Article 7: Business Profits
Learning Objectives: You should
1.understand the uses of the business activities concept
2.be able to identify when an enterprise undertakes activities in a territory
3.know how to determine when an expense should be deductible in calculating profits
4.be able to explain how profits are attributed to particular representatives or facilities
Key Concepts
Business Profits
Meaning of business activities
The comparable concept of permanent establishment
Deductible expenses
Profit allocation
Relationship between business profits and other articles
Case studies
United Nations Model Double Taxation Convention between Developed and Developing Countries (2017 Update)
Article 7: Business Profits
The profits of an enterprise of a Contracting State shall be taxable only in that State unless the enterprise carries on business in the other Contracting State through a permanent establishment situated therein. If the enterprise carries on business as aforesaid, the profits of the enterprise may be taxed in the other State but only so much of them as is attributable to (a) that permanent establishment; (b) sales in that other State of goods or merchandise of the same or similar kind as those sold through that permanent establishment; or (c) other business activities carried on in that other State of the same or similar kind as those effected through that permanent establishment.
Subject to the provisions of paragraph 3, where an enterprise of a Contracting State carries on business in the other Contracting State through a permanent establishment situated therein, there shall in each Contracting State be attributed to that permanent establishment the profits which it might be expected to make if it were a distinct and separate enterprise engaged in the same or similar activities under the same or similar conditions and dealing wholly independently with the enterprise of which it is a permanent establishment.
In the determination of the profits of a permanent establishment, there shall be allowed as deductions expenses which are incurred for the purposes of the business of the permanent establishment including executive and general administrative expenses so incurred, whether in the State in which the permanent establishment is situated or elsewhere. However, no such deduction shall be allowed in respect of amounts, if any, paid (otherwise than towards reimbursement of actual expenses) by the permanent establishment to the head office of the enterprise or any of its other offices, by way of royalties, fees or other similar payments in return for the use of patents or other rights, or by way of commission, for specific services performed or for management, or, except in the case of a banking enterprise, by way of interest on moneys lent to the permanent establishment. Likewise, no account shall be taken, in the determination of the profits of a permanent establishment, for amounts charged (otherwise than towards reimbursement of actual expenses), by the permanent establishment to the head office of the enterprise or any of its other offices, by way of royalties, fees or other similar payments in return for the use of patents or other rights, or by way of commission for specific services performed or for management, or, except in the case of a banking enterprise, by way of interest on moneys lent to the head office of the enterprise or any of its other offices.
In so far as it has been customary in a Contracting State to determine the profits to be attributed to a permanent establishment on the basis of an apportionment of the total profits of the enterprise to its various parts, nothing in paragraph 2 shall preclude that Contracting State from determining the profits to be taxed by such an apportionment as may be customary; the method of apportionment adopted shall, however, be such that the result shall be in accordance with the principles contained in this article.
For the purposes of the preceding paragraphs, the profits to be attributed to the permanent establishment shall be determined by the same method year by year unless there is good and sufficient reason to the contrary.
Where profits include items of income which are dealt with separately in other articles of this Convention, then the provisions of those articles shall not be affected by the provisions of this article.
[NOTE: The question of whether profits should be attributed to a permanent establishment by reason of the mere purchase by that permanent establishment of goods and merchandise for the enterprise was not resolved. It should therefore be settled in bilateral negotiations.]
OECD Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital (2017 Update)
Article 7: Business Profits
Profits of an enterprise of a Contracting State shall be taxable only in that State unless the enterprise carries on business in the other Contracting State through a permanent establishment situated therein. If the enterprise carries on business as aforesaid, the profits that are attributable to the permanent establishment in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 2 may be taxed in that other State.
For the purposes of this Article and Article [23 A] [23 B], the profits that are attributable in each Contracting State to the permanent establishment referred to in paragraph 1 are the profits it might be expected to make, in particular in its dealings with other parts of the enterprise, if it were a separate and independent enterprise engaged in the same or similar activities under the same or similar conditions, taking into account the functions performed, assets used and risks assumed by the enterprise through the permanent establishment and through the other parts of the enterprise.
