Skatteavtalstolkningens kärnfrågor - En komparativrättslig studie av skatteavtalstolkning i Kanada och Sverige
(2014) LAGM01 20142Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Avtalsrätten i hela världen styrs av begreppet pacta sunt servanda . Ett problem som kan uppstå när ett avtal ska tolkas är att parterna anser att avtalet kan tolkas på olika sätt. Det blir ännu svårare när det gäller bilaterala skatteavtal eftersom stater har internationella skyldigheter samtidigt som begreppen i avtalen tolkas på olika sätt i de olika staterna. Denna uppsats är en komparation mellan Sverige och Kanada vad gäller skatteavtalsrättens kärnfrågor. I uppsatsen analyseras hur högsta instans i respektive land tolkar skatteavtal i förhållande till Wienkonventionen samt kommentaren till OECD:s modellavtal. Fokus ligger på domstolarnas syn på bundenheten till ordalydelsen i förhållande till partsavsikten och hur tolkningsmetoderna... (More)
- Avtalsrätten i hela världen styrs av begreppet pacta sunt servanda . Ett problem som kan uppstå när ett avtal ska tolkas är att parterna anser att avtalet kan tolkas på olika sätt. Det blir ännu svårare när det gäller bilaterala skatteavtal eftersom stater har internationella skyldigheter samtidigt som begreppen i avtalen tolkas på olika sätt i de olika staterna. Denna uppsats är en komparation mellan Sverige och Kanada vad gäller skatteavtalsrättens kärnfrågor. I uppsatsen analyseras hur högsta instans i respektive land tolkar skatteavtal i förhållande till Wienkonventionen samt kommentaren till OECD:s modellavtal. Fokus ligger på domstolarnas syn på bundenheten till ordalydelsen i förhållande till partsavsikten och hur tolkningsmetoderna skiljer sig åt i de olika länderna. En redogörelse för den rättspraxis och doktrin som finns i respektive land har även utgjort grund för den diskussion som sedan förs kring likheter och skillnader i tolkning av skatteavtal i Kanada och Sverige. Trots att Sverige och Kanada är dualistiska stater och har samma förhållningssätt till folkrättsliga avtal finns det många skillnader i hur skatteavtalen tolkas. Kanada har ett mer liberalt sätt att se på skatteavtalsrätten då skatteavtal anses vara mer generella än den inhemska lagstiftningen. Att skatteavtal är mer generellt utformade beror på att skatteavtal utgör en begränsning av den beskattningsrätt som staten har enligt inhemsk rätt samt att skatteavtal är en kompromiss mellan olika stater med olika intressen. I Sverige har bundenheten till ordalydelsen fått en större betydelse vid skatteavtalstolkning än vad den fått i Kanada där partsavsikten ges en större betydelse framför ordalydelsen för att uppfylla syftet med avtalet. Vad gäller Kanadas och Sveriges förhållningssätt till kommentaren till OECD:s modellavtal finns ingen tydlig skiljelinje mellan hur Sverige respektive Kanada ser på kommentaren. I både domstol och doktrin finns åsikter om att den ursprungliga kommentaren ska utgöra gängse mening enligt 1969 års Wienkonvention om traktaträtten medan olika åsikter framkommit om vilken betydelse nyare kommentarer har på tidigare ingångna avtal.
Den slutsats jag dragit är att kommentaren inte saknar betydelse vid tolkning av skatteavtal men att betydelsen avgörs från fall till fall. På grund av att varje avtal speglar relationen mellan två olika rättskulturer kan generella slutsatser kring hur kommentaren ska användas inte dras. Den ursprungliga kommentaren från år 1963 anses spegla partsavsikten hos de avtalsparter som följt OECD:s modellavtal vid ingående av skatteavtal med andra stater. Vad gäller nyare kommentarer går åsikterna isär. Jag anser likt många forskare att den ursprungliga kommentaren till OECD:s modellavtal bör anses utgöra partsavsikt hos medlemmar av OECD medan nyare kommentarers bärighet måste avgöras från fall till fall. (Less) - Abstract
- Contract law is governed by the concept of pacta sunt servanda . A problem that can arise when a contract is to be interpreted is that the parties believe that the agreement should be interpreted in different ways. It becomes even more difficult when it comes to bilateral tax treaties when states have international obligations while terms in the tax treaties are interpreted differently in different states. This paper is a comparison between Sweden and Canada regarding the key questions of tax treaty law. The paper analyses how the highest court in each country interprets tax treaties in relation to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and the commentary to the OECD Model Tax Convention. Focus is on the courts’ views on textual... (More)
- Contract law is governed by the concept of pacta sunt servanda . A problem that can arise when a contract is to be interpreted is that the parties believe that the agreement should be interpreted in different ways. It becomes even more difficult when it comes to bilateral tax treaties when states have international obligations while terms in the tax treaties are interpreted differently in different states. This paper is a comparison between Sweden and Canada regarding the key questions of tax treaty law. The paper analyses how the highest court in each country interprets tax treaties in relation to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and the commentary to the OECD Model Tax Convention. Focus is on the courts’ views on textual interpretation in relation to the intention of the parties and how the interpretation methods differ in Sweden and Canada. A presentation of the case-law and doctrine in each country follows by a discussion of the similarities and differences of interpretation of tax treaties. Although Sweden and Canada are dualistic states and have the same approach to tax treaties, there are many differences in how tax treaties are interpreted. Canada has a more liberal approach to tax treaty law since tax treaties are considered as more general than domestic legislation. The general design of tax treaties is due to the fact that tax treaties constitutes restriction of the states right to taxation under domestic law and also due to the fact that tax treaties are compromises between different states with different interests. In Sweden, the textual interpretation has been given more focus when interpreting tax treaties than it has in Canada where the intention of the parties is to prefer before the wording to fulfil the purpose of a tax treaty. As for Canada’s and Sweden’s approach to the commentary of the OECD Model Tax Convention there are no clear differences regarding how the countries uses the commentary. In both courts and doctrine there are opinions saying that the original commentary should constitute ordinary meaning under the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties while different opinions have emerged regarding the importance of later commentaries when interpreting treaties concluded before the commentary was published.
