Dutch Bilateral Investment Treaties: A Gateway to ‘Treaty Shopping’ for Investment Protection by Multinational Companies

Roos van Os, Roeline Knottnerus
{"title":"Dutch Bilateral Investment Treaties: A Gateway to ‘Treaty Shopping’ for Investment Protection by Multinational Companies","authors":"Roos van Os, Roeline Knottnerus","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1974431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Multinational companies (MNCs) investing abroad have been using Dutch bilateral investment treaties (BITs) to sue host country governments for over 100 billion dollars for alleged damages to the profitability of their investments. This is one of the outcomes of new SOMO research into the unknown and opaque field of Dutch BITs and their legal impacts. In addition, the majority of companies enjoying generous investment protections offered by Dutch BITs are so-called ‘mailbox companies’, Companies with no employees on their payroll and no real economic activity in the Netherlands. It is a known fact that many transnational companies choose the jurisdiction of the Netherlands as the base for their global trade and investment operations because of its favorable tax regime that facilitates corporate tax avoidance strategies (SOMO, 2007). This SOMO report highlights the until now unexplored role Dutch investment protection policy plays in establishment decisions of MNCs. The report argues that current Dutch investment policies are used for treaty shopping, allowing for investor–state dispute settlement based on broad-based BIT definitions that pose a danger to policy space and the safeguarding of public goods and interests. Treaty shopping is not only highly problematic from a sustainable development perspective for southern countries, but increasingly for northern states as well.","PeriodicalId":121229,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law: National eJournal","volume":"05 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"29","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Public Law: National eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1974431","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

Abstract

Multinational companies (MNCs) investing abroad have been using Dutch bilateral investment treaties (BITs) to sue host country governments for over 100 billion dollars for alleged damages to the profitability of their investments. This is one of the outcomes of new SOMO research into the unknown and opaque field of Dutch BITs and their legal impacts. In addition, the majority of companies enjoying generous investment protections offered by Dutch BITs are so-called ‘mailbox companies’, Companies with no employees on their payroll and no real economic activity in the Netherlands. It is a known fact that many transnational companies choose the jurisdiction of the Netherlands as the base for their global trade and investment operations because of its favorable tax regime that facilitates corporate tax avoidance strategies (SOMO, 2007). This SOMO report highlights the until now unexplored role Dutch investment protection policy plays in establishment decisions of MNCs. The report argues that current Dutch investment policies are used for treaty shopping, allowing for investor–state dispute settlement based on broad-based BIT definitions that pose a danger to policy space and the safeguarding of public goods and interests. Treaty shopping is not only highly problematic from a sustainable development perspective for southern countries, but increasingly for northern states as well.
荷兰双边投资条约:通往跨国公司投资保护“条约购物”的门户
在海外投资的跨国公司(MNCs)一直在利用荷兰双边投资条约(BITs)起诉东道国政府,要求其赔偿1000多亿美元,理由是其投资的盈利能力受到损害。这是SOMO对荷兰双边投资协定的未知和不透明领域及其法律影响进行的新研究的结果之一。此外,大多数享受荷兰双边投资协定提供的慷慨投资保护的公司都是所谓的“邮箱公司”,这些公司在荷兰没有雇员,也没有真正的经济活动。众所周知,许多跨国公司选择荷兰的司法管辖区作为其全球贸易和投资业务的基地,因为其有利的税收制度有利于企业避税策略(SOMO, 2007)。这份SOMO报告强调了荷兰投资保护政策在跨国公司设立决策中迄今未被探索的作用。报告认为,目前荷兰的投资政策被用于购买条约,允许基于广泛的BIT定义来解决投资者与国家之间的争端,这对政策空间和公共产品和利益的保障构成了威胁。从可持续发展的角度来看,购买条约不仅对南方国家来说是一个严重的问题,对北方国家来说也是如此。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信