{"text_format":"2","workbook":"xls","n_sheets":1,"sheets":["report2"],"not_rendered":{"charts":0,"images":0,"macros":0,"external_links":1,"defined_names":1,"comments":0,"pivot_tables":0},"unopened":[],"bounds":{"document_bytes":16777216,"sheet_cells":100000,"run_cost":"one","rows_first":2000,"rows_last":500,"rows_between":2000,"halvings":0,"cell_chars":16384,"cell_head_chars":4096},"cells_cut":0,"cells_raw":0,"read":"whole","date_system":"1900","formulas":"cached_only"}

{"sheet":"report2","index":0,"n_rows":25,"n_cols":5,"rows_kept":25,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,2,0,3],[0,4,0,5],[1,2,1,3],[1,4,1,5],[2,2,2,3],[2,4,2,5],[3,2,3,3],[5,2,5,3],[6,2,6,3],[7,2,7,3],[8,2,8,3],[9,2,9,3],[11,2,11,3],[12,2,12,3],[16,2,16,3]],"flags":["formulas_cached_only"]}
[null,"1.","Record Nr.",null,"UNINA9911011341703321"]
[null,null,"Autore",null,"Bammens Niels"]
[null,null,"Titolo",null,"The Principle of Non-Discrimination in International and European Tax Law"]
[null,null,"Pubbl/distr/stampa",null,"Amsterdam : , : IBFD Publications USA, Incorporated, , 2012"]
[{"$nulls":4},"©2012"]
[null,null,"ISBN",null,"90-8722-160-6"]
[null,null,"Edizione",null,"[1st ed.]"]
[null,null,"Descrizione fisica",null,"xx, 1130 pages ; ; 24 cm"]
[null,null,"Collana",null,"IBFD doctoral series, , 1570-7164 ; ; v. 24"]
[null,null,"Soggetti",null,"Conflict of laws - Taxation"]
[{"$nulls":4},"Taxation - Law and legislation - Europe"]
[null,null,"Lingua di pubblicazione",null,"Inglese"]
[null,null,"Formato",null,"Materiale a stampa"]
[null,null,null,"Livello bibliografico","Monografia"]
[null,null,null,"Note generali","\"Degree awarded on 18 October 2011.\""]
[null,null,null,"Nota di bibliografia","Includes bibliographical references (pages 1093-1128)."]
[null,null,"Nota di contenuto",null,"Intro -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Table of Contents -- Part I Introduction -- Part I: Introduction -- Chapter 1: Aristotle's Concept of Distributive Justice -- Chapter 2: Basic Principles of Discrimination -- 2.1. Elements of the discrimination analysis -- 2.2. Proposal for an analytical framework -- 2.3. A brief note on ability to pay -- Chapter 3: Overview of the Study -- Part II Article 24 of the OECD Model Convention -- Chapter 4: Origin of Article 24 of the OECD Model Convention -- 4.1. Historical roots of the provision -- 4.2. The League of Nations -- 4.3. The OEEC Fiscal Committee -- 4.3.1. The first report of Working Party no. 4 -- 4.3.2. Reception of the first report -- 4.3.3. The second report -- 4.3.4. The third report -- 4.3.5. The final report -- 4.3.6. Conclusions -- 4.4. The genesis of the OECD Model Convention -- 4.5. The current version of Article 24 of the OECD Model Convention -- Chapter 5: Article 24(1): Nationality Non-Discrimination -- 5.1. General -- 5.2. No taxation without discrimination? -- 5.3. Nationality -- 5.3.1. Individuals -- 5.3.2. Other persons -- 5.3.2.1. General -- 5.3.2.2. The nationality of legal entities -- 5.3.2.2.1. The position taken in the Commentary -- 5.3.2.2.2. The 2008 update -- 5.3.2.2.3. Transvaal Special Income Tax Court decision of 10 March 1992 -- 5.3.2.2.4. 's-Hertogenbosch Court of Appeal decision of 13 December 2002 -- 5.4. Entitlement to article 24 -- 5.5. The comparability test: \"in the same circumstances\" -- 5.5.1. On sameness and similarity -- 5.5.2. Case law -- 5.5.2.1. Leeuwarden Court of Appeal decision of 7 April 2000 -- 5.5.2.2. United Dominions Trust Ltd -- 5.5.2.3. Belgian Supreme Court decision of 30 June 1988 -- 5.5.2.4. "]
[{"$nulls":4},"The Anglo-Swiss Land and Building Company Ltd. -- 5.5.2.5. Biso -- 5.5.2.6. Saipem -- 5.5.3. Discrimination \"on the basis of\" nationality?."]
