Show simple item record

(Un)constitutionality of the provision on the principal purpose of transaction or arrangement test from the tax treaties

dc.creatorPopović, Dejan
dc.creatorIlić-Popov, Gordana
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-11T15:03:23Z
dc.date.available2024-03-11T15:03:23Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.issn0003-2565
dc.identifier.urihttps://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1092
dc.description.abstractStupanjem na snagu Multilateralne konvencije (Multilateral Instrument - MLI) u Srbiji počinje da deluje klauzula o glavnom cilju transakcije ili aranžmana (GCT test), koja dozvoljava poreskim vlastima da ne odobre pogodnost iz obuhvaćenog poreskog ugovora. U članku se analizira struktura GCT i ustanovljava da su im ostavljena široka diskreciona ovlašćenja. Formulacija norme je takva da ne određuje šta će se oporezovati u zemlji izvora pošto pogodnost bude uskraćena. Autori zaključuju da zemlja rezidentstva može da ne dâ olakšicu kojom eliminiše nastalo dvostruko oporezivanje ako smatra da nije reč o razlikama u nacionalnom pravu već o razlikama u tumačenju odredaba ugovora ili činjenica. Ustavnost GCT testa mogla bi se ocenjivati u odnosu na principe pravne sigurnosti i jednakosti. Poreske vlasti su dobile arbitrarna ovlašćenja da procenjuju da li je reč o abuzivnom, jednom od glavnih ciljeva transakcije ili o legitimnom komercijalnom cilju, kojim će biti narušeni ustavni principi jednakosti i oporezivanja prema ekonomskoj snazi.sr
dc.description.abstractThe principal purpose of transaction or arrangement test (PPT) contained in MLI authorises tax authorities to deny a treaty benefit. The structure of PPT shows that tax authorities were given wide discretion. Its wording does not determine what will be taxed in the source country once the benefit is denied. In authors' opinion the residence country may decide to deny the relief for elimination of double taxation if it considers that it is the conflict of qualifications that arises from differences in interpretation of treaty or facts rather than from differences in domestic law. The constitutionality of PPT may be assessed with respect to the principles of legal certainty and equality. The tax authorities were given arbitrary authorisation to assess whether it is an abusive "one of the principal purposes of a transaction" or a legitimate commercial objective. This may violate the principles of equality and taxation based on abilityto-pay.en
dc.publisherUniverzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd
dc.rightsopenAccess
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.sourceAnali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
dc.subjectUstavnostsr
dc.subjectPravna sigurnostsr
dc.subjectMultilateralni instrumentsr
dc.subjectIzbegavanje porezasr
dc.subjectGlavni cilj transakcije ili aranžmanasr
dc.subjectTax avoidanceen
dc.subjectPrincipal purpose of transaction or arrangement testen
dc.subjectMultilateral instrumenten
dc.subjectLegal certaintyen
dc.subjectConstitutionalityen
dc.title(Ne)ustavnost odredbe o testu glavnog cilja transakcije ili aranžmana iz poreskih ugovorasr
dc.title(Un)constitutionality of the provision on the principal purpose of transaction or arrangement test from the tax treatiesen
dc.typearticle
dc.rights.licenseBY
dc.citation.epage33
dc.citation.issue2
dc.citation.other67(2): 7-33
dc.citation.rankM24
dc.citation.spage7
dc.citation.volume67
dc.identifier.doi10.5937/AnaliPFB1902007P
dc.identifier.fulltexthttps://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/bitstream/id/74/1089.pdf
dc.identifier.rcubconv_488
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record