The allocation of taxing rights of ship and aircraft leasing profits under Australia's tax treaties

The Australian Federal Commissioner of Taxation recently released Draft Taxation Ruling TR 2008/D3 with the stated purpose of clarifying ‘what profits derived from the leasing of ships or aircraft fall within the ship and aircraft articles of each of Australia’s tax treaties’. In particular, TR 2008/D3 explains the taxing rights over different types of leasing profits, such as a full basis lease in respect of any transport by a ship operated in international traffic and bareboat leases which are ancillary to the lessor transport operations of ships in international traffic. This article outlines the Commissioner’s views on the application of the standard ships and aircraft articles in the tax treaties to which it is a party as well as considering the major variations on the standard adoption. In doing so, guidance is provided as to the allocation of taxing rights of ship and aircraft leasing profits under Australia’s tax treaties.

The taxation of multinational banks : alternative apportionment through a unitary taxation regime aligning with economic reality

The taxation of multinational banks currently is governed by the general principles of international tax. However, it is arguable that there are characteristics exclusive to multinational banks that may warrant the consideration of a separate taxing regime. This article argues that because of the unique nature of multinational banks, the traditional international tax rules governing jurisdiction to tax and allocation of income do not produce a result which is optimal, as it does not reflect economic reality. That is, the current system does not produce a result that accurately reflects the economic source of the income or the location of the economic activity. The suggested alternative is unitary taxation using global formulary apportionment. Formulary apportionment is considered as an alternative that reflects economic reality by recognising the unique nature of multinational banks and allocating the income to the location of the economic activity. The unique nature of multinational banking is recognised in the fact that formulary apportionment does not attempt to undertake a transactional division of a highly integrated multinational entity. Rather, it allocates income to the jurisdictions based on an economically justifiable formula. Starting from this recognition, the purpose of this article is to demonstrate that formulary apportionment is a theoretically superior (or optimal) model for the taxation of multinational banks. An optimal regime, for the purposes of this article, is considered to be one that distributes the taxing rights in an equitable manner between the relevant jurisdictions, while, simultaneously allowing decisions of the international banks to be tax neutral. In this sense, neutrality is viewed as an economic concept and equity is regarded as a legal concept. A neutral tax system is one in which tax rules do not affect economic choices about commercial activities. Neutrality will ideally be across jurisdictions as well as across traditional and non-traditional industries. The primary focus of this article is jurisdictional neutrality. A system that distributes taxing rights in an equitable manner between the relevant jurisdictions ensures that each country receives its fair share of tax revenue. Given the increase in multinational banking, jurisdictions should be concerned that they are receiving their fair share. Inter-nation equity is concerned with re-determining the proper division of the tax base among countries. Richard and Peggy Musgrave argue that sharing of the tax base by countries of source should be seen as a matter of inter-nation equity requiring international cooperation. The rights of the jurisdiction of residency will also be at issue. To this extent, while it is agreed that inter-nation equity is an essential attribute to an international tax regime, there is no universal agreement as to how to achieve it. The current system attempts to achieve such equity through a combined residency and source regime, with the transfer pricing rules used to apportion income between the relevant jurisdictions. However, this article suggests, that as an alternative to the current regime, equity would be achieved through formulary apportionment. Opposition to formulary apportionment is generally based on the argument that it is not a theoretically superior (or optimal) model because of the implementation difficulties. Yet these are two separate issues. As such, this article is divided into two core parts. The first part examines the theoretical soundness of the formulary apportionment model concluding that it is theoretically superior to the arm’s length pricing requirement of the traditional transfer pricing regime. The second part examines the practical implications of accepting formulary apportionment as an optimal model with a view to disclosing the issues that arise when a formulary apportionment regime is adopted. Prior to an analysis of the theoretical and practical application of formulary apportionment to multinational banks, the unique nature of these banks is considered. The article concludes that, while there are significant implementation, compliance, and enforcement issues to overcome, the unitary taxation model may be theoretically superior to the current arm’s length model which applies to multinational banks. This conclusion is based on the unitary taxation model providing greater alignment with the unique features of these banks.

The traditional rationale of the arm’s length approach to transfer pricing : should the separate accounting model be maintained for modern multinational entities?

This article examines the current transfer pricing regime to consider whether it is a sound model to be applied to modern multinational entities. The arm's length price methodology is examined to enable a discussion of the arguments in favour of such a regime. The article then refutes these arguments concluding that, contrary to the very reason multinational entities exist, applying arm's length rules involves a legal fiction of imagining transactions between unrelated parties. Multinational entities exist to operate in a way that independent entities would not, which the arm's length rules fail to take into account. As such, there is clearly an air of artificiality in applying the arm's length standard. To demonstrate this artificiality with respect to modern multinational entities, multinational banks are used as an example. The article concluded that the separate entity paradigm adopted by the traditional transfer pricing regime is incongruous with the economic theory of modern multinational enterprises.

Doppia imposizione sui redditi transfrontalieri tra ordinamenti tributari e mercato europeo.