[{"$nulls":4},"5.6. The disadvantage test: \"other or more burdensome\" -- 5.6.1. General -- 5.6.2. Reverse discrimination -- 5.6.3. Other issues -- 5.6.4. Case law -- 5.6.4.1. Woodend Rubber and Tea -- 5.6.4.2. Dutch Supreme Court decision of 14 June 1972 -- 5.6.4.3. Bundesfinanzhof decision of 14 March 1989 -- 5.6.4.4. Conseil d'état decision of 28 May 1986 -- 5.7. Reciprocity -- 5.7.1. General -- 5.7.2. Case law -- 5.7.2.1. American Trust Company -- 5.7.2.2. Brown &amp -- Williamson Ltd -- 5.7.2.3. Dutch Supreme Court decision of 2 September 1992 -- 5.7.2.4. Dutch Supreme Court decision of 20 November 2009 -- 5.7.3. Conclusion -- 5.8. Comparability as a safety valve? -- 5.9. \"Other or more burdensome\" as a safety valve? -- Chapter 6: Article 24(2): Stateless Persons -- 6.1. The 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons -- 6.2. The OECD Model Convention -- Chapter 7: Article 24(3): Permanent Establishments -- 7.1. Entitlement to article 24(3): what is \"an enterprise\"? -- 7.2. The comparability test: \"an enterprise carrying on the same activities\" -- 7.2.1. General -- 7.2.1.1. \"Carrying on the same activities\" -- 7.2.1.2. Separate entity approach -- 7.2.2. Case law -- 7.2.2.1. Case law on the subject of comparison -- 7.2.2.1.1. Reuters Ltd -- 7.2.2.1.2. Brussels Court of Appeal decision of 28 May 1993 -- 7.2.2.1.3. Ghent Court of Appeal decision of 17 November 1994 -- 7.2.2.1.4. Bundesfinanzhof decision of 22 April 1998 -- 7.2.2.1.5. Bundesfinanzhof decision of 10 March 2005 -- 7.2.2.1.6. Verwaltungsgerichtshof decision of 16 February 2006 and 28 November 2007 -- 7.2.2.2. Case law on the object of comparison -- 7.2.2.2.1. Swiss Bundesgericht decision of 28 November 2005 -- 7.2.2.2.2. Finanzgericht Köln decision of 20 September 1995 -- 7.2.2.2.3. UBS AG -- 7.3. The disadvantage test: \"taxation … less favourably levied\" -- 7.3.1. \"Taxation\"."]
[{"$nulls":4},"7.3.2. \"Less favourably levied\" -- 7.3.2.1. Assessment of tax -- 7.3.2.2. Structure and rate of tax -- 7.3.2.2.1. Progressive scales and the non-resident's worldwide profits -- 7.3.2.2.2. Tax-free thresholds -- 7.3.2.2.3. Special taxes on a non-resident's PE -- 7.3.2.3. Dividends received in respect of holdings owned by a permanent establishment -- 7.3.2.4. Withholding tax on dividends, interest and royalties received by a permanent establishment -- 7.3.2.5. Credit for foreign tax and the extension to permanent establishments of the benefit of tax treaties concluded with third states -- 7.3.3. Case law -- 7.3.3.1. Assessment of tax -- 7.3.3.1.1. Brussels Court of Appeal decision of 30 June 1994 -- 7.3.3.1.2. Commerzbank AG v. Inland Revenue Commissioners -- 7.3.3.1.3. Automated Securities Clearance -- 7.3.3.1.4. Saipem -- 7.3.3.2. Structure and rate of tax -- 7.3.3.3. Dividends received in respect of holdings owned by a permanent establishment: UBS AG -- 7.3.3.4. Credit for foreign tax and the extension to permanent establishments of the benefit of tax treaties concluded with third states -- 7.3.3.4.1. Finanzgericht Hamburg decision of 9 August 1985 -- 7.3.3.4.2. Dutch Supreme Court decision of 8 February 2002 -- 7.3.3.5. Disadvantages caused by the treaty of which article 24(3) is invoked -- 7.3.3.5.1. Metchem Canada Inc -- 7.3.3.5.2. Brussels Court of First Instance decision of 9 November 2006 -- 7.3.4. No extension to personal allowances -- 7.3.4.1. Dutch Supreme Court decision of 19 December 1990 -- 7.3.4.2. Dutch Supreme Court decision of 11 September 1991 -- 7.3.4.3. Dutch Supreme Court decision of 6 November 1996 -- 7.3.4.4. Antwerp Court of Appeal decision of 2 February 2010 -- 7.3.4.5. Conclusion -- Chapter 8: Article 24(4): Deductibility -- 8.1. General -- 8.2. The comparability test -- 8.2.1. No express comparability requirement."]
