Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

General Anti-Avoidance Rules and Legal Certainty in Sweden, USA and China – A taxation determined by legal culture?

Nyberg Andersson, Markus LU (2018) JURM02 20181
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
The occurrence of taxpayers implementing arrangements without commercial purpose to avoid tax laws and reduce their taxation, id est tax avoidance, is counteracted in most legal systems with different methods. Most jurisdictions have implemented not only Specific Anti-Avoidance Rules ("SAARs"), but also General Anti Avoidance Rules ("GAARs") to counteract tax avoidance. The topic of this thesis is GAARs and the conflict between their application and taxpayers’ legal certainty. In the light of this conflict, the thesis examines GAARs in three different legal systems on three continents. Sweden, United States and China all apply a common method to counteract tax avoidance: statutory or judicially developed GAARs. This thesis investigates... (More)
The occurrence of taxpayers implementing arrangements without commercial purpose to avoid tax laws and reduce their taxation, id est tax avoidance, is counteracted in most legal systems with different methods. Most jurisdictions have implemented not only Specific Anti-Avoidance Rules ("SAARs"), but also General Anti Avoidance Rules ("GAARs") to counteract tax avoidance. The topic of this thesis is GAARs and the conflict between their application and taxpayers’ legal certainty. In the light of this conflict, the thesis examines GAARs in three different legal systems on three continents. Sweden, United States and China all apply a common method to counteract tax avoidance: statutory or judicially developed GAARs. This thesis investigates these three GAARs and examines their purpose, design, legal frameworks and application in the light of legal culture and legal certainty by examining each country's government, political governance, legal system and tax law interpretation. The thesis further analyzes how each GAAR in the light of legal culture affects taxpayers’ legal certainty. To achieve this purpose the thesis explores the significance of legal certainty in the countries, what impact GAARs have for taxpayers’ legal certainty, and how legal culture impacts on legal certainty in the application of GAARs. The study shows that the GAARs applied in Sweden, United States and China are very similar in terms of design, purpose and the criteria for application, as well as with regard to the fact that their effectiveness is conflicting with taxpayers’ legal certainty. Despite the fact that the three countries' GAARs are similar, there are however significant differences between their consequences for taxpayers’ legal certainty. The conclusions are that the importance given to taxpayers’ legal certainty vary between the countries, and in the context of GAAR application, there are conflicting interests that may limit taxpayers’ legal certainty. The differences are largely attributable to the legal cultures of Sweden, the United States and China, and the political ideologies dominating each country respectively have proven to have a major impact on the significance given to taxpayers’ legal certainty. (Less)
Abstract (Chinese)
纳税人通过进行缺少商业目的安排来逃避税法，减少缴税额的方式，也就是避税，被大多数法律体系采用不同的措施所打击。大多数司法机构不仅施行特别反避税法则（SAAR），还施行一般反避税法则（GAAR）来应对逃税。本论文的主题是GAAR，和它的施行与纳税人法律确定性之间的矛盾。从这一矛盾的角度出发，本论文考察了在三个大洲三种不同的法律体系下的GAAR。瑞典、美国和中国都施行一种常见的手段来应对逃税：法定或司法GAAR。本论文研究了这三种不同的GAAR，并且在不同的法律文化和法律确定性下通过检视这些国家的政府管理、政治治理、法律体系和税法解释这些方面来考察GAAR的目的、设计、法律框架和施行效果。本论文还分析了不同文化下每一种GAAR是如何影响纳税人的法律确定性的。为了完成这一目标，本论文探究了这些国家法律确定性层度，GAAR对纳税人法律确定性的影响，以及在GAAR施行中法律文化如何影响法律确定性。研究显示在瑞典、美国和中国施行的GAAR在设计、目的、施行标准和矛盾性（GAAR有效性和纳税人的法律确定性）上非常相似。尽管这三个国家的GAAR很相似，但是由它们导致的纳税人的法律确定性却有着明显的不同。结论是：纳税人法律确定性的重要程度随着国家和GAAR施行环境的不同而有所不同，并且矛盾的利益也许会限制纳税人的法律确定性。这些差异主要归结于瑞典、美国和中国的法律文化不同，并且支配着各国的政治思想体系也被证实对纳税人法律确定性的意义有主要影响。
Abstract (Swedish)
Förekomsten av att skattskyldiga genomför arrangemang utan affärsmässigt syfte för att kringgå skattelagstiftningen och sänka sin beskattning, id est skatteflykt, motverkas i de flesta rättssystem med olika metoder. De flesta jurisdiktioner har implementerat inte endast specifika skatteflyktsregler (”SAARs”), utan även generella så kallade General Anti-Avoidance Rules (”GAARs”) för att motverka skatteflykt. Ämnet för detta examensarbete är konflikten mellan GAARs och skattskyldigas rättssäkerhet. I ljuset av denna konflikt undersöker examensarbetet GAARs i tre olika rättssystem på tre kontinenter. Sverige, USA och Kina tillämpar en gemensam metod för att motverka skatteflykt: lagstiftade eller rättspraxisutvecklade GAARs. Detta arbete... (More)
