000			01591nab a2200277 c 4500
999			_c147700 _d147700
003			ES-MaIEF
005			20230928100225.0
007			ta
008			230613t2022 ne ||||| |||| 00| 0|eng d
040			_aES-MaIEF _bspa _cES-MaIEF
100	1		_963839 _aDebelva, Filip
245		0	_aPillar 2 _ban analysis of the IIR and UTPR from an international customary law, tax treaty law and European Union law perspective _c Filip Debelva, Luc De Broe
500			_aResumen.
520			_aThis article discusses potential jurisdictional conflicts between the Pillar 2 rules and international customary law, taking into account potential frictions with tax treaty law and European Union law. In addition, the authors assess whether the Pillar 2 rules can be justified in the same way as controlled foreign company (CFC) rules, thereby referring to the principle of personality. Part three of the article evaluates how conflicts between the Pillar 2 rules and international law are to be resolved. The authors conclude by providing potential solutions to resolve jurisdictional conflicts.
650			_aFISCALIDAD INTERNACIONAL _944303
650		4	_967772 _aSEGUNDO PILAR (OCDE)
650		4	_aIMPUESTO DE SOCIEDADES _945680
650		4	_967681 _aTIPO MÍNIMO GLOBAL
650		4	_aUTPR (OCDE) _970368
650		4	_aAPLICACION _927355
650		4	_aDERECHO COMUNITARIO EUROPEO _941975
650		4	_aCONFLICTOS JURISDICCIONALES _940558
700			_93984 _aDe Broe, Luc
773	0		_9169597 _oOP 2141/2022/12 _tIntertax _w(IEF)55619 _x 0165-2826 _g v. 50, n. 12, December 2022, p. 898-906
942			_cART