历史上的税收:财政一致性的三十年

IF 0.8 Q2 LAW
Intertax Pub Date : 2022-08-01 DOI:10.54648/taxi2022071
P. Wattel
{"title":"历史上的税收:财政一致性的三十年","authors":"P. Wattel","doi":"10.54648/taxi2022071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The mandatory requirement of jurisdictional fiscal coherence was born thirty years ago by mistake in the Bachmann Case, but was very desired to protect the integrity of Member States’ tax bases. Nevertheless, it subsequently hibernated for sixteen years. After the birth of its muscular brother ‘balanced allocation of taxing rights’ in the Marks & Spencer Case, however, it fortunately proved to be very much alive itself as well. It has been living more or less happily since then, and it even overcame the useless ‘one tax/one taxpayer’-limitation to her reach. It competed strongly with its balanced-allocation-sibling. Mostly, they perform ex aequo. At the same time, their fiscal-territoriality-stepsister increasingly steals the attention of their caregivers. Much as we love all three concepts, it would seem that three is a crowd. Even two is a crowd. As much as it may pain their caregivers’ hearts, the time has come to choose one favourite. Let us call her ‘Symmetry’; or ‘Integrity’.\nBachmann, fiscal coherence, fiscal territoriality, balanced allocation of taxing power, abuse, convergence, tax base integrity, symmetry.","PeriodicalId":45365,"journal":{"name":"Intertax","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tax In History: Thirty Years of Fiscal (In)coherence\",\"authors\":\"P. Wattel\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/taxi2022071\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The mandatory requirement of jurisdictional fiscal coherence was born thirty years ago by mistake in the Bachmann Case, but was very desired to protect the integrity of Member States’ tax bases. Nevertheless, it subsequently hibernated for sixteen years. After the birth of its muscular brother ‘balanced allocation of taxing rights’ in the Marks & Spencer Case, however, it fortunately proved to be very much alive itself as well. It has been living more or less happily since then, and it even overcame the useless ‘one tax/one taxpayer’-limitation to her reach. It competed strongly with its balanced-allocation-sibling. Mostly, they perform ex aequo. At the same time, their fiscal-territoriality-stepsister increasingly steals the attention of their caregivers. Much as we love all three concepts, it would seem that three is a crowd. Even two is a crowd. As much as it may pain their caregivers’ hearts, the time has come to choose one favourite. Let us call her ‘Symmetry’; or ‘Integrity’.\\nBachmann, fiscal coherence, fiscal territoriality, balanced allocation of taxing power, abuse, convergence, tax base integrity, symmetry.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45365,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Intertax\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Intertax\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/taxi2022071\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intertax","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/taxi2022071","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

管辖权财政一致性的强制性要求是30年前在巴赫曼案中错误提出的,但为了保护成员国税基的完整性,人们非常希望这样做。然而,它随后冬眠了16年。然而,在Marks&Spencer案中,其肌肉发达的兄弟“征税权的平衡分配”诞生后,幸运的是,事实证明,它本身也非常活跃。从那以后,它或多或少地过着幸福的生活,甚至克服了无用的“一个税/一个纳税人”——这对她来说是有限的。它与均衡分配的兄弟公司竞争激烈。大多数情况下,他们都是按原样表演。与此同时,他们在财政领域的继姐妹越来越引起照顾者的注意。尽管我们非常喜欢这三个概念,但似乎三个概念是一个群体。即使是两个人也是一群人。尽管这可能会让照顾者感到痛苦,但现在是时候选择一个最喜欢的了。让我们称她为“对称”;或“诚信”。巴赫曼,财政一致性,财政属地性,征税权的平衡分配,滥用,趋同,税基完整性,对称性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Tax In History: Thirty Years of Fiscal (In)coherence
The mandatory requirement of jurisdictional fiscal coherence was born thirty years ago by mistake in the Bachmann Case, but was very desired to protect the integrity of Member States’ tax bases. Nevertheless, it subsequently hibernated for sixteen years. After the birth of its muscular brother ‘balanced allocation of taxing rights’ in the Marks & Spencer Case, however, it fortunately proved to be very much alive itself as well. It has been living more or less happily since then, and it even overcame the useless ‘one tax/one taxpayer’-limitation to her reach. It competed strongly with its balanced-allocation-sibling. Mostly, they perform ex aequo. At the same time, their fiscal-territoriality-stepsister increasingly steals the attention of their caregivers. Much as we love all three concepts, it would seem that three is a crowd. Even two is a crowd. As much as it may pain their caregivers’ hearts, the time has come to choose one favourite. Let us call her ‘Symmetry’; or ‘Integrity’. Bachmann, fiscal coherence, fiscal territoriality, balanced allocation of taxing power, abuse, convergence, tax base integrity, symmetry.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Intertax
Intertax LAW-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
50.00%
发文量
45
×
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