This content is from: Jurisdictions

World's leading tax controversy advisers unveiled

The fourth edition of International Tax Review's Tax Controversy Leaders guide is out now. Find out who the top-rated disputes specialists are in your jurisdiction.

This year's guide also contains articles authored by listed experts providing an insightful overview of developments in the audit and disputes environments of Brazil, Canada, Mexico, Switzerland, and the US, as well as a roundup of the emerging megatrends in global tax controversy.

Tax Controversy Leaders was launched in 2011 with the aim of helping taxpayers to identify controversy specialists in their jurisdiction who possessed the broad skillset required to help them cope with the range of challenges they were facing from revenue authorities.

Practitioners in the guide have experience in all stages of tax controversy, including pre-audit, audit, alternative dispute resolution (ADR), administrative appeals, litigation and competent authority negotiations, among others.

It is important to include such a diverse array of professionals because the approach to tax controversy is evolving - and in some cases being drastically re-evaluated - in many countries worldwide.

With the increasing realisation that effective dispute resolution is as much about preventing a dispute as it is about managing and resolving one after it arises, the use of advance and real-time negotiations between taxpayers and tax authorities continues to rise.

Facilitating these processes is therefore of the utmost importance. Getting the right advice, from the right people, is essential. When considering a transaction or other business activity which could be open to a tax challenge, it has never been more important to be proactive and ensure you have a strong team of advisers on hand to assist. This guide can help you make sure you are picking the right people.

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) - in the form of pre-filing agreements, cooperative compliance, administrative appeals, mediation and arbitration - has continued to prosper as a mechanism that can bring benefits for tax authorities and taxpayers. But ADR regimes around the world differ markedly. Most are in their infancy, and best practices are still being established but, from a taxpayer perspective, ADR-related transparency obligations are the trade-off for developing a more cooperative relationship with the authorities.

Mutual agreement procedure (MAP) statistics indicate a surge in tax audits and disputes, while instances of triangular cases are also on the rise, implying that national authorities are increasingly staking claim to the same income.

Authorities around the world were already becoming more aggressive before the global financial crisis, particularly in the area of anti-abuse rules, and figures such as the Australian Tax Commissioner winning 75% of cases in 2013 indicate the importance of enlisting the help of quality advisers to reach a satisfactory outcome. Many authorities have also invested in hiring senior private sector professionals, so taxpayes must be prepared to engage with increasingly knowledgeable and technically-skilled personnel.

But this hiring trend goes both ways. Many of the leaders in this guide have experience of working at various national tax authorities. An acute understanding of both sides' approach to controversy and litigation matters means taxpayers can establish a position of comfort and confidence, and with levels of authority aggression reaching new heights, this can be an invaluable asset in your tax dispute defence arsenal.

The practitioners in this fourth edition of Tax Controversy Leaders have experience in all stages of tax controversy and can therefore cater for the full range of taxpayers' dispute resolution needs in each of the 51 jurisdictions covered.

Methodology

Inclusion in Tax Controversy Leaders is based on a minimum number of nominations received. Besides the required number of nominations, entrants into the guide must also possess (1) evidence of outstanding success in the last year; and (2) consistently positive feedback from peers and clients. Firms and individuals cannot pay to be recommended in Tax Controversy Leaders.

Click here to access Tax Controversy Leaders 2014

Related