Where, in accordance with paragraph 2, a Contracting State adjusts the profits that are attributable to a permanent establishment of an enterprise of one of the Contracting States and taxes accordingly profits of the enterprise that have been charged to tax in the other State, the other State shall, to the extent necessary to eliminate double taxation on these profits, make an appropriate adjustment to the amount of the tax charged on those profits. In determining such adjustment, the competent authorities of the Contracting States shall if necessary consult each other.
Where profits include items of income which are dealt with separately in other Articles of this Convention, then the provisions of those Articles shall not be affected by the provisions of this Article.
Article 7 Bibliography
Arnold, Brian J. “At Sixes and Sevens: The Relationship between the Taxation of Business Profits and Income from Immovable Property under Tax Treaties” (2006) 60:1 Bull Intl Tax’n 5 <https://www.ibfd.org/IBFD-Products/Journal-Articles/Bulletin-for-International-Taxation/collections/bit/pdf/bifd010602.pdf>
Avi-Yonah, Reuven & Kimberly A Clausing. "Business Profits (Article 7 OECD Model Convention)" (2007) University of Michigan Law & Economics Working Paper No 07-016; University of Michigan Public Law Working Paper No 91, online: <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1017515>
Avi-Yonah, Reuven & Zachée Pouga Tinhaga. “Unitary Taxation and International Tax Rules” (2014) International Centre for Tax & Development Working Paper No 26, online: <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2351920>
Baker, Philip & Richard S Collier. “General Report” (2006) 91b Cahiers de Droit Fiscal Intl.
Balco, Tomas. “Kazakhstan: Allocation of Head Office Expenses to Permanent Establishments” in Eric CCM Kemmeren et al, eds, Tax Treaty Case Law around the Globe 2012 (Vienna: Linde, 2013) 103 <https://www.ibfd.org/IBFD-Products/Tax-Treaty-Case-Law-around-Globe-2012>
Bankman, Joseph and Kane, Mitchell and Sykes, Alan, Collecting the Rent: The Global Battle to Capture MNE Profits (October 25, 2018). Tax Law Review, Forthcoming; NYU Law and Economics Research Paper No. 18-38; Stanford Law and Economics Olin Working Paper No. 527. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3273112
Bendlinger, Stefan, Maximilian Görl & Christian Schon. “Taxation of Large-Scale Construction Projects and the OECD Discussion Draft on the Attribution of Profits to Permanent Establishment” (2006) 34 Intertax 180.
Bennett, Mary C. “Article 7: New OECD Rules for Attributing Profit to Permanent Establishments” in Dennis Weber & Stef van Weeghel, eds, The 2010 OECD Updates: Model Tax Convention & Transfer Pricing Guidelines: A Critical Review (Alphen on the Rhine: Kluwer Law International, 2011) 21 <https://lrus.wolterskluwer.com/store/product/the-2010-oecd-updates-model-tax-convention-and-transfer-pricing-guidelines-a-critical-review/>
Bennett, Mary C & Carol A Dunahoo. “The Attribution of Profits to a Permanent Establishment: Issues and Recommendations” (2005) 33 Intertax 51 <https://www.kluwerlawonline.com/abstract.php?area=Journals&id=TAXI2005009>
Cope, Charles W. “Branch Taxation OECD Style: A Review of New Draft Article 7 (Business Profits) of the OECD Model Tax Convention” (2008) 37 Tax Mgmt Intl J 635.
Cortot-Boucher, Emmanuelle. “France: Minister vs. Société Bayerische Hypo und Vereinsbank” in Michael Lang et al, eds, Tax Treaty Case Law Around the Globe 2015 (Vienna: Linde, 2016) 87 <https://www.ibfd.org/IBFD-Products/Tax-Treaty-Case-Law-around-Globe-2015>
Cui, Wei. “China: A New (Furtive) Approach to Taxing International Transportation Income” in Michael Lang et al, eds, Tax Treaty Case Law Around the Globe 2011 (Alphen on the Rhine: Kluwer Law International, 2012) 159 <http://www.academia.edu/9930165/China_A_New_Furtive_Approach_to_International_Transportation_Income>
da Silva, Soares & David Roberto. “Service Payments Remitted Abroad Exempt from Withholding Under Treaties, Brazilian Court Rules” (2009) Tax Analyst.
