Reports


  • 30-October-2015

    English

    Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes Peer Reviews: Liechtenstein 2015 - Phase 2: Implementation of the Standard in Practice

    This report contains the 2014 “Phase 2: Implementation of the Standards in Practice” Global Forum review of Liechtenstein.

    The Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes is the multilateral framework within which work in the area of tax transparency and exchange of information is carried out by over 120 jurisdictions which participate in the work of the Global Forum on an equal footing.

    The Global Forum is charged with in-depth monitoring and peer review of the implementation of the standards of transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes. These standards are primarily reflected in the 2002 OECD Model Agreement on Exchange of Information on Tax Matters and its commentary, and in Article 26 of the OECD Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital and its commentary as updated in 2004, which has been incorporated in the UN Model Tax Convention.

    The standards provide for international exchange on request of foreseeably relevant information for the administration or enforcement of the domestic tax laws of a requesting party. “Fishing expeditions” are not authorised, but all foreseeably relevant information must be provided, including bank information and information held by fiduciaries, regardless of the existence of a domestic tax interest or the application of a dual criminality standard.

    All members of the Global Forum, as well as jurisdictions identified by the Global Forum as relevant to its work, are being reviewed. This process is undertaken in two phases. Phase 1 reviews assess the quality of a jurisdiction’s legal and regulatory framework for the exchange of information, while Phase 2 reviews look at the practical implementation of that framework. Some Global Forum members are undergoing combined – Phase 1 plus Phase 2 – reviews. The ultimate goal is to help jurisdictions to effectively implement the international standards of transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes.

  • 30-October-2015

    English

    Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes Peer Reviews: Costa Rica 2015 - Phase 2: Implementation of the Standard in Practice

    This report contains the 2014 “Phase 2: Implementation of the Standards in Practice” Global Forum review of Costa Rica.

    The Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes is the multilateral framework within which work in the area of tax transparency and exchange of information is carried out by over 120 jurisdictions which participate in the work of the Global Forum on an equal footing.

    The Global Forum is charged with in-depth monitoring and peer review of the implementation of the standards of transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes. These standards are primarily reflected in the 2002 OECD Model Agreement on Exchange of Information on Tax Matters and its commentary, and in Article 26 of the OECD Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital and its commentary as updated in 2004, which has been incorporated in the UN Model Tax Convention.

    The standards provide for international exchange on request of foreseeably relevant information for the administration or enforcement of the domestic tax laws of a requesting party. “Fishing expeditions” are not authorised, but all foreseeably relevant information must be provided, including bank information and information held by fiduciaries, regardless of the existence of a domestic tax interest or the application of a dual criminality standard.

    All members of the Global Forum, as well as jurisdictions identified by the Global Forum as relevant to its work, are being reviewed. This process is undertaken in two phases. Phase 1 reviews assess the quality of a jurisdiction’s legal and regulatory framework for the exchange of information, while Phase 2 reviews look at the practical implementation of that framework. Some Global Forum members are undergoing combined – Phase 1 plus Phase 2 – reviews. The ultimate goal is to help jurisdictions to effectively implement the international standards of transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes.

  • 30-October-2015

    English

    Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes Peer Reviews: Latvia 2015 - Phase 2: Implementation of the Standard in Practice

    This report contains the 2014 “Phase 2: Implementation of the Standards in Practice” Global Forum review of Latvia.

    The Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes is the multilateral framework within which work in the area of tax transparency and exchange of information is carried out by over 120 jurisdictions which participate in the work of the Global Forum on an equal footing.

    The Global Forum is charged with in-depth monitoring and peer review of the implementation of the standards of transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes. These standards are primarily reflected in the 2002 OECD Model Agreement on Exchange of Information on Tax Matters and its commentary, and in Article 26 of the OECD Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital and its commentary as updated in 2004, which has been incorporated in the UN Model Tax Convention.

    The standards provide for international exchange on request of foreseeably relevant information for the administration or enforcement of the domestic tax laws of a requesting party. “Fishing expeditions” are not authorised, but all foreseeably relevant information must be provided, including bank information and information held by fiduciaries, regardless of the existence of a domestic tax interest or the application of a dual criminality standard.

    All members of the Global Forum, as well as jurisdictions identified by the Global Forum as relevant to its work, are being reviewed. This process is undertaken in two phases. Phase 1 reviews assess the quality of a jurisdiction’s legal and regulatory framework for the exchange of information, while Phase 2 reviews look at the practical implementation of that framework. Some Global Forum members are undergoing combined – Phase 1 plus Phase 2 – reviews. The ultimate goal is to help jurisdictions to effectively implement the international standards of transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes.

  • 5-October-2015

    English

    Measuring and Monitoring BEPS, Action 11 - 2015 Final Report

    There are hundreds of empirical studies finding evidence of tax-motivated profit shifting, using different data sources and estimation strategies. While measuring the scope of BEPS is challenging given its complexity and existing data limitations, a number of recent studies suggest that BEPS is responsible for significant global corporate income tax (CIT) revenue losses. This report assesses currently available data and concludes that significant limitations severely constrain economic analyses of the scale and economic impact of BEPS and improved data and methodologies are required. Noting these data limitations, a dashboard of six BEPS indicators has been constructed, using different data sources and assessing different BEPS channels. These indicators provide evidence that BEPS exists and has been increasing over time. New empirical analysis estimates that the scale of global CIT revenue losses could be between USD 100 and 240 billion annually at 2014 levels. The report also presents a toolkit to assist countries evaluate the fiscal effects of BEPS countermeasures. The research also finds significant non-fiscal economic distortions arising from BEPS.  The report concludes by making recommendations regarding data and monitoring tools to improve the analysis of BEPS in the future.

