
⇒ AA
. 38 of Statute of ICF applicable .
.
A court is
obligedto take international conventions
into account
C)
Domestica
some countries have specific rules on how to interpret
-
international conventions fti Canada) .
.
-
some have unwritten rules for interpretation A.i. France )
-
some have specific rules on tax law interpretation
It i.. indoubt of interpretation infavor of the TP
general
domestic
principles
-
Ilerent
di possibilities ofjudges in di
H countries
-
.
dlprinapleotcommoninterpretation
CS supposed to
find commongroundfor interpretation of Treaties
-
take and
into account the courts decisionsof the otherCS,
foreign law foreign foreign
'
scholars court decisions
-
,
a limited to Inot
language binding
, e) Tax Treaties
¥ih0nswithin the Treaties CAA . 3-5)
domestic law CAA 3121 6 ,
references to )
-
- . .
.
,
3121
general interpretation
rule AA
-
.
reference to
commentary
-
HAA.to/2)OECDMTC-
④when does the context require otherwise ?
some : domestic law to
approachfirst
others dom law as last resort
:
.
which States law to ?
apply
→ :
-
OECD approach: HA 23 shows that, when the otherstate
.
has taxed in accordance with the Treaty we will avoid Double
Taxation
by credit/exemption and therefore, the R State is bound
-
by the decision of interpretationofthe
SState
-
A case law shows that almost
nobodyfollows
glhutuaetgreeme.ms?DTT are not
binding for courts 1 not ratified or transferred into domestic law
;
lower rank
,
override
through
court decision possible
Quaciticationconfcicts
Qualification of income of source state binding for Residence State R State must provide
-
is
relief
→ -
1 AA 23
para 32.1 Ot
-
.
2
difference in domestic law
para .
32.3 of AA 23 -
Qualification of source state is not
binding if
-
'
,
}para
different interpretation of facts
°
32
so
. .
H interror of treat
di
Z provisions
.
.
-
Double Non
-
-
taxation AA 23141para
.
.
32.6 t 32 -
t →
not applicable if S State
applies DTC and concludes
-
that it State K has to
may tax :
avoid DT even if States doesnt
,
tax
-
applicable , ifStates exempts or
does not WHT
UY
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper samanthaf. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €6,49. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