La ricerca affronta in modo unitario e nell’ottica europea i multiformi fenomeni della doppia imposizione economica e giuridica, assumendo come paradigma iniziale la tassazione dei dividendi cross-border. Definito lo statuto giuridico della doppia imposizione, se ne motiva la contrarietà all’ordinamento europeo e si indagano gli strumenti comunitari per raggiungere l’obiettivo europeo della sua eliminazione. In assenza di un’armonizzazione positiva, il risultato sostanziale viene raggiunto grazie all’integrazione negativa. Si dimostra che il riserbo della Corte di Giustizia di fronte a opzioni di politica fiscale è soltanto un’impostazione di facciata, valorizzando le aperture giurisprudenziali per il suo superamento. Questi, in sintesi, i passaggi fondamentali. Si parte dall’evoluzione delle libertà fondamentali in diritti di rango costituzionale, che ne trasforma il contenuto economico e la portata giuridica, attribuendo portata costituzionale ai valori di neutralità e non restrizione. Si evidenzia quindi il passaggio dal divieto di discriminazioni al divieto di restrizioni, constatando il fallimento del tentativo di configurare il divieto di doppia imposizione come principio autonomo dell’ordinamento europeo. Contemporaneamente, però, diventa opportuno riesaminare la distinzione tra doppia imposizione economica e giuridica, e impostare un unico inquadramento teorico della doppia imposizione come ipotesi paradigmatica di restrizione alle libertà. Conseguentemente, viene razionalizzato l’impianto giurisprudenziale delle cause di giustificazione. Questo consente agevolmente di legittimare scelte comunitarie per la ripartizione dei poteri impositivi tra Stati Membri e l’attribuzione delle responsabilità per l’eliminazione degli effetti della doppia imposizione. In conclusione, dunque, emerge una formulazione europea dell’equilibrato riparto di poteri impositivi a favore dello Stato della fonte. E, accanto ad essa, una concezione comunitaria del principio di capacità contributiva, con implicazioni dirompenti ancora da verificare. Sul piano metodologico, l’analisi si concentra criticamente sull’operato della Corte di Giustizia, svelando punti di forza e di debolezza della sua azione, che ha posto le basi per la risposta europea al problema della doppia imposizione.

La fiscalità delle perdite dei gruppi transfrontalieri: tra regimi nazionali e libertà di stabilimento

Caratteristica comune ai regimi di consolidamento previsti dai diversi ordinamenti, è quella di consentire la compensazione tra utili e perdite di società residenti, e, di negare, o rendere particolarmente difficoltosa, la stessa compensazione, quando le perdite sono maturate da società non residenti. La non considerazione delle perdite comporta una tassazione al lordo del gruppo multinazionale, per mezzo della quale, non si colpisce il reddito effettivo dei soggetti che vi appartengono. L’effetto immediato è quello di disincentivare i gruppi a travalicare i confini nazionali. Ciò impedisce il funzionamento del Mercato unico, a scapito della libertà di stabilimento prevista dagli artt. 49-54 del TFUE. Le previsioni ivi contenute sono infatti dirette, oltre ad assicurare a società straniere il beneficio della disciplina dello Stato membro ospitante, a proibire altresì allo Stato di origine di ostacolare lo stabilimento in un altro Stato membro dei propri cittadini o delle società costituite conformemente alla propria legislazione. Gli Stati membri giustificano la discriminazione tra società residenti e non residenti alla luce della riserva di competenza tributaria ad essi riconosciuta dall’ordinamento europeo in materia delle imposte dirette, dunque, in base all’equilibrata ripartizione del potere impositivo. In assenza di qualsiasi riferimento normativo, va ascritto alla Corte di Giustizia il ruolo di interprete del diritto europeo. La Suprema Corte, con una serie di importanti pronunce, ha infatti sindacato la compatibilità con il diritto comunitario dei vari regimi interni che negano la compensazione transfrontaliera delle perdite. Nel verificare la compatibilità con il diritto comunitario di tali discipline, la Corte ha tentato di raggiungere un (difficile) equilibrio tra due interessi completamenti contrapposti: quello comunitario, riconducibile al rispetto della libertà di stabilimento, quello degli Stati membri, che rivendicano il diritto di esercitare il proprio potere impositivo.

Payments in lieu of taxes to States of local taxing units. Report of the Committee on Government Operations, United States Senate, Eighty-third Congress, second session, on H.R. 5605, an act of 1949 to provide for payment of taxes or payments in lieu of taxes with respect to real property transferred from Government corporations to other agencies of the Federal Government.

Mode of access: Internet.

In the Supreme Court of the State of California : the People, etc., respondent, vs. the Hibernia Savings and Loan Society, appellant; argument of Eugene Liès, Am. Cu. against the constitutionality of laws taxing credits.

Mode of access: Internet.

The justice and necessity of taxing the American colonies, demonstrated. Together with a vindication of the authority of Parliament.

Sabin 36947. Rich v. 1, p 157.

An analysis of alternatives for taxing social security as a private pension /

Cover title.

Federal estate and gift taxes, recommendations for modifications in the system of taxing estates and gifts; report of Committee on federal finance.

Cover-title.

Local taxing units: the Illinois experience

Mode of access: Internet.

Payment of taxes, or in lieu of taxes, to State or local taxing units : hearing before the Committee on Government Operations, United States Senate, Eighty-fourth Congress, first[-second] session, on S. 826, S. 888. S. 1566, S. 1657, S. 2100, S. 2377, and S. 2390, bills relating to payments of taxes, or in lieu of taxes to state or local taxing units.

Description based on pt. 1.

More basics : the basics of fringe benefits, revised to reflect tax law changes of OBRA '93, (lots of benefits, without taxing your schedule or your patience).

A user's guide designed to accompany a video of the same title, produced by Counsel Technical Communications.