Advertisement

European Journal of Law and Economics

, Volume 42, Issue 3, pp 383–404 | Cite as

Tax treaties with developing countries and the allocation of taxing rights

  • Dimitri PaoliniEmail author
  • Pasquale Pistone
  • Giuseppe Pulina
  • Martin Zagler
Article

Abstract

Worldwide income taxation in the country of residence is a legal dogma of international taxation. We question this dogma from the perspective of relations between developed and developing countries from legal and economic perspectives, and make a modern and fair proposal for tax treaties. We show under which conditions a developing and a developed country will voluntarily sign a tax treaty where the developing country is more inclined to share the information with the developed country and whether they should share revenues. Moreover, we demonstrate how the conclusion of a tax treaty can assist in the implementation of a tax audit system in the developing country.

Keywords

Developing countries Tax treaties Exchange of information Revenue sharing Cost sharing International tax justice 

JEL Classification

F53 H25 H87 D82 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank J. Braun, M. Dirkis, A. Gautier, C. Marchese and T. Pietra, the conference participants at IIPF, SIEP, SIDE-ISLE, at seminars at the Catholic University of Milan and at CRENoS-DEIR of the University of Sassari for helpful comments and suggestions. Paolini gratefully acknowledges financial support of MIUR-PRIN 2008 and from FNR (Measure AM2c), Luxembourg. Pistone and Zagler would like to acknowledge funding from the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) SFB international tax coordination. Zagler would like to acknowledge financial support from OeNB Jubiläumsfonds Projekt Nr. 16017 and thank CRENoS and DEIR (Università di Sassari) for their hospitality while working on this project.

References

  1. Bacchetta, P., & Espinosa, M. P. (2000). Exchange of information clauses in international tax treaties. International Tax and Public Finance, 7, 275–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baron, D., & Myerson, R. (1982). Regulating a monopolist with unknown costs. Econometrica, 50, 911–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barthel, F., Busse, M., Krever, R., & Neumayer, E. (2010). The relationship between double taxation treaties and foreign direct investment. Tax treaties: Building bridges between law and economics (pp. 3–18). Amsterdam: IBFD.Google Scholar
  4. Benshalom, I. (2010). The new poor at our gates: Global justice implications for international trade and tax law. New York University Law Review, 89(1), 101–177.Google Scholar
  5. Braun, J., & Zagler, M. (2014). An economic perspective on double tax treaties with(in) developing countries.Google Scholar
  6. Brauner, Y. (2010). A framework for an informed study of the realistic role of tax in a development agenda. University of British Columbia Law Review, 42(2), 275–330.Google Scholar
  7. Brooks, K. (2007). Tax treaty treatment of royalty payments from low-income countries: A comparison of canada and Australia’s policies. eJournal of Tax Research, 5(2), 168–197.Google Scholar
  8. Brooks, K. (2009). Inter-nation equity: The development of an important but underappreciated international tax value. In R. Krever & J. G. Head (Eds.), Tax reform in the 21st century (pp. 471–497). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  9. Chisik, R., & Davies, R. B. (2004a). Asymmetric FDI and tax-treaty bargaining: theory and evidence. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 1119–1148.Google Scholar
  10. Chisik, R., & Davies, R. B. (2004b). Asymmetric FDI and tax-treaty bargaining: Theory and evidence. Journal of Public Economics, 88(6), 1119–1148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Christians, A. (2005). Tax treaties for investment and aid to sub-Saharan Africa: A case study. Brooklyn Law Review, 71, 639–700.Google Scholar
  12. Christians, A. (2010). Global trends and constraints on tax policy in the least developed countries. University of British Columbia Law Review, 42(2), 239–274.Google Scholar
  13. Commission, Norwegian Government. (2009). Report by Norwegian Government Commission on capital flight from poor countries, submitted to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on 18 June 2009, NOU—Official Norwegian reports 2009:19. The English translation of the report is currently available at http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/ud/dok/nou-er/2009/nou-2009-19-2.html?id=572129.
  14. Dagan, T. (2010). Just harmonization. University of British Columbia Law Review, 42(2), 331–362.Google Scholar
  15. De Goede, J., & Wijnen, W. (2014). The UN model in practice 1997–2013. Bulletin for International Taxation, 68(3), 188ff.Google Scholar
  16. Dean, S. (2007). Philosopher kings and international tax. Hastings Law Journal, 58, 911.Google Scholar
  17. Dourado, A. P. (2013). Exchange of information and validity of global standards in tax law: Abstractionism and expressionism or where the truth lies. Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies Global Governance Programme 37. EUI.Google Scholar
  18. Eggert, W., & Kolmar, M. (2002). Residence-based capital taxation is a small open economy: Why information is voluntarily exchanges and why it is not. International Tax and Public Finance, 9, 465–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fleming, J. C., Peroni, R., & Shay, S. (2009). Worse than exemption. Emory Law Journal, 59(1), 79–149.Google Scholar
  20. Keen, M., & Ligthart, J. E. (2007). Revenue sharing and information exchange under non-discriminatory taxation. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 109(3), 487–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mc Daniel, P. (2007). Territorial vs worldwide international tax systems: Which is better for the U.S. Florida Tax Review, 8, 263–291.Google Scholar
  22. Mintz, J., & Weichenrieder, A. (2010). The indirect side of direct investment: Multinational company finance and taxation. CESifo book series. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  23. OECD (ed). (2010). Transfer pricing guidelines for multinational enterprises and tax administrations. OECD Paris.Google Scholar
  24. Pistone, P. (2010). Tax treaties from a legal and economic perspective. Amsterdam: IBFD Publications.Google Scholar
  25. Pistone, P. (2012). General report. In M. Lang, P. Pistone, J. Schuch, & C. Staringer (Eds.), The impact of the UN and OECD model tax conventions on bilateral tax treaties (pp. 1–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Pistone, P., & Goodspeed, T. J. (2010). Rethinking tax jurisdictions and relief from international double taxation with regard to developing countries: Legal and economic perspectives from Europe and North America. In M. Zagler (Ed.), International tax coordination (pp. 13–36). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Schoueri, L. E., & Silva, N. M. (2010). Amended transfer pricing rules. International Transfer Pricing Journal, 17(4), 287–291.Google Scholar
  28. Stiglitz, J. (1987). Principal and agent. In The new Palgrave: A dictionary of Economics (vol. 3, pp. 966–971), Palgrave.Google Scholar
  29. Voget, J., & Litghart, J. (2011). The determinants of double tax treaty formation. Mimeo: Tilburg University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dimitri Paolini
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Pasquale Pistone
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
  • Giuseppe Pulina
    • 6
  • Martin Zagler
    • 7
    • 8
  1. 1.CRENoS & DiSEAUniversità di SassariSassariItaly
  2. 2.COREUniversité catholique de LouvainLouvain-la-NeuveBelgium
  3. 3.DISESUniversity of SalernoSalernoItaly
  4. 4.Institute for Austrian and International Tax LawWU Vienna University of Economics and BusinessViennaAustria
  5. 5.IBFDAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  6. 6.CREAUniversity of LuxembourgLuxembourgLuxembourg
  7. 7.Department of EconomicsWU Vienna University of Economics and BusinessViennaAustria
  8. 8.DiSEIUPO University of Eastern PiedmontAlessandriaItaly

Personalised recommendations