The Experts below are selected from a list of 13146 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Alice Pirlot - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
don t blame it on WTO Law an analysis of the alleged WTO Law incompatibility of destination based taxes
Florida Tax Review, 2020Co-Authors: Alice PirlotAbstract:The idea that corporations should be taxed in the jurisdiction where they make their sales or provide their services is getting more and more attention in the policy debate on international taxation. In 2016, U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan proposed to introduce a destination-based cash flow tax (DBCFT) in order to reform the United States’ corporate income tax (CIT). Moreover, in the last few years, more and more countries have considered the adoption of new rules to tax the digital economy in the country where the users and/or the consumers are located. These proposals differ from traditional direct taxes imposed on corporations. They borrow from the tax design of indirect taxes, such as sales taxes or value added taxes. Consequently, it is difficult to predict whether these sui generis destination-based taxes will fit in with superior legal provisions, in particular international tax and trade Law. One recurring legal argument against destination-based taxes is that they are likely to violate the Law of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Using the DBCFT as a case study, this Article will assess the different conflicts that could arise between new types of destination-based taxes and international trade Law. Based on a critical approach informed by the analysis of the history and case Law surrounding destination-based taxes, this Article concludes that the likelihood that a DBCFT would be found incompatible with international trade Law is much lower than past legal scholars have concluded. WTO Law does not in itself prevent countries from adopting such taxes. Since this conclusion could be extended by analogy to other, new types of destination-based taxes, this Article could have important implications for policymakers who are willing to move towards taxation in the country of destination.
-
don t blame it on WTO Law an analysis of the alleged WTO Law incompatibility of destination based taxes
Social Science Research Network, 2019Co-Authors: Alice PirlotAbstract:The idea that corporations should be taxed in the jurisdiction where they make their sales or provide their services is getting more and more attention in the policy debate on international taxation. In 2016, U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan proposed to introduce a destination-based cash flow tax (DBCFT) in order to reform America’s corporate income tax (CIT). Moreover, in the last few years, more and more countries have considered the adoption of new rules to tax the digital economy in the country where the users and/or the consumers are located. These proposals differ from traditional direct taxes imposed on corporations. They borrow from the tax design of indirect taxes, such as sales taxes or value added taxes. Consequently, it is difficult to predict whether these sui generis destination-based taxes will fit in with superior legal provisions, in particular international tax and trade Law. One recurring legal argument against destination-based taxes is that they are likely to violate the Law of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Using the DBCFT as a case study, this Article will assess the different conflicts that could arise between new types of destination-based taxes and international trade Law. Based on a critical approach informed by the analysis of the history and case-Law surrounding destination-based taxes, this Article concludes that the likelihood for a DBCFT to be found incompatible with international trade Law is much lower than past legal scholars have concluded. WTO Law does not in itself prevent countries from adopting such taxes. Since this conclusion could be extended by analogy to other, new types of destination-based taxes, this Article could have important implications for policy-makers who are willing to move towards taxation in the country of destination.
-
environmental border tax adjustments and international trade Law fostering environmental protection
2017Co-Authors: Alice PirlotAbstract:This timely book brings clarity to the debate on the new legal phenomenon of environmental border tax adjustments. It will help form a better understanding of the role and limits these taxes have on environmental policies in combating global environmental challenges, such as climate change. The book is structured around three main topics: the rationale, the tax design and the legal framework of environmental border tax adjustments. This three-fold analysis gives an overview of the legal issues that should be considered before the adoption of environmental border taxes, including carbon tax adjustments. Alice Pirlot’s critical approach to the arguments surrounding traditional and environmental border tax adjustments allows for detailed legal analysis going beyond the question of their compatibility with WTO Law, while also reviewing the economic argument. This book will prove to be essential reading for legal scholars and professionals alike, as well as benefitting environmental NGOs, stakeholders in energy-intensive industries and policymakers looking for in-depth insight into environmental border tax adjustments.
A F M Maniruzzaman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
addressing the global climate change problem in gatt WTO Law the vision of a new international climate Law based on international distributive justice
Social Science Research Network, 2011Co-Authors: A F M Maniruzzaman, Ahmad S A S AltayerAbstract:‘International distribution justice’, not ‘most favored nation’ (MFN), is the appropriate core principle to govern a Law of obligations such as that of the World Trade Organization (WTO). The international distributive justice principle delivers opportunity for economic development because it observes the ‘differences’ principle that characterizes distributive justice, whereas the MFN principle does not, for it distributes obligations erga omnes partes. On the international distributive justice model, obligations are distributed in accordance with WTO member countries’ capacities to bear them. The distribution metric is simple: the degrees of obligation to observe WTO Law should range from ‘nil’ to ‘absolute’ along the range of ‘least-developed’, ‘developing’ and ‘developed’ countries. The rank ordering of countries should occur on the basis of their gross domestic product (GDP) status alone, for that status is sufficiently indicative of every country’s economic condition. Accordingly, the current WTO sense of ‘least-developed’, ‘developing’ and ‘developed’ countries should be abandoned in favor of their distinction in terms of their GDP status. Quite properly, there is global interest in the development of a climate Law that will deliver the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The core principle of that Law must also be international distributive justice, in order that there be an equitable distribution of the cost burden of GHG reduction. The concept of international distributive justice is discernible in the ‘common but differentiated responsibilities’ doctrine of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), but there is no clear relationship between MEAs and the WTO/GATT legislative scheme. A new climate Law securely based on the international distributive justice principle will determine that relationship once it is also the core principle of WTO Law. Then only the legislative power of the United Nations is required to give the new climate Law a coercive power that obliges all GHG emitters.
