Skip to main content

U.S. Treasury Department Proposes Changes to the U.S. Model Income Tax Treaty

By Chris Dykes
This week, the U.S. Treasury Department released five sets of draft revisions to the U.S. Model Income Tax Convention for public comment. The model tax conventions are not binding themselves, but they are very important because they provide the starting point for bilateral tax treaty negotiations between nations. The OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development), United Nations, and the U.S. Model tax conventions are three main model tax conventions that are used, with the U.S. model being used by the United States in negotiating tax treaties with other nations. These drafts would make potentially substantial changes to the U.S. model tax convention and subsequently, to future bilateral tax treaties between the U.S. and other countries. Some of the changes to be made by the draft revisions include the following:
  • Discourage the use of corporate inversions to avoid tax by implementing full withholding on payments by "expatriated entities" such as dividends, interest, and royalties.
  • Target abuse stemming from "special tax regimes" that provide low tax rate for movable income such as royalties. The provisions would deny benefits if the "special tax regimes" are used in conjunction with particular provisions of a tax treaty to move such deductible income around.
  • Avoid allowing nonresidents (who reside outside of the two nations who have entered into a bilateral tax treaty) from improperly obtaining benefits  from the treaty.
  • Adds a "derivative benefits" rule to the provisions, that would widen the term "ownership" to include third country ownership.
The draft revisions along with the 2006 U.S. Model Tax Convention and technical explanations are now available on the Treasury Department's website.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Amazing, but True, Deportation Story of Carlos Marcello

By
Earlier this week, the University of Houston Law Center was fortunate to have as its guest Professor Daniel Kanstroom of Boston College of Law. An expert in immigration law, he is the Director of the International Human Rights Program, and he both founded and directs the Boston College Immigration and Asylum Clinic. Speaking as the guest of the Houston Journal of International Law’s annual Fall Lecture Series, Professor Kanstroom discussed issues raised in his new book, Aftermath: Deportation Law and the New American Diaspora . Professor Michael Olivas introduced Professor Kanstroom to the audience, and mentioned the fascinating tale of Carlos Marcello, which Professor Kanstroom wrote about in his chapter “The Long, Complex, and Futile Deportation Saga of Carlos Marcello,” in Immigration Stories , a collection of narratives about leading immigration law cases. My interest piqued, I read and was amazed by Kanstroom’s description of one of the most interesting figures in American le
1 comment
Read more

C-SPAN Video Archive Now Online

By
Legislative researchers and politics fans take note. C-SPAN recently completed a digitization project placing the entirety of its video collection online. The archives record all three C-SPAN networks seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. The videos are available at no cost for historical, educational, research, and archival uses. The database includes over 160,000 hours of video recorded since 1987 and the programs are indexed by subject, speaker names, titles, affiliations, sponsors, committees, categories, formats, policy groups, keywords, and locations. The most recent, most watched, and most shared videos are highlighted on the main page. To start watching, visit the C-SPAN Video Library and use the search function at the top of the page.
Post a Comment
Read more

Texas Subsequent History Table Ceases Publication

By
This week, Thomson Reuters notified subscribers that publication of the Texas Subsequent History Table will be discontinued and no further updates will be produced, due to “insufficient market interest.” Practitioners have been extracting writ (and since 1997, petition) history from the tables since their initial publication in 1917 as The Complete Texas Writs of Error Table . The tables, later published by West, have been used for nearly a century to determine how the Texas Supreme Court or Court of Criminal Appeals disposed of an appeal from an intermediate appellate court. The purpose of adding this notation to citations is to indicate the effect of the Texas Supreme Court’s action on the weight of authority of the Court of Appeals’ opinion.  For example, practitioners may prefer to use as authority a case that the Texas Supreme Court has determined is correct both in result and legal principles applied (petition refused), rather than one that simply presents no error that requires
Post a Comment
Read more