The conclusion I’ve drawn is that the commentary is not irrelevant when interpreting tax treaties but the importance should be determined from case to case. Since each tax treaty reflects the relationship between to different legal cultures, general conclusions about how the commentary should be used can’t be drawn. The original commentary from year 1963 is considered to reflect the intention of the parties who followed the OECD Model Tax Convention when entering a tax treaty. As for the more recent commentaries, the opinions divide. I think, like many authors, that the original commentary of the OECD Model Tax Convention should be considered to constitute the intention of the parties for those countries who are members of the OECD while more recent commentaries viability must be determined from case to case. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/4913948
- author
- Hultman, Kajsa LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Core Issues of Interpretation of Tax Treaties
- course
- LAGM01 20142
- year
- 2014
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- skatterätt, skatteavtalstolkning, Sverige, Kanada, partsavsikt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 4913948
- date added to LUP
- 2015-04-21 14:39:32
- date last changed
- 2015-04-21 14:39:32
@misc{4913948,
abstract = {{Contract law is governed by the concept of pacta sunt servanda . A problem that can arise when a contract is to be interpreted is that the parties believe that the agreement should be interpreted in different ways. It becomes even more difficult when it comes to bilateral tax treaties when states have international obligations while terms in the tax treaties are interpreted differently in different states. This paper is a comparison between Sweden and Canada regarding the key questions of tax treaty law. The paper analyses how the highest court in each country interprets tax treaties in relation to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and the commentary to the OECD Model Tax Convention. Focus is on the courts’ views on textual interpretation in relation to the intention of the parties and how the interpretation methods differ in Sweden and Canada. A presentation of the case-law and doctrine in each country follows by a discussion of the similarities and differences of interpretation of tax treaties. Although Sweden and Canada are dualistic states and have the same approach to tax treaties, there are many differences in how tax treaties are interpreted. Canada has a more liberal approach to tax treaty law since tax treaties are considered as more general than domestic legislation. The general design of tax treaties is due to the fact that tax treaties constitutes restriction of the states right to taxation under domestic law and also due to the fact that tax treaties are compromises between different states with different interests. In Sweden, the textual interpretation has been given more focus when interpreting tax treaties than it has in Canada where the intention of the parties is to prefer before the wording to fulfil the purpose of a tax treaty. As for Canada’s and Sweden’s approach to the commentary of the OECD Model Tax Convention there are no clear differences regarding how the countries uses the commentary. In both courts and doctrine there are opinions saying that the original commentary should constitute ordinary meaning under the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties while different opinions have emerged regarding the importance of later commentaries when interpreting treaties concluded before the commentary was published.
The conclusion I’ve drawn is that the commentary is not irrelevant when interpreting tax treaties but the importance should be determined from case to case. Since each tax treaty reflects the relationship between to different legal cultures, general conclusions about how the commentary should be used can’t be drawn. The original commentary from year 1963 is considered to reflect the intention of the parties who followed the OECD Model Tax Convention when entering a tax treaty. As for the more recent commentaries, the opinions divide. I think, like many authors, that the original commentary of the OECD Model Tax Convention should be considered to constitute the intention of the parties for those countries who are members of the OECD while more recent commentaries viability must be determined from case to case.}},
author = {{Hultman, Kajsa}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Skatteavtalstolkningens kärnfrågor - En komparativrättslig studie av skatteavtalstolkning i Kanada och Sverige}},
year = {{2014}},
}