Canada: Conservative approach taken to BEPS Multilateral Instrument

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Canada: Conservative approach taken to BEPS Multilateral Instrument

intl-updates-small.jpg
caines.JPG
maclagan.jpg

Ian Caines

Bill Maclagan

On June 7 2017, Canada was among 68 countries to sign the OECD's Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (the MLI). The MLI is an instrument developed as part of the OECD's project on base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS), in order to allow participating countries to efficiently implement BEPS recommendations in their tax treaties, without needing to individually renegotiate each treaty.

Canada has provisionally indicated that it is willing to have the MLI cover 75 of its existing tax treaties. However, Canada has also indicated that it expects bilateral negotiations to continue to be preferable (or necessary) in some cases. Underlining this point, on the same day that Canada signed the MLI it also announced planned negotiations to update the German and Swiss tax treaties, neither of which were included in Canada's provisional list of covered treaties for the MLI.

The MLI's provisions cover a range of BEPS subjects, including treaty abuse, hybrid mismatch arrangements, and permanent establishments. Countries signing the MLI must determine which of their tax treaties the MLI will apply to, and may register reservations against particular MLI provisions. Generally speaking, an MLI provision will only modify the terms of a treaty between two countries where the countries both elect to have the MLI apply to the treaty, and neither has reserved on the particular MLI provision. Only in the case of certain provisions reflecting minimum standards for treaty abuse and dispute resolution (including mutual agreement procedures) are signatories prevented from opting out of a provision entirely through reservation. There remains some flexibility regarding how certain minimum standards are satisfied.

Canada has adopted a conservative approach to accepting MLI provisions so far, by registering reservations against all of the optional MLI provisions apart from certain provisions relating to treaty abuse and dispute resolution. This approach allows Canada maximum flexibility going forward, since the terms of the MLI will allow reservations to be withdrawn in the future, but generally will not permit new reservations to be added following ratification.

With regard to treaty abuse, Canada adopted the MLI's principal purpose test (PPT). The PPT is expected to be easier for taxpayers to satisfy than the domestic anti-treaty shopping rules, which had previously been proposed for Canadian domestic legislation (but which the government is no longer pursuing, in light of the MLI), but the exact scope of the PPT, as interpreted by Canadian courts, remains to be seen. Looking past the MLI, Canada has indicated that it will, "where appropriate", seek to implement detailed limitation on benefit provisions through bilateral negotiations.

Dispute resolution is one area where Canada has gone beyond the required minimum standards by also electing to adopt most of the MLI's rules for mandatory binding arbitration. Canada likely feels comfortable with these rules as they are similar to rules that Canada has already accepted under its treaties with the US, UK and Switzerland.

Canada is continuing to pursue its domestic process for ratification, which a government official has suggested could be completed in time for the MLI to enter into force for Canada before the end of 2018. Once the MLI has entered into force for both parties to a particular treaty, the MLI will generally apply to taxes under the treaty for taxable periods beginning at least six months after the MLI has entered into force in both jurisdictions (i.e. mid-2019, for assuming a late 2018 entry into force), except that the MLI will apply in respect of withholding taxes under the treaty starting January 1 of the calendar year following the mutual entry into force.

Bill Maclagan, QC (bill.maclagan@blakes.com), Vancouver and Ian Caines (ian.caines@blakes.com), Toronto

Blake, Cassels & Graydon

Tel: +1 604 631 3336 and +1 416 863 5277

Website: www.blakes.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The deal to acquire ITR's parent company is expected to complete by the end of May 2025
JBS, the biggest meat company in the world, allegedly used Luxembourgian ‘mailbox companies’ to avoid taxes between 2019 and 2022
Despite the conviction of Jessa Dabalos, the Tax Practitioners’ Board’s investigative work continues with five outstanding PwC scandal probes
Heads of tax need to push their teams forward as strategic business advisers to add value across their organisations, says Sandy Markwick
Scott Bessent reportedly felt undermined by Musk naming Gary Shapley as acting IRS commissioner; in other news, Baker Tilly will combine with a top 15 US firm
The promise of nine years’ tax certainty and a ‘rational and pragmatic’ government process makes APAs a no-brainer, Indian tax advisers tell ITR
Despite garnering significant revenues from multinationals, Italy’s digital services tax presents pressing double taxation issues, say Stefano Simontacchi and Francesco Saverio Scandone of BonelliErede
ITR’s research shows that in-house tax counsel in Asia also feel underserved by their advisers’ international networks
World Tax global head of research Jon Moore tells ITR how his team spots standout submissions, and gives early statistical insights into this year’s entries
Australia’s conservative opposition will repeal controversial tax agent reporting rules if elected in the country’s May general election
Gift this article