E. Baistrocchi and I. Roxan (eds.), Resolving Transfer
Pricing Disputes: A Global Analysis (London: Cambridge University Press.
2012
Via a global analysis of more than 180 transfer pricing cases from 20 representative jurisdictions, Resolving Transfer Pricing Disputes explains how the law on transfer pricing operates in practice and examines how disputes between taxpayers and tax administrations are dealt with around the world. It has been designed to be an essential complement to the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations, which focus on transfer pricing issues but do not refer to specific transfer pricing disputes. All of the transfer pricing cases discussed in the book are linked to the relevant paragraphs of the OECD Guidelines by means of a 'Golden Bridge', namely a table listing the cases according to the paragraphs of the Guidelines to which they refer. It therefore provides examples of the application of the Arm's Length Principle in many settings on all continents.
click here for publisher's site
Transfer Pricing Litigation: Theory and Practice,
Lexis Nexis, 2008
‘The International Tax Regime and the BRIC World:
Elements for a Theory’ Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 2013
The global economy’s centre of gravity is shifting. Emerging
and developing countries have been contributing over 50% of the global GDP since
the onset of the 21st century, which is unprecedented since the Industrial
Revolution. This article offers the first analysis of the creeping convergence
of the BRIC world (i.e. Brazil, Russia, India and China) with global legal
standards in a key area of International Law: the International Tax Regime (ITR).
The ITR is a legal technology fundamentally designed by the League of Nations in
the 1920s, when the BRICs played no relevant role. This article proposes a
theory that aims to illuminate the core driving forces of the on-going trend
towards global convergence in this area of International Law from both the
static and dynamic dimensions. It is grounded on the logic of two-sided
platforms.
click here for full text via
OUP [ON
CAMPUS]
click here for full text via
OUP [OFF CAMPUS]
'Tax Disputes under Institutional Instability: Theory and
Implications', Modern Law Review (2012), Volume 75, Issue 4, 547-577.
This article aims to offer the first structural analysis of tax disputes under institutional instability using a core element of the international tax regime as an example. It offers a theory grounded on Mancur Olson’s seminal contribution to group dynamics, the logic of collective action. It also suggests implications of this theory that might help to address key enforcement issues faced by the international tax regime in a frequent context worldwide: institutionally unstable countries.
'The Use and Interpretation of Tax Treaties in the Emerging
World: Theory and Implications' (September 24, 2008). British Tax Review,
No. 4, 2008
Certain parts
of the international tax system are largely unexplored from a structural
perspective. One prominent example is the asymmetric tax treaty network, i.e.
the network that consists of bilateral tax treaties concluded between developed
and emerging countries on the basis of the OECD Model
Tax Convention on Income and on Capital (OECD model). The relative size of this
network is substantial. For instance, the United Kingdom's asymmetric tax treaty
network represents about 72 per cent of its entire tax treaty network. This
article offers a structural analysis of the asymmetric tax treaty network. It
answers two fundamental questions. First, it elaborates a theory for explaining
why a representative emerging country is willing to conclude tax treaties with
developed countries on the basis of the OECD model. Secondly, this article
extends that theory to understanding the dynamics of
tax treaty interpretation in the emerging world. This extension aims to
illuminate the structure of incentives the courts of a representative emerging
country normally have when construing OECD-based tax treaties in the foreign
direct investment (FDI) area. Game theory is used as a theoretical framework for
answering both questions.
click
here for full text via SSRN
'The Transfer Pricing Problem: A Global Proposal
for Simplification' (Summer 2006). Tax Lawyer, Summer 2006
This Article
focuses on the problem of transfer pricing from an international taxation
perspective. It elaborates two major points using game theory as a theoretical
framework. First, it argues that both developed and developing countries are
facing the same fundamental problem in the transfer pricing arena; the meaning
of the arm's length standard (ALS) is largely unknowable because of the absence
of transfer pricing case law with public good features. Second, this Article
proposes a solution to the transfer pricing problem within the ALS framework.
The proposal consists of a procedural, rather than a substantive, system in
which multilateral advance pricing agreements (APAs) are used to produce a proxy
for case law with public good features. The proposal is arguably superior to
other options (such as formulary apportionment and consolidated base taxation
approach elaborated by the European Commission) because it can be applied by
both developed and developing countries and is consistent with the current
structure of international taxation. The proposal has been written to facilitate
its addition to Article 9 of the OECD Model Tax Convention on Income and on
Capital.
click
here for full text via SSRN
The Arm's Length Standard in the 21st Century: A Proposal for Both
Developed and Developing Countries' Tax Notes International,
pp. 241-255, October 18, 2004
One recurring
question concerning how legal commands should be formulated in a legal system
involves whether commands should take the form of rules or standards. The policy
option that is at the core of this question is whether the content of the law
should be determined and announced in advance, in a rule, or left to an
adjudicator, in a standard. This distinction is relevant in the transfer pricing
area because the arm's length approach is a standard: its precise meaning can
only be determined via adjudication. Thus, the arm's length standard is
unworkable unless the legal system in which it operates is prepared to produce
case law (or something functionally equivalent to case law) to give guidance to
taxpayers on how they are expected to behave. The purpose of this article is
two-fold. First, it attempts to provide an analysis of the dramatic problem
faced by the arm's length standard when the legal system in which it works is
unable to produce case law capable of showing taxpayers how they are expected to
behave in the transfer pricing area (the Problem). The Problem is common to both
developed and developing countries. On the one hand, developed countries face
the Problem because a variety of reasons have made case law an infrequent
element. Moreover, the limited case law available is not a public good: the
holdings are too fact-specific to allow predicting the probable outcome of
future court decisions. This scenario makes the meaning of the arm's length
standard difficult to determine - especially when no comparables are available.
On the other hand, developing countries also face the Problem but for an
additional reason: their weak rule of law produces, inter alia, frequent
violations of stare decisis making case law a negligible source for predicting
court decisions. In sum, the meaning of the arm's length standard is largely
uncertain in both the developed and developing worlds. This explains the
worldwide arm's length standard crisis. The second purpose of this article
is to suggest a procedural method for inducing a legal system - be it from the
developed or developing world - to produce a proxy of case law capable of
determining precise meanings of the arm's length standard. The suggested
procedure has been written in such a way as to facilitate its addition to
article 9 of the OECD or UN Model Tax Conventions on Income and on Capital.
click
here for full text via SSRN