| Summary: |
This thesis is concerned with the consequences for international fiscal law, and the development of international fiscal law, of unilateral anti-tax haven legislation. For the purposes of the discussion, anti-tax haven legislation of the U.S. and the U.K. has been taken as examples of unilateral legislation directed against the use of tax havens. There are a number of differences between the statutory form of the U.S. and the U.K. legislation and these are reflected in the analysis of the two sets of measures. The thesis is divided into four parts, A-D. Chapter one of Part A commences with a discussion of the nature of international fiscal law and of the policies, principles and objectives underlying international fiscal law. It is noted that a primary objective underlying international fiscal law, determined by reference to economic criteria, can be identified. This objective, the removal of fiscal distortions to the free movement of capital and persons and goods and services, in turn dictates policies and principles underlying international fiscal law which seek to implement or deliver this primary objective. These policies and principles represent the prescriptive tools which are used in the analysis of unilateral anti-tax haven legislation throughout this thesis. After this first chapter on international fiscal law, the following two chapters deal with the concepts of international tax avoidance and tax havens respectively. Both concepts are of considerable relevance to international fiscal law, and, more importantly here, to the assumptions on which unilateral anti-tax haven (CFC) legislation is based. Parts B and C are each divided into two chapters which consider the official attitudes to international tax avoidance and tax havens and the background to, and development of, the CFC legislation of the U.S. (in Part B) and the U.K. (in Part C). Part D represents the conclusion of this thesis and contains two chapters. The first is concerned with an evaluation of unilateral anti-tax haven legislation, according to the criteria of international fiscal law. The final chapter of Part D offers conclusions on the consequences for international fiscal law of the unilateral anti-tax haven legislation discussed in the main body of this thesis. The law is stated as at 30 November 1988.
|