Grinberg, Itai, International Taxation in an Era of Digital Disruption: Analyzing the Current Debate (October 29, 2018). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3275737 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3275737
Isabel Verlinden, David Ledure and Maxime Dessy, "The Risky Side of Transfer Pricing: The OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Reports Sharpen the Rules on Risk Allocation under the Arm’s Length Standard" (2016) International Transfer Pricing Journal. https://www.ibfd.org/sites/ibfd.org/files/content/pdf/itpj_2016_02_int_1.pdf
Kobetsky, Michael. “Article 7 of the OECD Model: Defining the Personality of Permanent Establishments” (2006) 60:10 Bull Intl Fiscal Doc 411 <https://www.ibfd.org/IBFD-Products/Journal-Articles/Bulletin-for-International-Taxation/collections/bit/pdf/bifd100604.pdf>
Kobetsky, Michael. “Attribution of Profits to Branches of International Banks: The OECD Discussion Drafts” (2005) 20:5 BFLR 319.
Kobetsky, Michael. “The Tax Treaty Implications of the Foreign Bank Branch Tax Measures” (2002) 17 BFLR 181.
Korobchenko, Konstantin. “Cross-border Services in Tax Treaties: Crossing the PE Border” (2013) 24 Intl Tax Rev 12.
Kristina I. Novak, Mark P. Thomas and Cym H. Lowell, “United States: Treatment of Intangibles under New US Tax Regime” (July/August 2018) Vol.25, No.4 International Transfer Pricing Journal 257-66
Lampert, Steffen. “Germany: Characterization of Interest Payments Derived through a Deemed US Trading Partnership” in Michael Lang et al, eds, Tax Treaty Case Law Around the Globe 2011 (Alphen on the Rhine: Kluwer Law International, 2012) 171 <https://www.lindeverlag.at/buch/tax-treaty-case-law-around-the-globe-2011-4419>
Maitrot de la Motte, Alexandre. “France: Is There Symmetry between State of Taxation and State of Deduction of Expenses?” in Eric CCM Kemmeren et al, eds, Tax Treaty Case Law Around the Globe 2014 (Amsterdam: International Bureau of Fiscal Documentation, 2014) 41 <https://www.ibfd.org/IBFD-Products/Tax-Treaty-Case-Law-Around-Globe-2014>
McGill, Sandra P & Lowell D Yoder. “From Storefronts to Servers to Service Providers: Stretching the Permanent Establishment Definition to Accommodate New Business Models” (2003) 81:3 Taxes – The Tax Magazine <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=389261>
Muller, Johan. “Attribution of Profits to PE: A Business Perspective” in Dennis Weber & Stef van Weeghel, eds, The 2010 OECD Updates: Model Tax Convention & Transfer Pricing Guidelines: A Critical Review (Alphen on the Rhine: Kluwer Law International, 2011) 51 <https://lrus.wolterskluwer.com/store/product/the-2010-oecd-updates-model-tax-convention-and-transfer-pricing-guidelines-a-critical-review/>
Nouel, Luis, ‘The New Article 7 of the OECD Model Tax Convention: the End of the Road?’ (2011) 65 Bull Intl Tax 1 <https://www.ibfd.org/IBFD-Products/Journal-Articles/Bulletin-for-International-Taxation/collections/bit/html/bit_2011_01_o2_2.html>
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Attribution of Profit to a Permanent Establishment Involved in Electronic Commerce Transactions (Centre for Tax Policy Administration, 2001), online: <http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/46/25/1923312.pdf>
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Discussion Draft on a New Article 7 (Business Profits) of the OECD Model Tax Convention (Centre for Tax Policy Administration, 2008), online: <https://www.oecd.org/tax/treaties/40974117.pdf>
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Report on the Attribution of Profits to Permanent Establishments (Centre for Tax Policy Administration, 2008), online: <http://www.oecd.org/tax/transfer-pricing/41031455.pdf>
Pereira, Neil. “The New Draft of Article 7 (Business Profits): First Thoughts” (2009) 12:5 Tax Specialist 286.
