Arbitration institutes an issue overlooked Hans Mooij
By: Mooij, Hans
.
Material type: 







Item type | Current location | Home library | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Artículos | IEF | IEF | OP 2141/2019/8/9-8 (Browse shelf) | Available | OP 2141/2019/8/9-8 |
Browsing IEF Shelves Close shelf browser
No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | ||
OP 2141/2019/8/9-5 Mandatory binding arbitration in the BEPS multilateral instrument | OP 2141/2019/8/9-6 Taxpayer rights and taxpayer participation in procedures under the Dispute Resolution Directive | OP 2141/2019/8/9-7 Does the Achmea Case prevent the resolution of tax treaty disputes through arbitration ? | OP 2141/2019/8/9-8 Arbitration institutes | OP 2141/2019/8/9-9 The changed landscape of Tax Dispute Resolution within the EU | OP 2141/2020/1 Intertax | OP 2141/2020/10 Intertax |
Resumen.
The article argues that with the MLI and the Dispute Resolution Directive, numbers of arbitrations may reasonably be expected to go up. According to the author the tax authorities will have to face the question whether they want to administer arbitrations themselves, or prefer to instead call on facilitation by professional arbitration institutes as is customary practice in commercial or investment arbitration. Proper and effective administration will be a significant factor to the eventual success of tax treaty arbitration. Absent any guidance in either the MLI or the Dispute Resolution Directive, the issue requires careful consideration from authorities.
There are no comments for this item.