Webbläsaren som du använder stöds inte av denna webbplats. Alla versioner av Internet Explorer stöds inte längre, av oss eller Microsoft (läs mer här: * https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Var god och använd en modern webbläsare för att ta del av denna webbplats, som t.ex. nyaste versioner av Edge, Chrome, Firefox eller Safari osv.

The Use of OECD Commentaries as Interpretative Aids : The Static/Ambulatory-Approaches Debate Considered from the Perspective of International Law

In English

Författare

Summary, in English

Since many years, international tax law experts debate the relevance of changes to OECD Commentaries for the purpose of the interpretation of previously concluded tax treaties. Although, generally, most experts seem averse to the idea of an ambulatory approach to the usage of OECD Commentaries, they are reluctant to exclude this idea altogether. Such a position raises an important issue of justification: When exactly should the ambulatory approach be taken? As argued in this essay, the proper answer to this question depends on the particular rule of interpretation justifying the usage of OECD Commentaries in particular cases. If Commentaries are used according to Article 32 of the VCLT as part of the circumstances of the conclusion of a tax treaty, then because of the very nature of this means of interpretation, a static approach would have to be taken. If, instead, Commentaries are used to determine the ordinary meaning of the terms of a tax treaty, or its object and purpose; or if Commentaries are used based on Article 31, paragraph 3(b) of the VCLT; then the VCLT confers on interpreters a discretion. This discretion is limited by the principle of good faith, which means that interpreters will have to continue searching for the intention of treaty parties. Although this search can be rationalized as the application of general factors, as argued in this article, no choices between a static or an ambulatory approach can be made other than relative to particular cases, based on an overall assessment taking all applicable factors into account. Readers should contrast this conclusion with the position of many international tax law experts, who argue that such choices can be dealt with conclusively by the adoption of some or other general principle.

Publiceringsår

2015

Språk

Engelska

Sidor

34-59

Publikation/Tidskrift/Serie

Nordic Tax Journal

Volym

2015

Issue

1

Dokumenttyp

Artikel i tidskrift

Förlag

De Gruyter Open

Ämne

  • Law

Nyckelord

  • Fiscal law
  • Public international law
  • Finansrätt
  • Folkrätt

Status

Published

Projekt

  • Generalklausuler mot skatteflykt och skatteavtal - en komparativ analys

Forskningsgrupp

  • Public International Law

ISBN/ISSN/Övrigt

  • ISSN: 2246-1809