This paper examines the introduction of the General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR) into the Ugandan tax system in order to combat tax avoidance and evasion. The paper argues that the introduction of the GAAR has had a positive effect on revenue collection and curtailed tax avoidance and evasion in Uganda. It also suggests that the implementation of the GAAR has been hampered by inadequate legal and institutional structures and a lack of public awareness. Furthermore, the paper highlights the need for further reforms and a better understanding of the complexities and implications of GAAR in order to ensure its successful implementation and enforcement.
The Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 makes provision for the taxation of taxpayers under the new General Anti Avoidance Rule (GAAR) which is encompassed in section 80A- 80G. This research basically deals with the analysis of the new general anti avoidance rule. Each provision is critically analysed. An anti avoidance rule has been part of the South African legislation since 1941, in section 90 of the Income Tax Act. Section 103 was later introduced to deal with the provisions of the anti avoidance rule because section 90 had proved to be insufficient to combat tax abuses. However, section 103 was repealed and replaced by the current section 80A (under discussion) because it proved to be an inconsistent and ineffective deterrent to the increasing form of tax arrangements. Furthermore, it was stated that it was not in line with international standards and developments, hence resulting in the introduction of section 80A-80G in 1996. The aim of this research is to determine whether the new rule is an effective deterrent for abusive tax abuses by the taxpayers. Furthermore, it aims at investigating whether the new general anti avoidance rule has been phrased in clear, unambiguous terms so as to ensure that the taxpayer, the Commissioner and the courts are clear as to what each provision entails. In general each of the provisions of section 80A of the New General Anti Avoidance is analysed. The research deals with the meaning of the terms arrangement, thereafter tax benefit, 'sole and main purpose, commercial substance, and lastly, misuse and abuse of the provisions of the Act. The analysis of each of the provisions is aimed at determining whether the new general anti avoidance rule is clear and easy to understand. It aims at determining what constitutes an impermissible tax avoidance rule, which in the event that an arrangement or agreement is impermissible tax avoidance, would lead to the provisions of the GAAR being applicable. Furthermore, this research aims to determine whether the Act makes provision for, or rather explains in clear terms, what amounts to permissible tax avoidance. Lastly, after all the provisions are discussed, the research identifies the major weaknesses of the new GAAR and provides recommendations. It has to be noted that regardless of the fact that the new GAAR might have deficiencies, it is imperative that the legislature makes the provisions the GAAR clear by inserting sections in the Act, or replacing certain provisions in the Act where necessary and applicable, so as to ensure that the there is clarity and certainty when dealing with such provisions. Therefore this research is necessary to ensure that taxpayers are aware of the provisions which qualify as impermissible tax avoidance and when the arrangements they enter into are regarded as permissible. In addition, clarity is required to ensure that the taxpayer, the Commissioner and the courts understand exactly what the new GAAR entails, thus preventing the opening of the floodgates of litigation. Lastly, after all the provisions are discussed, the research identifies the major weaknesses of the new GAAR and provides recommendations. It has to be noted that regardless of the fact that the new GAAR might have deficiencies, it is imperative that the legislature makes the provisions the GAAR clear by inserting sections in the Act, or replacing certain provisions in the Act where necessary and applicable, so as to ensure that the there is clarity and certainty when dealing with such provisions. Therefore this research is necessary to ensure that taxpayers are aware of the provisions which qualify as impermissible tax avoidance and when the arrangements they enter into are regarded as permissible. In addition, clarity is required to ensure that the taxpayer, the Commissioner and the courts understand exactly what the new GAAR entails, thus preventing the opening of the floodgates of litigation. Copyright.
Tax avoidance continues to attract attention globally with strong support for tax law reform at all levels. This Tax Law IMF Technical Note focuses on some of the key design and drafting considerations of one specific legal instrument (being, a statutory general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR)) which is often considered by authorities to combat unacceptable tax avoidance practices. A GAAR is typically designed to strike down those otherwise lawful practices that are found to be carried out in a manner which undermines the intention of the tax law such as where a taxpayer has misused or abused that law. However, the objective of combating unacceptable tax avoidance can itself make the legal design of a GAAR complex. This is simply because the phrase “tax avoidance” means different things to different people. Whatever the form of a GAAR, it should give effect to a policy that seeks to strike down blatant, artificial or contrived arrangements which are tax driven. However, the GAAR should be designed and applied so as not to inhibit or impede ordinary commercial transactions. This Tax Law IMF Technical Note discusses and explores how drawing a line between those arrangements which should be caught by the GAAR is a matter of degree and can be delicate.
Advance tax rulings are a common feature of mature tax systems. The tax systems of the United States, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany, Australia, and South Africa all have established ruling practices. Taxpayers can obtain an advance tax ruling in nearly all OECD member countries. Increasingly, many non-OECD countries are also offering advance tax rulings. An advance tax ruling regime seeks to promote clarity and consistency regarding the application of the tax law for both taxpayers and the tax authority. However, there are also inherent risks associated with the proliferation of granting confidential advance tax rulings which are not published or otherwise reported. This Tax Law IMF Technical Note focuses on designing an advance tax ruling regime in the nature of private tax rulings.
This action plan, created in response to a request by the G20, identifies a set of domestic and international actions to address the problems of base erosion and profit sharing.
This annual publication provides details of taxes paid on wages in OECD countries. It covers personal income taxes and social security contributions paid by employees, social security contributions and payroll taxes paid by employers, and cash benefits received by workers. Taxing Wages 2021 includes a special feature entitled: “Impact of COVID-19 on the Tax Wedge in OECD Countries”.
This truly indispensable book from Nexia International condenses the KEY rates, reliefs and tax facts from 80 regimes into one essential guide.It's an accessible and user-friendly first point of reference for accountants, tax advisers, policy-makers, investors looking at opportunities overseas and anyone considering living or working abroad.Each chapter covers a single jurisdiction and includes information on: - Legal Forms - Corporate Tax - Personal Tax - Withholding Taxes - Indirect TaxesEach country-specific chapter is organised and presented in the same format and style. The chapters are organised alphabetically by country which ensures readers can quickly find the information they need on a specific country. Written by Nexia members based in the relevant tax regime, The International Tax Handbook provides a concise overview of taxation in these regimes: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, British Virgin Islands, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada, Channel Islands - Guernsey, Channel Islands - Jersey, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, Gibraltar, Greece, Guatemala, Hong Kong SAR, Hungary, India, Iran, Ireland, Isle of Man, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Korea, Lebanon, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Namibia, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Oman (Sultanate of Oman), Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovak Republic, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Tanzania, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Vietnam.Previous edition ISBN: 9781780431277
International corporate tax issues are prominent in public debate, notably with the G20-OECD project addressing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (‘BEPS’). But while there is considerable empirical evidence for advanced countries on the cross-country fiscal externalities at the heart of these issues, there is almost none for developing countries. This paper uses panel data for 173 countries over 33 years to explore their magnitude and nature, focusing particularly on developing countries and applying a new method to distinguish between spillover effects through real decisions and through avoidance —and quantify the revenue impact of the latter. The results suggest that spillover effects on the tax base are if anything a greater concern for developing countries than for advanced—and a significant one.
General anti-avoidance rules (GAARs) have been a topic of great relevance in practice as well as in academia for decades. In a post-BEPS tax world, with national legislators introducing or tightening GAARs, and with the European Union and OECD suggesting implementation of such rules, the topic seems more important than ever. The aim of this book is to give tax policymakers, tax authorities, tax courts and tax practitioners an idea of the various understandings of and approaches towards tax avoidance in 39 countries.