Ahmad S A S Altayer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
addressing the global climate change problem in gatt WTO Law the vision of a new international climate Law based on international distributive justice
Social Science Research Network, 2011Co-Authors: A F M Maniruzzaman, Ahmad S A S AltayerAbstract:‘International distribution justice’, not ‘most favored nation’ (MFN), is the appropriate core principle to govern a Law of obligations such as that of the World Trade Organization (WTO). The international distributive justice principle delivers opportunity for economic development because it observes the ‘differences’ principle that characterizes distributive justice, whereas the MFN principle does not, for it distributes obligations erga omnes partes. On the international distributive justice model, obligations are distributed in accordance with WTO member countries’ capacities to bear them. The distribution metric is simple: the degrees of obligation to observe WTO Law should range from ‘nil’ to ‘absolute’ along the range of ‘least-developed’, ‘developing’ and ‘developed’ countries. The rank ordering of countries should occur on the basis of their gross domestic product (GDP) status alone, for that status is sufficiently indicative of every country’s economic condition. Accordingly, the current WTO sense of ‘least-developed’, ‘developing’ and ‘developed’ countries should be abandoned in favor of their distinction in terms of their GDP status. Quite properly, there is global interest in the development of a climate Law that will deliver the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The core principle of that Law must also be international distributive justice, in order that there be an equitable distribution of the cost burden of GHG reduction. The concept of international distributive justice is discernible in the ‘common but differentiated responsibilities’ doctrine of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), but there is no clear relationship between MEAs and the WTO/GATT legislative scheme. A new climate Law securely based on the international distributive justice principle will determine that relationship once it is also the core principle of WTO Law. Then only the legislative power of the United Nations is required to give the new climate Law a coercive power that obliges all GHG emitters.
Annaalexandra Marhold - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
WTO Law and economics and restrictive practices in energy trade the case of the opec cartel
The Journal of World Energy Law & Business, 2016Co-Authors: Annaalexandra MarholdAbstract:The World Trade Organization cannot deal comprehensively with restrictive export practices maintained by energy cartels such as the OPEC. The main reason for this is the absence of competition rules in the multilateral trading system. However, in spite of the fact that the WTO does not have rules on competition, it does provide for other rules, such as GATT Article XI on the General Elimination of Quantitative Restrictions. This article will take a Law and economics approach and explore whether restrictive practices in the energy sector as maintained by OPEC could be caught by this article. It will analyse whether OPEC’s ‘monopolist market power instrument of choice’, namely the administration of production quota on petroleum, could fall within the definition of this Article. To this end, this contribution aims to understand the economic and legal rationales and functioning of both the WTO and OPEC.
-
subsidy regulation in WTO Law some implications for fossil fuels and renewable energy
Social Science Research Network, 2016Co-Authors: Annaalexandra MarholdAbstract:This contribution discusses WTO subsidies disciplines in the context of the energy sector. After laying out the relevant disciplines, it will discuss the paradox of WTO Law with respect to subsidies towards fossil fuels vis-a-vis those towards renewable energy. It is clear that subsidies on clean energy production and consumption are needed to correct market failures and to promote legitimate policy goals such as contributing to sustainable development through the scale up of clean energy, including expanding its trade.2 However, experience has shown that support schemes for clean energy by their nature and design make them sensitive to WTO dispute settlement. Much more harmful subsidies on fossil fuels, on the other hand, are omnipresent yet often escape being addressed in the multilateral trading system. The contribution will draw upon the examples of ‘energy dual pricing’ and Feed-In Tariffs (FITs). It will argue that while it may be difficult to tackle fossil fuels subsidies in the WTO forum, more efforts are needed to (re)legalise environmental subsidies.
Christoph B Graber - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
indigenous cultural heritage and fair trade voluntary certification standards in the light of wipo and WTO Law and policymaking
Social Science Research Network, 2011Co-Authors: Christoph B Graber, Jessica C LaiAbstract:Private initiatives of voluntary certification standards appear to be an attractive alternative to top-down approaches in the field of ICH and development. Over the last 50 years, many different Indigenous communities have attempted to use certification trade marks to promote their authentic cultural products, while at the same time marginalising those that are not. These different schemes have had varying success, but arguably none have been as visually unsuccessful as the government-funded Australian system, which collapsed within two years of its inception. On the other side of the scale, the Fairtrade Label is considered to be an international triumphant success. This paper assesses why the Australian Authenticity Label system failed, as compared to the success of the Fairtrade Label, and how these conclusions can be used for existing and future endeavours. It further discusses whether such a voluntary certification system would be compliant with WIPO and WTO Law and policy. It concludes by looking towards the future and the possibility of the Fairtrade Label being extended to meet the interests of Indigenous communities. An updated version is published in INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ INNOVATION. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PATHWAYS TO DEVELOPMENT, Peter Drahos and Susy Frankel, eds, pp. 95-119. Canberra: ANU
-
institutionalization of creativity in traditional societies and in international trade Law
2010Co-Authors: Christoph B GraberAbstract:Modern legal systems were not developed to deal with the modes of creativity and the meanings behind cultural expressions of traditional societies. The protection of creative expressions and knowledge through intellectual property rights has a commoditizing effect, inconsistent with the customary norms of many traditional societies, such that the propertization is offensive. This paper assesses the concept of creativity, from a modern and traditional perspective, and the effect of globalization on Indigenous peoples’ views on the trade of their cultural heritage. It then analyzes Indigenous creativity in the realm of international trade Law and how WTO Law could better serve the interests of Indigenous peoples, with respect to their participation in the international trade of certain aspects of their cultural heritage, and discusses how the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples may affect such trade.