  • 5-octobre-2015

    Français

    BEPS: Rapports finaux 2015

    Le Projet OCDE/G20 de lutte contre l’érosion de la base d’imposition et le transfert de bénéfices (BEPS) fournit aux États des solutions pour éliminer les brèches qui subsistent dans les règles internationales actuelles et permettent à des sociétés d’organiser la « disparition » de leurs bénéfices ou de transférer artificiellement ces bénéfices vers certains pays qui appliquent une fiscalité faible ou nulle.

    Also AvailableEgalement disponible(s)
  • 5-October-2015

    English

    Preventing the Granting of Treaty Benefits in Inappropriate Circumstances, Action 6 - 2015 Final Report

    This report includes changes to the OECD Model Tax Convention to prevent treaty abuse. It first addresses treaty shopping through alternative provisions that form part of a minimum standard that all countries participating in the BEPS Project have agreed to implement.  It also includes specific treaty rules to address other forms of treaty abuse and ensures that tax treaties do not inadvertently prevent the application of domestic anti-abuse rules. The report finally includes changes to the OECD Model Tax Convention that clarify that tax treaties are not intended to create opportunities for non-taxation or reduced taxation through tax evasion or avoidance (including through treaty-shopping) and that identify the tax policy considerations that countries should consider before deciding to enter into a tax treaty with another country.

  • 5-October-2015

    English

    Neutralising the Effects of Hybrid Mismatch Arrangements, Action 2 - 2015 Final Report

    This report sets out recommendations for domestic rules to neutralise the effect of hybrid mismatch arrangements and includes changes to the OECD Model Tax Convention to address such arrangements.  Once translated into domestic law, the recommendations in Part 1 of the report will neutralise the effect of cross-border hybrid mismatch arrangements that produce multiple deductions for a single expense or a deduction in one jurisdiction with no corresponding taxation in the other jurisdiction. Part I of the report sets out recommendations for rules to address hybrid mismatches in respect of payments made under a hybrid financial instrument or payments made to or by a hybrid entity.  It also recommends rules to address indirect mismatches that arise when the effects of a hybrid mismatch arrangement are imported into a third jurisdiction. The recommendations are supported by a commentary and examples to illustrate how they should apply. Part 2 of the report sets out proposed changes to the Model Convention that will ensure the benefits of tax treaties are only granted to hybrid entities (including dual resident entities) in appropriate cases.  Part 2 also considers the interaction between the OECD Model Convention and the domestic law recommendations in Part 1.

  • 5-October-2015

    English

    Making Dispute Resolution Mechanisms More Effective, Action 14 - 2015 Final Report

    Improving dispute resolution mechanisms is an integral component of the work on BEPS. The measures developed under Action 14 of the BEPS Project and contained in this report aim to minimize the risks of uncertainty and unintended double taxation. They do so by ensuring the consistent and proper implementation of tax treaties, including the effective and timely resolution of disputes regarding their interpretation or application through the mutual agreement procedure. Countries have agreed to important changes in their approach to dispute resolution, such as a minimum standard with respect to the resolution of treaty-related disputes. They have committed to its rapid implementation and agreed to ensure its effective implementation through the establishment of a robust peer-based monitoring mechanism.  A large group of countries has also committed to provide for mandatory binding arbitration in their bilateral tax treaties as a mechanism to guarantee that treaty-related disputes will be resolved within a specified timeframe.

  • 5-October-2015

    English

    Addressing the Tax Challenges of the Digital Economy, Action 1 - 2015 Final Report

    The spread of the digital economy poses challenges for international taxation. This report sets out an analysis of these tax challenges.  It notes that because the digital economy is increasingly becoming the economy itself, it would not be feasible to ring-fence the digital economy from the rest of the economy for tax purposes. The report notes, however, that certain business models and key features of the digital economy may exacerbate BEPS risks, and shows the expected impact of measures developed across the BEPS Project on these risks.  The report also describes rules and implementation mechanisms to enable efficient collection of value-added tax (VAT) in the country of the consumer in cross-border business-to-consumer transactions, which will help level the playing field between foreign and domestic suppliers. The report also discusses and analyses options to deal with the broader tax challenges raised by the digital economy, noting the need for monitoring developments in the digital economy over time.

  • 5-October-2015

    English

    Mandatory Disclosure Rules, Action 12 - 2015 Final Report

    The lack of timely, comprehensive and relevant information on aggressive tax planning strategies is one of the main challenges faced by tax authorities worldwide. Mandatory disclosure regimes can enable countries to quickly respond to tax risks by providing early access to such information. This report includes an overview of mandatory disclosure regimes, based on the experiences of countries that have such regimes, and sets out recommendations for a modular framework for use by countries wishing to implement or amend mandatory disclosure rules in order to obtain early information on aggressive or abusive tax planning schemes and their users. The recommendations provide the necessary flexibility to balance a country’s need for better, more timely information with the compliance burdens for taxpayers. This report also sets out specific recommendations for rules targeting international tax schemes, as well as for the development and implementation of more effective information exchange and co-operation between tax administrations.

  • << < 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 > >>