Perrou, Katerina. “Greece: The Calculation of the Profits that are Attributable to a PE” in Michael Lang et al, eds, Tax Treaty Case Law Around the Globe 2011 (Alphen on the Rhine: Kluwer Law International, 2012) 177 <https://www.lindeverlag.at/buch/tax-treaty-case-law-around-the-globe-2011-4419>
Pijl, Hans. “The 2010 Elimination of Article 7-3 (1963): Rise and Fall of an Article” in Dennis Weber & Stef van Weeghel, eds, The 2010 OECD Updates: Model Tax Convention & Transfer Pricing Guidelines: A Critical Review (Alphen on the Rhine: Kluwer Law International, 2011) 37 <https://lrus.wolterskluwer.com/store/product/the-2010-oecd-updates-model-tax-convention-and-transfer-pricing-guidelines-a-critical-review/>
Pjil, Hans, ‘Interpretation of Article 7 of the OECD Model, Permanent Establishment Financing and Other Dealings’ (2011) 65 Bull Intl Tax 294 <https://www.ibfd.org/IBFD-Products/Journal-Articles/Bulletin-for-International-Taxation/collections/bit/html/bit_2011_06_int_2.html>
Rao, Srinivasa & Rajendra Nayak. “Courts Raise Doubts about Permanent Establishment” (2009) 20:5 Intl Tax Rev 42 <https://search.proquest.com/docview/230207139?pq-origsite=gscholar>
Reuven S. Avi-Yonah, "Structure of International Taxation: A Proposal for Simplification" (1996) 74:6 Texas Law Review 1301-1360. https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/tlr74&id=1321&men_tab=srchresults
Richard S. Collier and Joseph L. Andrus, Transfer Pricing and the Arm’s Length Principle after BEPS (Oxford University Press, 2017)
Rust, Alexander. “Austria: Constitutional Review of Tax Treaties” in Michael Lang et al, eds, Tax Treaty Case Law Around the Globe 2015 (Vienna: Linde, 2016) 95 <https://www.ibfd.org/IBFD-Products/Tax-Treaty-Case-Law-around-Globe-2015>
Rust, Alexander. “Germany: Interpretation of the Term ‘Business Income’ under an Income Tax Treaty” in Eric CCM Kemmeren et al, eds, Tax Treaty Case Law around the Globe 2012 (Vienna: Linde, 2013) 93 <https://www.ibfd.org/IBFD-Products/Tax-Treaty-Case-Law-around-Globe-2012>
Saccardo, Nicola. “Art 24(3) of the OECD Model Convention: The Significance of the Expression ‘Taxation on a Permanent Establishment’ in Cross-border Reorganization” (2003) 31:8/9 Intertax 271, online: <https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/kluwer-law-international/art-24-3-of-the-oecd-model-convention-the-significance-of-the-PTrBCF6cbf>
Sadowsky, Marilyne. “France: Taxation of Partnerships: France versus the OECD” in Eric CCM Kemmeren et al, eds, Tax Treaty Case Law around the Globe 2012 (Vienna: Linde, 2013) 79 <https://www.ibfd.org/IBFD-Products/Tax-Treaty-Case-Law-around-Globe-2012>
Scandone, Francesco Saverio. “The Interaction between Business Profits and Income from Immovable Property under Tax Treaties: Is It All about Definitions?” (2009) 37:4 Intertax 223 <https://www.kluwerlawonline.com/abstract.php?area=Journals&id=TAXI2009023>
Schoueri, Luís Eduardo. “Brazil: The Qualification of Income Derived from Technical Services” in Michael Lang et al, eds, Tax Treaty Case Law Around the Globe 2011 (Alphen on the Rhine: Kluwer Law International, 2012) 145 <https://www.lindeverlag.at/buch/tax-treaty-case-law-around-the-globe-2011-4419>
Schoueri, Luís Eduardo & Mateus Calicchio Barbosa. “Brazil: CFC Rules and Tax Treaties in Brazil: A Case for Article 7” in Michael Lang et al, eds, Tax Treaty Case Law Around the Globe 2015 (Vienna: Linde, 2016) 69 <https://www.ibfd.org/IBFD-Products/Tax-Treaty-Case-Law-around-Globe-2015>
Schoueri, Luís Eduardo & Mateus Calicchio Barbosa. “Technical Services and the Application of Article 7 under Brazilian Treaty Practice: A Case Study” in Michael Lang et al, eds, Tax Treaty Case Law Around the Globe 2013 (Vienna: Linde, 2014) 103.
