Is there a special enforced tax collection regime under the ECtHR case law ? Barıs Bahçeci
By: Bahçeci, Baris
.
Material type: 







Item type | Current location | Home library | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Artículos | IEF | IEF | OP 2141-B/2021/1-5 (Browse shelf) | Available | OP 2141-B/2021/1-5 |
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-B/2021/1-2 DAC6 and the challenges arising from Its disclosure obligation | OP 2141-B/2021/1-3 The DAC7 proposal and reporting obligation for online platforms | OP 2141-B/2021/1-4 The new rules for reporting by sharing and gig economy platforms under the OECD and EU Initiatives | OP 2141-B/2021/1-5 Is there a special enforced tax collection regime under the ECtHR case law ? | OP 2141-B/2021/2 EC Tax Review | OP 2141-B/2021/2-1 The future of digital services taxes | OP 2141-B/2021/2-2 Between apples and oranges |
Disponible también en formato electrónico.
Resumen.
During 2020, the OECD and the EU Commission have separately unveiled two proposals both laying down new rules for reporting of tax information by sharing and gig economy platforms. Although the template used for tax reporting by sharing and gig economy platforms is nearly the same, some differences can be noted by a close reading and comparison of the text under the two initiatives. In this article, the author analyses the new rules for reporting by sharing and gig economy platforms that the OECD and the EU have separately released in the first half of 2020, retraces the common rationale behind the proposed introduction of the new rules, and explains similarities and differences existing between the two initiatives.
There are no comments for this item.