Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:49:44.462Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Treatment of Tax Measures Under International Trade and Investment Agreements: The Gats Compromise

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

Leslie B. Samuels
Leslie B. Samuels*
Affiliation:
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
The Sovereign Power to Tax
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 102 , 2008 , pp. 51 - 55
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

* Mr. Harrington and Mr. Saint-Amans did not submit remarks to the Proceedings. The panel wishes to thank David Hall who served as reporter for this panel, and Anna Beier-Pedrazzi for preparing the following edited transcript.

1 See Appellate Body Report, United States - Tax Treatment for Foreign Sales Corporations - Second Recourse to Article 21.5 of the Dsu by the European Communities, WT/DS108/AB/RW2 (Feb. 13, 2006); Appellate Body Report, United States - Tax Treatment for Foreign Sales Corporations - Recourse to Article 21.5 of the Dsu by the European Communities, WT/DS108/AB/RW (Jan. 14, 2002); Appellate Body Report, United States - Tax Treatment for Foreign Sales Corporations, WT/DS108/AB/R (Feb. 24 2000).

2 General Agreement on Trade in Services, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1B, 1869 U.N.T.S. 183; 33 ILM 1167 (1994) [hereinafter GATS].

3 Barclays did lose the case, Barclays Bank Pic v. Franchise Tax Bd., 512 U.S. 298 (1994), but California nevertheless changed its law in a way that satisfied the United Kingdom.

4 The European Union continues to complain that various United States tax provisions impose barriers to trade and investment. See European Commission, U.S. Barriers to Trade and Investment Report for 2007 (April 2008), available at <http://ec.europa.eu/trade/issues/sectoral/mk_access/prl 80408_en.htm>.

5 GATS Article XVII.

6 Informal GNS Meeting - 10 December 1993: Chairman’s Statement, MTN.GNS/49, p.l (Dec. 11, 1993) [hereinafter Chairman’s Statement].

7 See Secretariat Note, MTN.GNS/W/210, December 1, 1993.

8 GATS Article XIV(d), n. 6. For further elucidation of this footnote, see Secretariat Note, MTN.GNS/W/178, November 15, 1993 and Secretariat Note, MTN.GNS/W/178/Add.l, November 30, 1993.

9 Chairman’s Statement, p.2.

10 Id. GATS Article II.

12 See Secretariat Note, MTN.GNS/W/178, November 15, 1993.

13 GATS Article XIV(e).

14 GATS Article XXII 13.

15 See, e.g., Protocol Amending U.S.-Ger. Tax Convention, June 1, 2006, S. Treaty Doc. No. 109-20 (2006).