Sengputa, DP. “India: Mediterranean Shipping” in Michael Lang et al, eds, Tax Treaty Case Law Around the Globe 2013 (Vienna: Linde, 2014) 117 <https://www.ibfd.org/IBFD-Products/Tax-Treaty-Case-Law-Around-Globe-2013>
Sprague, Gary D & Michael Boyle. “General Report” (2001) 86a Cahiers de Droit Fiscal Intl.
Tittle, Martin B. “A Unified Approach to Permanent Establishment by Agent in the US” (2007) 48:6 Tax Notes Intl, online: <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1027727>
van Raad, Kees. “Deemed Expenses of a Permanent Establishment under Article 7 of the OECD Model” (2000) 28:4 Intertax 253.
van Wanrooij, Josine SA. “Comments on the Proposed Article 7 of the OECD Model Convention” (2009) 37:5 Intertax 298 <https://www.kluwerlawonline.com/abstract.php?area=Journals&id=TAXI2009031>
Van Raad, Cornelius, ‘Enterprise and Enterprise of a Contracting State’ in: Guglielmo Maisto (ed), The Meaning of ‘Enterprise’, ‘Business’ and ‘Business Profits’ under Tax Treaties and EU Tax Law (IBFD 2011) <https://www.ibfd.org/IBFD-Products/Meaning-Enterprise-Business-and-Business-Profits-under-Tax-Treaties-and-EU-Tax-Law>
Vann, Richard. “Do We Need 7(3)? History and Purpose of the Business Profits Deduction Rule in Tax Treaties” in John Tiley, ed, Studies in the History of Tax Law (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2011) 393, online: <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1787805>
Yalti, Billur. “Turkey: Business Profits v. Professional Income” in Michael Lang et al, eds, Tax Treaty Case Law Around the Globe 2011 (Alphen on the Rhine: Kluwer Law International, 2012) 185 <https://www.lindeverlag.at/buch/tax-treaty-case-law-around-the-globe-2011-4419>
Article 7 Cases
Audencia Nacional (National Court), 270/2006, 1 October 2007, Jurisprudence Tributaria, 2007,1352 (Spain).
Audiencia Nacional(National Court), (AN), 10 July 2015, ING Direct case, no 281/2012.
Bricom Holdings Ltd v Commissioners of Inland Revenue, 25 June 1997, [1997] STC 1179 (United Kingdom).
Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Fiscal Court), I R 5/06, 17 October 2007, Bundessteuerblatt, 2009, II, 356 (Germany).
Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Fiscal Court), I R 7/99, 17 November 1999, Betriebsberater, 2000, 1017 (Germany).
Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Fiscal Court), I R 40/95, 6 December 1995, Bundessteuerblatt, II, 1997, 118 (Germany).
Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Fiscal Court), I R 43/98, 21 October 1999, Bundessteuerblatt, 2000, II, 424 (Germany).
Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Fiscal Court), I R 46/95, 16 February 1996, Bundesfinanzhof/NV, 1996, 111 (Germany).
Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Fiscal Court), I R 49/09, 9 December 2010, Entscheidungen der Finanzgerichte, 2009, 1395 (Germany).
Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Fiscal Court), II R 59/05, 9 August 2006, Bundesfinanzhof/NB 2006, 2326.
Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Fiscal Court), I R 71/92, 14 July 1993, Bundessteuerblatt, 1994, II, 91 (Germany).
Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Fiscal Court), I R 74/93, 31 May 1995, Bundessteuerblatt, 1995, II, 683 (Germany).
Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Fiscal Court), I R 78/80, 9 December 1981, Bundessteuerblatt, 1982, II, 243 (Germany).
Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Fiscal Court), I R 81/09, 28 April 2010, Entscheidungen des Bundesfinanzhof, 229, 252 (Germany).
Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Fiscal Court), I R 107/09, 9 June 2010, Betriebsberater, 2010, 2013 (Germany).
Bundesfinanzhof [Federal Tax Court],28 April 2010, I R 81/09, IStR, 525, No 14 (Germany).
Bundesfinanzhof [Federal Tax Court],4 May 2011, II R 51/09, IStR, 635 (Germany).
Bundesfinanzhof [Federal Tax Court],25 May 2011, I R 95/10, IStR, 688 (Germany).
Canada v. Dudney, 2000 CanLII 14932 (FCA)
Conseil d’État [Supreme Administrative Court], 11 July 2011, No 317024 (France).
Conseil d’État [Supreme Administrative Court], 1 October 2013, Société BNP Paribas, No 351982 (France).
Conseil d’État [Supreme Administrative Court], Minister v Société Bayerische Hypo und Vereinsbank, 11 April 2014, No 344990 (France).
Conseil d’État, (Supreme Administrative Court), 70,906, 15 May 1992, Droit Fiscal, 1992, 42, 1599 (France)
Conseil d’Etat (Supreme Administrative Court), 351702, 12 June 2013, Droit Fiscal, 2013, 46, 511 (France).
Conseil d’État, Assemblee (Supreme Court), 232,276, 28 June 2002, Droit Fiscal, 2002, 36, 1150 (France).
Commissioner of Income Tax v Hyundai Heavy Industries(2007) (Supreme Court India)
Corte Suprema di Cassazione (Supreme Court), 1133, 26 January 2001 (Italy).
Corte Suprema di Cassazione (Supreme Court), 11648, 5 September 2000 (Italy).
Cudd Pressure Control Inc v R, (1998) [1999] 1 CTC 1 (FCA).
Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax v Boston Consulting Group Pte, Ltd, [2005] 94 ITD 31 Mum (India).
Finanzgericht Bayern (Tax Court, Bayern), 7 K 189/04, 12 July 2006, Entscheidungen der Finanzgerichte, 2007, 420 (Germany).
Finanzgericht Bayern (Tax Court, Bayern), 9 K 3576/01, 10 December 2003, Entscheidungen der Finanzgerichte, 2004, 634 (Germany).
Finanzgericht Berlin-Brandenburg (Tax Court, Berlin), 2 September 2010, 9 K 2510/04 B, Entscheidungen der Finanzgerichte, 2011, 415 (Germany).
Finanzgericht Hamburg (Tax Court, Hamburg), VII 244/98, 30 May 2000, Entscheidungen der Finanzgerichte 2000, 1048 (Germany).
Finanzgericht Schleswig-Holstein, (Tax Court, Schleswig-Holstein) 5 K 291/04, 28 March 2006, Entscheidungen der Finanzgerichte, 2006, 824 (Germany).
Greek Supreme Administrative Court, No 917/2010 (Greece).
Hof van Beroep Gent (Court of Appeals, Gent), 1995/FR/59, 1 April 2003, Jurisprudence Fiscale, 2004, 42, 138 (Belgium).
Hof van Cassatie/Cour de Cassation (Supreme Court), F1155N, 29 June 1984, Fiscale Jurisprudentie, 1984, 3, 279 (Belgium).
