As the interrelationship among tax bases continues to parallel the rapid development of the global economy, disputes among governments as to their right to tax international trade and investments under income tax treaties are expected to increase in number and scope. This study takes an in-depth look at the mechanisms used to resolve such disputes and how they interact with the interests of the various parties involved in the process. The study presents an analysis of the available literature, supplemented by statistical data from North America, Europe and Asia. Analysis of this data leads to interesting insights into the way the dispute resolution process functions when it is applied in different contexts. A comprehensive common framework of analysis, based on a checklist for governments, international organizations and taxpayers, is also developed in the study. This framework lists the main advantages and disadvantages of treaty-related international income tax dispute resolution procedures. The checklist is formulated with the aim to assist readers informing policies and in arguing positions, taking into account the subjective value given by each reader to each listed item. The study concludes by suggesting the creation of a new mechanism for the resolution of tax treaty-related disputes, and advocates, in part, the establishment of a new international organization with links to domestic judicial networks. This mechanism is then subjected to the same common framework analysis and checklist used in earlier parts of the study. The analysis suggests how such a mechanism would mitigate some of the most formidable challenges associated with the current dispute resolution procedures.

Analysis of both the concluded and the proposed dispute resolution methods. The relationship between the current developments in tax treaty law and the more general trends of modern dispute resolution in public international law is investigated. Concludes with a summary and evaluation of several alternative methods of dispute resolution in recent treaty practice.

Dispute Resolution under Tax Treaties and Beyond is a detailed and comprehensive study on tax dispute resolution mechanisms, with a specific focus on tax treaty disputes.

Stakeholders in the international taxation community agree that existing dispute resolution processes are in serious need of improvement, and a global consensus must be achieved. This book offers a potential restructuring of the tax treaty dispute resolution system based on a comparative analysis of the dispute resolution mechanisms under tax treaties, as prescribed in the OECD and UN models, on the one hand, and the UN Law of the Sea Convention (LOSC) on the other. This comparative study is the first of its kind and is premised on certain key geopolitical similarities that underpin the international tax regime (ITR) and the law of the sea regime while taking into consideration the differences in the institutional context of both regimes. The author proposes a new tax treaty dispute resolution system based on the LOSC system for resolving multilateral tax disputes, focusing on the following: mapping of the institutional arrangements that make up the dispute resolution mechanisms to understand how each system works; comparative analysis of the patterns of interaction and outcomes generated across the two dispute resolution systems to identify relevant aspects of the LOSC system that may be adapted in the ITR to improve tax treaty dispute resolution; and analysis of the inclusivity levels across the decision-making structures under each system to identify specific consensus-building techniques that may facilitate the implementation of the new proposed tax treaty dispute resolution system and also enhance international cooperation across the ITR. The proposed restructuring of the tax treaty dispute resolution system expands the existing mutual agreement procedure and forms a comprehensive legal framework that aims to achieve a more effective, predictable and equitable resolution of multilateral tax disputes in the 21st-century ITR by striking a balance between countries’ right to tax sovereignty and the rule of law. Just as the design of the dispute resolution system under the LOSC paved the way for universal consensus of the Convention among almost 160 countries, the author’s new tax treaty dispute resolution system also offers a solid foundation for consensus-building towards a universal treaty in the ITR. Everyone concerned with international tax dispute resolution – whether policymaker, in-house counsel, national tax authority official, judge, tax lawyer or academic – will find the truly valuable analysis here, not elsewhere.

This article focuses on recent initiatives to embed arbitration as a mechanism for resolving tax controversies under income tax treaties. Drawing on the author's experience as an arbitration lawyer, the article considers developments in the frameworks for arbitration under income tax treaties, including (i) the OECD Model, (ii) the EU Arbitration Convention and (iii) the Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (the BEPS Multilateral Instrument). These frameworks are compared to existing (non-tax specific) arbitration frameworks, in order to evaluate the efficacy of arbitration as a mechanism for resolving tax controversies and identify where some lessons may be learned as the tax arbitration process is further developed and refined.

When taxpayers go global, can disputes and dispute resolution remain local? Unilateral administrative measures and domestic judicial systems will continue to be used for the resolution of international tax disputes, but the inherent limits of one-sided solutions to multi-sided problems are bound to lead us to unsatisfactory results. Closer international cooperation becomes a sine qua non for the establishment of an international dispute resolution system that will possess all the fair trial guarantees of domestic judicial systems, but also cure its limited effectiveness, which does not extend beyond the geographical borders of one state.0The striking discrepancy between domestic judicial systems and the international one (MAP and arbitration) is the phenomenon of the absent taxpayer. This may be explained, but at the current level of development of international (economic) law and human rights law it can no longer be justified. This analysis develops on two axes: (i) the access of private parties to international law remedies from the perspective of public international law; and (ii) the access of private parties to international law remedies from a human rights law perspective.