Introduction: the present article is aimed at providing an overview of the Brazilian measures with regard to the BEPS Project and seeking the common perspectives Brazil may share with other BRICS countries.
Methods: analysis, comparison, description, interpretation.
Analysis: in its first part, the article addresses some aspects of the Brazilian legislation which are relevant for the BEPS Project Actions. In the second part, common evolutionary aspects of the treaty policies of the BRICS countries are presented, followed by considerations on the need for cooperation between the BRICS for more comprehensive reforms with regard to the digital economy.
Results: even though Brazilian legislation is still silent with respect to a General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR), Brazil has enacted important Special Anti-Avoidance Rules (SAARs). Besides, Brazilian transfer pricing policy presents relevant deviations from the OECD Guidelines. These deviations, if adequately interpreted, may offer a suitable solution to current feasibility problems of the application of transfer pricing legislation as addressed in the OECD Guidelines.
It is also important to describe why Brazilian regime of taxation of controlled foreign companies cannot be considered as a SAAR. Furthermore, it is important to present Brazilian measures with regard to deductibility of interests, contrasting them with the measures of BEPS Action 4. Finally, the treaties in which Brazil has recently included specific anti-abuse provisions are addressed.
Accordingly, this article aims at briefly discussing a highly complex, controversial issue in international taxation: the resort to domestic law in the interpretation of tax treaties. For this purpose, this article elects as object of analysis the Fowler Case, recently judged by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. The issue at dispute in the case is whether Mr. Fowler’s income should fall within article 7 (business profits) or article 14 (employment income) of the double taxation convention between the UK and South Africa (“UK-South Africa DTC”). Since Prof. Rainer Prokisch has very much contributed not only to the study of tax treaty interpretation but also specifically to that of employment income taxation as the responsible for article 15 of the OECD Model in Vogel’s Commentaries, the discussion of the Fowler Case somewhat celebrates the particular importance of Prof. Rainer Prokisch to these two research fields. Without intending to “solve” the Fowler Case in place of the UK Supreme Court, this article intends to sustain the primacy of the autonomous interpretation of treaty concepts, showing that the UK Supreme Court did not take this approach when ruling the Fowler Case. First, this article (1) presents the Fowler Case along very general lines. It focuses on the decision of the case by the UK Supreme Court. Lower courts decisions on the case are not considered. Second, this paper (2) articulates the authors’ fundamental position regarding the interpretation of tax treaties. Lastly, this article (3) criticizes the interpretative approach undertaken by the UK Supreme Court in view of the authors’ position.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.