摘要
伴随间接征收概念的不断扩张,作为东道国合理管制权力的征税权也逐渐被投资者质疑从而提起征收之诉而要求补偿。过度的征税、歧视性的征税以及逾越善意本质的征税有可能被视为间接征收。《北美自由贸易协定》、《欧洲人权条约》等极力倡导保护私人投资权利的国际条约在其仲裁与司法实践中却将天平倾斜于东道国,设置了争端解决的前置程序或形成了实践中的认定标准。我国外资征税体制虽然发生了重要的变革,但无论从税率的设置还是实施的普遍性和效果来看都不构成对外资的间接征收。
With the development of the concept of indirect expropriation,the taxation power of the host county,as the legitimate police power,has gradually been challenged by the foreign investors and thus they file lawsuit against the expropriation for compensation.The excessive and discriminatory taxation,and non-bona taxation may be deemed as indirect expropriation.NAFTA and ECHR Convention,which are featured as providing more protections to the investors,and providing their preference to the host country,including setting up procedural prerequisite and framing the identifying standards in the practice.Although the foreign capital taxation system in China has undergone great changes,it cannot be deemed as indirect expropriation in terms of tax rate setting or the universality and effect of implementation.
出处
《企业经济》
北大核心
2012年第5期160-163,共4页
Enterprise Economy
关键词
征税
间接征收
国际条约
区分
taxation
indirect expropriation
international treaties
differentiation
