{"title":"后 BEPS 税务条约法中的 PPT：它是 GAAR，但只是 GAAR！","authors":"R. Danon","doi":"10.59403/136hxah","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, the author discusses the principal purpose test (PPT) included in article 29 of the OECD and UN Models (2017), arguing in particular that while the PPT certainly permits a purposive interpretation, it may not be used to build into tax treaty law additional requirements that were never intended. Finally, the author concludes by looking at the other side of the coin and wonders whether a comparable “PPT” should not regulate the performance by States of their treaty obligations.","PeriodicalId":516699,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin for International Taxation","volume":" 20","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The PPT in Post-BEPS Tax Treaty Law: It Is a GAAR but Just a GAAR!\",\"authors\":\"R. Danon\",\"doi\":\"10.59403/136hxah\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article, the author discusses the principal purpose test (PPT) included in article 29 of the OECD and UN Models (2017), arguing in particular that while the PPT certainly permits a purposive interpretation, it may not be used to build into tax treaty law additional requirements that were never intended. Finally, the author concludes by looking at the other side of the coin and wonders whether a comparable “PPT” should not regulate the performance by States of their treaty obligations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":516699,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin for International Taxation\",\"volume\":\" 20\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin for International Taxation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.59403/136hxah\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin for International Taxation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.59403/136hxah","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The PPT in Post-BEPS Tax Treaty Law: It Is a GAAR but Just a GAAR!
In this article, the author discusses the principal purpose test (PPT) included in article 29 of the OECD and UN Models (2017), arguing in particular that while the PPT certainly permits a purposive interpretation, it may not be used to build into tax treaty law additional requirements that were never intended. Finally, the author concludes by looking at the other side of the coin and wonders whether a comparable “PPT” should not regulate the performance by States of their treaty obligations.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
