Browse by: "2017"

Under Action 14, jurisdictions have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process.

The peer review process is conducted in two stages.  Stage 1 assesses jurisdictions against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focuses on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' stage 1 peer review report. This report reflects the outcome of the stage 1 peer review of the implementation of the Action 14 Minimum Standard by Germany.

Under Action 14, jurisdictions have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The minimum standard is complemented by a set of best practices.

The peer review process is conducted in two stages.  Stage 1 assesses jurisdictions against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focuses on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' stage 1 peer review report. This report reflects the outcome of the stage 1 peer review of the implementation of the Action 14 Minimum Standard by Sweden, which is accompanied by a document addressing the implementation of best practices which can be accessed on the OECD website.

Aux termes de l'Action 14, les juridictions se sont engagées à mettre en œuvre un standard minimum afin d’améliorer l'efficacité et l’efficience de la procédure amiable (PA). La PA est prévue à l'article 25 du modèle de convention fiscale de l'OCDE et engage les pays à s'efforcer de résoudre les différends relatifs à l'interprétation et à l'application des conventions fiscales. Le Standard Minimum de l’Action 14 a été traduit en termes de référence précis, et une méthodologie a été établie pour le processus d’examen par les pairs et de suivi de cet examen. Le standard minimum est complétée par un ensemble de bonnes pratiques.

Le processus d'examen par les pairs se déroule en deux phrases. La première phase consiste à évaluer les juridictions par rapport aux termes de référence du standard minimum, selon un calendrier d'examen convenu. La seconde phase procède au suivi des recommandations formulées dans le rapport d'examen par les pairs de phase 1 des juridictions. Le présent rapport reflète les résultats de l'évaluation par les pairs de phase 1 de la mise en œuvre du Standard Minimum de l'Action 14 par le Luxembourg. Il est accompagné d'un document sur la mise en oeuvre des bonnes pratiques, accessible sur le site de l'OCDE.

Aux termes de l'Action 14, les juridictions se sont engagées à mettre en œuvre un standard minimum afin d’améliorer l'efficacité et l’efficience de la procédure amiable (PA). La PA est prévue à l'article 25 du modèle de convention fiscale de l'OCDE et engage les pays à s'efforcer de résoudre les différends relatifs à l'interprétation et à l'application des conventions fiscales. Le Standard Minimum de l’Action 14 a été traduit en termes de référence précis, et une méthodologie a été établie pour le processus d’examen par les pairs et de suivi de cet examen.

Le processus d'examen par les pairs se déroule en deux phrases. La première phase consiste à évaluer les juridictions  par rapport aux termes de référence du standard minimum, selon un calendrier d'examen convenu. La seconde phase procède au suivi des recommandations formulées dans le rapport d'examen par les pairs de phase 1 des juridictions. Le présent rapport reflète les résultats de l'évaluation par les pairs de phase 1 de la mise en œuvre du Standard Minimum de l'Action 14 par la France.

Under Action 14, jurisdictions have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process.

The peer review process is conducted in two stages.  Stage 1 assesses jurisdictions against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focuses on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' stage 1 peer review report. This report reflects the outcome of the stage 1 peer review of the implementation of the Action 14 Minimum Standard by Italy.

Under Action 14, jurisdictions have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The minimum standard is complemented by a set of best practices.

The peer review process is conducted in two stages.  Stage 1 assesses jurisdictions against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focuses on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' stage 1 peer review report. This report reflects the outcome of the stage 1 peer review of the implementation of the Action 14 Minimum Standard by Austria, which is accompanied by a document addressing the implementation of best practices which can be accessed on the OECD website.

Under Action 14, jurisdictions have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The minimum standard is complemented by a set of best practices.

The peer review process is conducted in two stages.  Stage 1 assesses jurisdictions against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focuses on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' stage 1 peer review report. This report reflects the outcome of the stage 1 peer review of the implementation of the Action 14 Minimum Standard by Liechtenstein, which is accompanied by a document addressing the implementation of best practices which can be accessed on the OECD website.

Under Action 14, jurisdictions have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The minimum standard is complemented by a set of best practices.

The peer review process is conducted in two stages.  Stage 1 assesses jurdisdictions  against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focuses on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' stage 1 peer review report. This report reflects the outcome of the stage 1 peer review of the implementation of the Action 14 Minimum Standard by Luxembourg, which is accompanied by a document addressing the implementation of best practices which can be accessed on the OECD website.

BEPS Action 5 is one of the four BEPS minimum standards which all Inclusive Framework members have committed to implement. One part of the Action 5 minimum standard is the transparency framework for compulsory spontaneous exchange on certain rulings which, in the absence of transparency, could give rise to BEPS concerns. Over 100 jurisdictions have joined the Inclusive Framework and will take part in a peer review to assess their compliance with the transparency framework.

Specific terms of reference and a methodology have been agreed for the peer reviews to assess a jurisdiction’s implementation of the minimum standard. The review of the transparency framework assesses countries against the terms of reference which focus on five key elements: i) information gathering process, ii) exchange of information, iii) confidentiality of the information received; iv) statistics on the exchanges of rulings; and v) transparency on certain aspect of intellectual property regimes.

This report reflects the outcome of the first peer review of the implementation of the Action 5 minimum standard. It covers the jurisdictions which participated in the BEPS Project prior to the creation of the Inclusive Framework, and it assesses implementation for the 1 January 2016 – 31 December 2016 period.