LEADER 03119nam 2200397 450 001 9910816710803321 005 20220824201953.0 010 $a90-8722-633-0 035 $a(CKB)4100000011509202 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC6372019 035 $a(EXLCZ)994100000011509202 100 $a20210227d2020 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurcnu|||||||| 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 10$aAddressing tax arbitrage with hybrid financial instruments $ea multidisciplinary study and proposal for developed and developing countries /$fMoritz Scherleitner 210 1$aAmsterdam, The Netherlands :$cIBFD,$d[2020] 210 4$dİ2020 215 $a1 online resource (xviii, 597 pages) 225 1 $aIBFD Doctoral series ;$vVolume 54 311 $a90-8722-632-2 330 8 $a"This book analyses legislative action against tax arbitrage with hybrid financial instruments (HFIs) from a multidisciplinary perspective. It begins by investigating the non-legal problems of the legal phenomenon of tax arbitrage with HFIs, which should display the concerns caused by (uncombated) tax arbitrage with HFIs. The author works out three concerns from an inter-taxpayer equity perspective, three from an inter-nation equity perspective and three from an efficiency perspective. Four approaches against tax arbitrage with HFIs are then analysed. These are the OECD approach, the low-tax approach, the UN approach and the recharacterization approach. The focus is on tax arbitrage transactions with HFIs that rely on a qualification conflict and substitute transactions with financial instruments that reach the same or a similar result. The approaches under analysis are assessed in view of their potential to overcome the predefined non-legal problems. Aside from this, additional considerations regarding inter-taxpayer equity, inter-nation equity and efficiency are provided. The study also takes into account the administrability of an approach and elaborates on legal dogmatic questions. Having conducted an analysis of the four approaches, the author provides his own solutions. He does not propose a new approach; rather, building on the prior discussions, he aims to advise tax policymakers on what action can possibly - and sensibly - be taken. In doing so, tax policymakers in three different situations are addressed: (i) those who already decided to combat tax arbitrage with HFIs through BEPS Action 2; (ii) those who are considering combating tax arbitrage with HFIs by means of targeted (and potentially simpler) linking rules; and (iii) those who do not intend to combat tax arbitrage with HFIs through targeted rules." 410 0$aDoctoral series ;$vVolume 54. 606 $aTaxation$xLaw and legislation 615 0$aTaxation$xLaw and legislation. 676 $a343.04 700 $aScherleitner$b Moritz$01698125 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910816710803321 996 $aAddressing tax arbitrage with hybrid financial instruments$94079368 997 $aUNINA