Förekomsten av att skattskyldiga genomför arrangemang utan affärsmässigt syfte för att kringgå skattelagstiftningen och sänka sin beskattning, id est skatteflykt, motverkas i de flesta rättssystem med olika metoder. De flesta jurisdiktioner har implementerat inte endast specifika skatteflyktsregler (”SAARs”), utan även generella så kallade General Anti-Avoidance Rules (”GAARs”) för att motverka skatteflykt. Ämnet för detta examensarbete är konflikten mellan GAARs och skattskyldigas rättssäkerhet. I ljuset av denna konflikt undersöker examensarbetet GAARs i tre olika rättssystem på tre kontinenter. Sverige, USA och Kina tillämpar en gemensam metod för att motverka skatteflykt: lagstiftade eller rättspraxisutvecklade GAARs. Detta arbete undersöker dessa tre GAARs och granskar deras syfte, utformning, rättsliga ramverk och tillämpning i ljuset av rättskultur och rättssäkerhet genom att undersöka respektive lands regering, politiska styre, rättssystem och skatterättsliga lagtolkning. Examensarbetet analyserar vidare hur respektive GAAR i ljuset av rättskultur inverkar på skattskyldigas rättssäkerhet. För att uppnå detta syfte utröner uppsatsen vilken betydelse rättssäkerhet har inom länderna, vilken inverkan GAARs har för skattskyldigas rättssäkerhet, samt hur rättskulturen inverkar på rättssäkerhet vid tillämpningen av GAARs. Undersökningen visar att de GAARs som tillämpas i Sverige, USA och Kina är mycket likartade vad avser utformning, syfte och kriterier för tillämpning, samt i avseendet att deras effektivitet står i konflikt med skattskyldigas rättssäkerhet. Trots att de tre ländernas GAARs är likartade finns emellertid väsentliga skillnader mellan deras konsekvenser för skattskyldigas rättssäkerhet. Slutsatserna är att betydelsen som ges till skattskyldigas rättssäkerhet varierar mellan länderna, och i kontexten av GAAR tillämpning finns motstående intressen som kan begränsa skattskyldigas rättssäkerhet. Skillnaderna är till stor del hänförbara till rättskulturerna i Sverige, USA och Kina, och de politiska ideologier som dominerar respektive land har visat sig ha stor inverkan på den betydelse som ges till skattskyldigas rättssäkerhet. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Nyberg Andersson, Markus LU
supervisor
organization
course
JURM02 20181
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Tax Avoidance, Legal Certainty, GAAR, Sweden, United States, USA, U.S., China, General Anti-Avoidance Rules, Tax law, skatterätt, internationell skatterätt, international tax law, ATAD, BEPS Project, Chinese GAAR, SAAR, OECD, Swedish GAAR, U.S. GAAR, People's Republic of China
language
English
id
8941574
date added to LUP
2018-06-13 10:40:47
date last changed
2018-09-04 13:02:59
@misc{8941574,
  abstract     = {{The occurrence of taxpayers implementing arrangements without commercial purpose to avoid tax laws and reduce their taxation, id est tax avoidance, is counteracted in most legal systems with different methods. Most jurisdictions have implemented not only Specific Anti-Avoidance Rules ("SAARs"), but also General Anti Avoidance Rules ("GAARs") to counteract tax avoidance. The topic of this thesis is GAARs and the conflict between their application and taxpayers’ legal certainty. In the light of this conflict, the thesis examines GAARs in three different legal systems on three continents. Sweden, United States and China all apply a common method to counteract tax avoidance: statutory or judicially developed GAARs. This thesis investigates these three GAARs and examines their purpose, design, legal frameworks and application in the light of legal culture and legal certainty by examining each country's government, political governance, legal system and tax law interpretation. The thesis further analyzes how each GAAR in the light of legal culture affects taxpayers’ legal certainty. To achieve this purpose the thesis explores the significance of legal certainty in the countries, what impact GAARs have for taxpayers’ legal certainty, and how legal culture impacts on legal certainty in the application of GAARs. The study shows that the GAARs applied in Sweden, United States and China are very similar in terms of design, purpose and the criteria for application, as well as with regard to the fact that their effectiveness is conflicting with taxpayers’ legal certainty. Despite the fact that the three countries' GAARs are similar, there are however significant differences between their consequences for taxpayers’ legal certainty. The conclusions are that the importance given to taxpayers’ legal certainty vary between the countries, and in the context of GAAR application, there are conflicting interests that may limit taxpayers’ legal certainty. The differences are largely attributable to the legal cultures of Sweden, the United States and China, and the political ideologies dominating each country respectively have proven to have a major impact on the significance given to taxpayers’ legal certainty.}},
  author       = {{Nyberg Andersson, Markus}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{General Anti-Avoidance Rules and Legal Certainty in Sweden, USA and China – A taxation determined by legal culture?}},
  year         = {{2018}},
}