Hoge Raad der Nederlander (The Netherlands Supreme Court), 93/14/0135, 15 April 1997 (Netherlands).
Hoyesterett (Supreme Court), HR-2011-02245-A, (sak nr 2011/755), 2 December 2011 (Norway).
Tax Court (TC), Room B, 20 Apr 2015, Italtel SPA Sucrusal Argentina s/apelacion a las Ganancias, [2015] (Argentina).
Lagmannsrett Trondheim (Court of Appeal Trondheim), 532/96, 9 December 1996, LF, 1996, 532 (Norway).
Mashreqbank PSC v DDIT, [2007] 14 SOI 1 Mum (India).
McMahon v MNR, [1959] CTC 166 (Ex Ct).
Metchem Canada Inc v Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(2005), [2006] 100 ITD 251 Mum (India).
National Westminster Bank, PLC v United States, (2008) 512 F (3d) 1347 (Fed Cir 2008).
Ostre Landsret (High Court of Eastern Denmark), 14 May 2012, B-307-10 (Denmark).
Primeira Camara (Federal Administrative Tax Court), 16327.000530/2005-28, 17/12/2008, Eagle Distribuidora de Bebidas SA v National Treasury, 101-97.070, First Taxpayers Council (1st Chamber), 2008 (Brazil).
R. v. Melford Developments Inc., [1982] 2 S.C.R. 504
Rutenberg v MNR, [1979] CTC 459 (FCA).
Second Regional Federal Court, 16 March 2010, No 2004.50.01.001354-5 (Brazil).
Specialized Interdistrict Economic Court (SIEC), Atyrau Region, 21 January 2011, Halliburton v Tax Department of Atyrau City, No 2-104/6-11 (Kazakhstan).
Superior Court of Justice, 17 May 2012, No 1.161.467/RS (Brazil).
Superior Court of Justice, 24 April 2014, No 1.325.709/RJ (Brazil).
Supreme Administrative Court, Fourth Chamber, Nos E.2010/621, K.2010/2979, 24 May 2010 (not published) (Turkey).
Supreme Court, 18 April 2012, KCE Deutag Drilling GmbH v Tax Department of Atyrau City, No 3gp-452-12 (Kazakhstan).
Supreme People’s Court, Huancui District of Weihai City, Shandong Province, Donghwa Industrial Corporation v Huancui, Weihai, (2010) Weihuan Xingchuzi No 31 (China).
Supremo Tribunal Federal (Supreme Federal Court), DAU 2,588, 10 April 2013, Confederacao Nacional da Industria – CNI, ADI 2588, Supreme Court of Justice, 2013 (Brazil).
Thiel v Federal Commissioner of Taxation, 22 August 1990, (1990) 171 CLR 338 (Australia).
Tribunal Economico Administrativo Central (Central Administrative Appeals Body), 03099/2004, 21 December 2006 (Spain).
Tribunal Economico Administrativo Central (Central Administrative Appeals Body), 03852/2004, 23 November 2006 (Spain).
Tribunal Supremo (Supreme Court), 1626/2008, 12 January 2012 (Spain).
Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp v R, [1985] 2 CTC 328 (FCTD).
Union of India v Azadi Bacaho Andolan, [2003-TII-02-SC-INTL].
Veracel Celulose SA v National Treasury, AMS 2004 50010013545, 2nd Regional Federal Court TRF2, 2010 (Brazil).
Verfassungsgerichtshof [Constitutional Court], 23 June 2014, No SV2/2013 (Austria).
Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Supreme Administrative Court), 93/14/0135, 15 April 1997 (Austria).
Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Supreme Administrative Court), 97/14/0109, 7 August 2001 (Austria).
Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Supreme Administrative Court), 99/14/0217, 25 September 2001 (Austria).
Wuslich v MNR, [1991] 1 CTC 2473 (TCC).
Xerox Corp v United States Internal Revenue Service, 6 December 1994, 88-1 USTC 9231 (United States).