Australia: Removal of OBU regime and new arbitration process with Belgium

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Australia: Removal of OBU regime and new arbitration process with Belgium

Sponsored by

Sponsored_Firms_piper.png
The OECD identified the OBU concession to be a ‘harmful preferential tax regime’

Jock McCormack of DLA Piper highlights the key tax-related developments from March 2021 in Australia.

Offshore banking unit regime

On March 12 2021, the Australian government announced the proposed removal of the offshore banking unit (OBU) concessional tax regime/rate from the commencement of the 2023–24 income tax year, i.e. effectively a two year grandfathering for existing OBUs.

On March 17 2021, the government subsequently introduced amending legislation into parliament that would firstly, remove the concessional tax treatment (10% tax rate) for OBUs; secondly, remove the interest withholding tax exemption; and thirdly, close the regime for new entrants by withdrawing the treasurer’s ability to declare an entity to be an OBU.

Eligible offshore banking activities include, among other things, financial intermediation between foreign residents or the provision of financial services to foreign residents in respect of transactions occurring outside of Australia. The OBU regime was originally introduced to assist Australian financial services entities to compete with financial services providers located in low tax jurisdictions in the Asia-Pacific region.

In 2018, the OECD identified the OBU concession to be a ‘harmful preferential tax regime’ and Australia undertook measures to remove or limit the concession, subject to grandfathering provisions.

It is expected that the proposed amending legislation will pass through parliament and into law in the coming weeks.

 

Australia/Belgium double tax treaty

The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) has released the memorandum of understanding (MoU) on the mode of application of the arbitration processes between the competent authorities of Australia and Belgium under Article 25 of the Australia/Belgium double tax agreement.

The MoU is operative from March 3 2021 and prescribes the arbitration process, selection and appointment of arbitrators, timing issues, confidentiality and non-disclosure rules, operating procedures and the effect of arbitration decisions which are generally binding on both contracting states (subject to limited exceptions).

Generally, unresolved issues arising from a mutual agreement procedure may be submitted to arbitration. However, this usually occurs only after three years from the date on which a case was presented to the competent authority of one contracting state pursuant to Article 25(1) of the double tax agreement.

The MoU is very similar to the MoU entered into between Australia and Switzerland in September 2020.

 

Jock McCormack

T: +61 2 9286 8253 

E: jock.mccormack@dlapiper.com 

 

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Veteran Elizabeth Arrendale will lead the new advisory practice, which will support clients with M&A tax structuring, post-deal integration, and more
MAP cases keep increasing, and cases closed aren’t keeping pace with the number started, the OECD’s Sriram Govind also told an ITR summit
Nobody likes paperwork or paying money, but the assertion that legal accreditation doesn’t offer value to firms and clients alike is false
Ryan hopes the buyout will help it expand into Asia and the Middle East; in other news, three German finance ministers have called for a suspension of pillar two
SKAT, which was represented by Pinsent Masons, had accused Sanjay Shah and other defendants of fraudulent dividend tax refund claims
TP managers must be able to explain technical issues in simple terms, ITR’s European Transfer Pricing Forum heard
Prudential had challenged HMRC over VAT group relief; in other news, Donald Trump unveiled timber and wood tariffs, and the European Commission published a ViDA implementation strategy
Australia’s CbCR rules have ‘widespread support’ and do not put American companies at a competitive disadvantage, the FACT Coalition said
Baker McKenzie advised two of the member firms involved, while several advisers provided transaction counsel to US-based Grant Thornton Advisors
Foreign remittance requirements put additional administrative burden on Indian law firms and strain their relationship with foreign associate firms, according to practitioners
Gift this article