000			02102nab a2200289 c 4500
999			_c138679 _d138679
003			ES-MaIEF
005			20220825131436.0
007			ta
008			180824s2018 ne ||||| |||| 00| 0|eng d
040			_aES-MaIEF _bspa _cES-MaIEF
041			_aeng
100	1		_963454 _aKuzniacki, Blazej
245		4	_aThe limitation on benefits (LOB) provision in BEPS Action 6/MLI _bineffective overreaction of mind-numbing complexity : part 1 _c Blazej Kuzniacki
260			_c2018
520			_aThis two-part article addresses the usefulness of the limitation on benefits (LoB) rule in the base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) Action 6 project and a Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (MLI) to prevent abusive treaty shopping - the most prevalent and typical form of treaty abuse. Although a certain flexibility in the prevention of treaty abuse was envisaged by BEPS Action 6/MLI, only twelve out of the sixty-eight Signatories to the Multilateral Instrument (MLI) have so far chosen to add the MLI's LoB rule to the principal purpose test (PPT). Such little interest in implementing the MLI's LoB rule may have something to do with its mind-numbing complexity. Or perhaps tax administrations simply prefer to have more discretionary power under the PPT? This study interrogates this unexplored research area by performing a comprehensive, in-depth analysis of abusive treaty shopping and the MLI's LoB rule. The overarching question pertains to the effectiveness of the MLI's LoB rule in the prevention of treaty shopping.
650		4	_963148 _aEROSIÓN DE LA BASE IMPONIBLE Y TRASLADO DE BENEFICIOS
650		4	_aELUSION FISCAL _943410
650		4	_944029 _aEVASION FISCAL
650		4	_954712 _aPREVENCIÓN
650		4	_948158 _aPROGRAMAS
650		4	_927355 _aAPLICACION
650		4	_963564 _aABUSO DE TRATADOS
650		4	_959746 _aBENEFICIARIO EFECTIVO
650		4	_941141 _aCONVENIO MULTILATERAL
773	0		_9157136 _oOP 2141/2018/1 _tIntertax _w(IEF)55619 _x 0165-2826 _g v. 46, n. 1, January 2018, p. 68-79
942			_cART