Abstract
In this article, the author critically examines the proposed tiebreaker rule in the OECD’s Final Report on Action 6 of the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) project, and the motives behind the proposal. The author concludes by suggesting an alternative, which he argues is a more effective means to achieve the intended ends.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 520-525 |
Journal | Bulletin for International Taxation |
Volume | 70 |
Issue number | 9 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2016 |
Prizes
-
IFA President YIN Scientific Award
Sanghavi, Dhruv (Recipient), 2017
Prize: Prize (including medals and awards) › Professional