DC Field | Value | Language |
dc.contributor.author | Ashagre, Aschalew | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-12-13T08:09:52Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2021-12-13T08:09:52Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2019-12 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/mlr.v13i3.7 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Countries sign bilateral double tax treaties (DTTs) to avoid or mitigate double
taxation in cross border economic activity. It is hardly possible to ignore the
effect of double taxation in the era of globalization. DTTs are signed between
two countries to allocate tax jurisdiction between them and to avoid tax disputes
between the taxpayer and the country concerned. Nonetheless, tax disputes crop
up since such treaties may be open to interpretation at the time of
implementation. Hence, DTTs contain tax dispute resolution mechanism. The
widely recognized dispute resolution mechanisms are the mutual agreement
procedure (MAP) –a kind of negotiation between the two contracting states– and
compulsory arbitration. However, the aptness and efficacy of these tax dispute
resolution mechanisms have been seriously questioned particularly from the
vantage point of developing countries such as Ethiopia. Although Ethiopia has
signed several DTTs with a view to attracting FDI, no study has been made
which sheds some light on the essence and operation of the MAP in the DTTs.
This note aims at exploring the tax dispute resolution mechanisms incorporated in
DTTs since such mechanisms have implication for developing countries
including Ethiopia. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.publisher | St.Mary's University | en_US |
dc.subject | Globalization · International taxation · Double taxation · Mutual agreement procedure · Compulsory arbitration | en_US |
dc.title | Vol. 13 No.3:A Note on Resolution of Tax Disputes Arising from DTTs and Implications for Developing Countries | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
Appears in Collections: | Mizan Law Review
|