GAAR - Trinidad & Tobago - Iatj.net

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Fictitious transactions • Fictitious transactions are generally regarded as a sham which in effect means the appearance of creating legal rights or obligations between the parties different from the actual rights and obligations if any (Snook v London and West Riding Investments per Lord Diplock) 3rd IATJ Assembly Munich 18‐19 October 2012 38
Artificial transactions • Artificial transactions were defined by the Tax Appeal Board of <strong>Trinidad</strong> & <strong>Tobago</strong> to mean: • 1. a non arm’s length transaction where one party has control over the other • 2. which does not make commercial sense in that it is unnatural and not one expected of persons acting freely and independently with each other • 3. there is a substantial disparity between the price at which the transaction is carried out and the fair market value • 4. the circumstances surounding the transaction are such that one can fairly infer that it was a device or arrangement to reduce or avoid tax (Z Estates v Board of Inland Revenue) 3rd IATJ Assembly Munich 18‐19 October 2012 39
Page 1 and 2: ANTHONY DJ GAFOOR TRINIDAD & TOBAGO
Page 3 and 4: Topical nature of Anti‐Avoidance
Page 5 and 6: Distinguishing Tax Evasion, Avoidan
Page 7 and 8: Royal Commission on the Taxation of
Page 9 and 10: Review of Anti‐Avoidance principl
Page 11 and 12: Review of Anti‐Avoidance principl
Page 13 and 14: Common Law jurisdictions • Have i
Page 15 and 16: International tax evasion and avoid
Page 17 and 18: Hybrid developments • These may b
Page 19 and 20: Tax Treaties • Bilateral tax trea
Page 21 and 22: • However, for many developing co
Page 23 and 24: 3rd IATJ Assembly Munich 18‐19 Oc
Page 25 and 26: Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas • T
Page 27 and 28: Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas • I
Page 31 and 32: Treatment of anti‐avoidance in th
Page 33 and 34: Leading anti‐avoidance cases in t
Page 35 and 36: Jamaica and Barbados • These are
Page 37: GAAR in the Caribbean • Typically
Page 43 and 44: Wide scope of the anti‐avoidance
Page 45 and 46: Wide scope of anti‐avoidance prov
Page 47 and 48: St. Lucia • It was argued by the
Page 49 and 50: Jamaica • The leading case from t
Page 51 and 52: Jamaica • The Privy Council held
Page 53 and 54: Consequences of invoking the genera
Page 55 and 56: Specific Anti‐Avoidance Provision
Page 57 and 58: (3) Where a person transfers proper
Page 61 and 62: Background • In 1980s‐1990s, a
Page 63 and 64: Arguments • The rhetorical contes
Page 65 and 66: Lessons to be learnt • The need f
Page 67 and 68: Closing thoughts • Adam Smith oft

GAAR - Trinidad & Tobago - Iatj.net

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?