[{"$nulls":4},"8.2.2. \"Under the same conditions\" as a comparability requirement? -- 8.3. The disadvantage test -- 8.4. Domestic rules on thin capitalization -- 8.4.1. General -- 8.4.2. \"Interest\" -- 8.4.3. Examples -- 8.4.3.1. Article 54 of the Belgian Income Tax Code -- 8.4.3.2. Article 26 of the Belgian Income Tax Code -- 8.4.4. Case law -- 8.4.4.1. Millennium Infocom Technologies -- 8.4.4.2. Specialty Manufacturing -- Chapter 9: Article 24(5): Foreign Ownership -- 9.1. Entitlement to article 24(5) -- 9.1.1. General -- 9.1.1.1. The wording of article 24(5) -- 9.1.1.2. Indirect ownership: Re A Oy and B Oy -- 9.1.2. Only the resident company is protected -- 9.1.2.1. Example: imputation systems vs.split-rate systems -- 9.1.2.2. Group treatment -- 9.1.3. Discrimination on the basis of foreign ownership -- 9.1.3.1. On the basis of -- 9.1.3.2. On the sole basis of? -- 9.1.3.3. Application of these principles -- 9.1.3.4. Example: Decision of the Swedish Supreme Administrative Court on the interpretation of \"solely\" -- 9.2. The comparability test: \"other similar enterprises\" -- 9.2.1. Similarity as a reference to shareholders' residence? -- 9.2.2. Similarity as a reference to the applicable tax regime? -- 9.2.3. Similarity as a reference to all relevant circumstances other than foreign ownership -- 9.2.4. Case law -- 9.2.4.1. Swedish Supreme Administrative Court decision of 19 November 1987 -- 9.2.4.2. Dutch Supreme Court decision of 23 December 1992 -- 9.2.4.3. Dutch Supreme Court decisions of 27 April 1994 -- 9.2.4.4. Boake Allen -- 9.2.4.5. DaimlerChrysler India -- 9.2.4.6. UnionBanCal -- 9.2.4.7. Square D -- 9.2.4.8. FCE Bank -- 9.3. The disadvantage test: \"other or more burdensome\" -- 9.3.1. General -- 9.3.1.1. The origin of the expression -- 9.3.1.2. Interpretation -- 9.3.2. Case law -- 9.3.2.1. The Delaware case."]
[{"$nulls":4},"9.3.2.2. Luxembourg Administrative Court of Appeal decision of 19 April 2007 -- 9.3.2.3. The Swedish Supreme Administrative Court on the interpretation of \"other\" -- 9.4. Relationship to article 24(4) -- 9.4.1. General -- 9.4.2. Case law: Andritz -- Chapter 10: Article 24(6): Taxes Covered -- 10.1. General -- 10.2. Case law: Dutch Supreme Court decision of 1 November 2000 -- Chapter 11: The Concurrent Application of Different Provisions of Article 24 of the OECD Model Convention -- 11.1. Article 24(1) and article 24(3) -- 11.2. Article 24(1) and article 24(4) -- 11.3. Article 24(1) and article 24(5) -- 11.4. Article 24(3) and article 24(4) -- 11.5. Article 24(3) and article 24(5) -- 11.6. Conclusion -- Part III Non-Discrimination in European Tax Law -- Chapter 12: General Overview of the Approach of the European Court of Justice to Non-Discrimination -- 12.1. The Court's Aristotelian understanding of non-discrimination -- 12.1.1. Overview -- 12.1.2. Methodology -- 12.2. Types of discrimination -- 12.2.1. Discrimination in form and discrimination in substance -- 12.2.2. Direct and indirect discrimination -- 12.2.3. Reverse discrimination -- 12.2.3.1. The Court's traditional position -- 12.2.3.2. Later evolution and criticism -- 12.2.4. Quantitative restrictions and measures having equivalent effect -- 12.2.5. Dassonville extended to other freedoms -- 12.2.6. Conclusion -- Chapter 13: Non-Discrimination in European Tax Law: General Remarks -- 13.1. Introduction -- 13.1.1. Purpose and scope of the study -- 13.1.2. The case law of the European Court of Justice on direct taxation -- 13.2. Comparable situations -- 13.3. Equal treatment -- 13.4. Types of discrimination -- 13.4.1. Direct and indirect discrimination -- 13.4.2. Reverse discrimination."]
[{"$nulls":4},"13.4.3. Is ECJ case law in direct tax matters still based on a discrimination analysis, or has it evolved towards a restriction-based reading of the Treaty?."]
[null,null,null,"Sommario/riassunto","This dissertation analyses the non-discrimination principle in tax treaties and in the direct tax case law of the Court of Justice of the "]
[{"$nulls":4},"European Union."]