I'd venture a guess and say any practical solution, to be successful, would have to rely on innovative 'diplomacy' or geopolitical might (see e.g. TheTaxThatShallNotBeNamed) rather than strictly legal procedure
-
-
Yup. How do countries have legal jurisdiction to require local filing of Master File, but not of CbCR ? (since they are both data held by ultimate parent)?
@AlexParkerDC@martinhearson2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MForstater @phdskat and
Perhaps because I am a lawyer, I don't understand the issue other than Aisling's last tweet. Vietnam says 'we don't care about the corporate veil, just give us the info or face X consequence', company makes its choice.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @martinhearson @MForstater and
But, consequences can only be for Sub Ltd and if Parent Ltd is secretive e.g. owned by an oligarch Sub Ltd can't control lack of data. It's bad law in the respect, penalizing a party for matters beyond their control.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AislingTax @MForstater and
I get the secrecy issue, but I just don't see the issue with penalising a sub for parent's non-compliance, since they are under common control.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @martinhearson @MForstater and
Depends on level of penalties. What if they put Sub Ltd into financial difficulties costing jobs? What if they render local directors of Sub Ltd criminal? They'd need to be that kind of level to force extra territorial compliance.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AislingTax @MForstater and
Yeah I wouldn't put it past Vietnam
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @martinhearson @AislingTax and
Suppose parent might argue democratic deficit in that they are not resident but being penalised indirectly. (Who wants to mention FATCA...) Or could play hardball, threaten to move investment elsewhere?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @iaincampbell07 @martinhearson and
Woah, how did I get pulled into this? I agree w/what's been said before, I think the local country can just require it and punish the sub if the parent doesn't supply the info. Not all that different from other doc requirements. (E.g. transfer pricing.)
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @AlexParkerDC @iaincampbell07 and
Also remember, if it's following the OECD guidelines to the letter, the local jurisdiction can only request the CBCR if the parent country refuses to participate in the system and the company refuses to set up a surrogate parent.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Vietnam's approach is that they require (at least so the decree says) all subs whose parents file cbcr elsewhere to also file it in Vietnam. (i.e. tearing up the OECD guidelines). The case study says this is a great idea. But i wonder how it is actually working....
-
-
Replying to @MForstater @AlexParkerDC and
Thought a consensus was developing that it might work if companies agreed but it breached the international agreements. Unless we discover names of complying firms we can't really hazard a guess on why.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @iaincampbell07 @MForstater and
As far as I know there's no int'l agreement that would prevent Vietnam from requiring the reports, it's all just the OECD soft law. Maybe it would come up in a double tax dispute but even that's a bit of a stretch.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 33 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.