Search results for

On May 2 2006 the Luxembourg government announced some changes in corporate income tax, income tax, value-added tax (VAT) and social security.

The price for refined oil products in China has long remained at a lower level compared to the international market due to China's heavily regulated pricing system. With the international price of crude oil soaring since 2003, the disparity between the price of crude oil and refined oil products in the Chinese market has increased. This could lead to a number of potentially damaging outcomes controlled.

On April 27 2006 ECJ Advocate General Geelhoed issued his opinion in Denkavit International BV and Denkavit France SARL (case 170/05). He states that the withholding tax that France applied to outbound dividends whereas domestic distributions would be almost totally exempt is in breach of article 43 of the EC Treaty.

On May 2 2006 the new Conservative government tabled its first federal Budget. Included was a rate reduction in the federal goods and services tax from 7% to 6%, as well as a number of prominent tax measures affecting business, namely a reduction in the general corporate tax rate and the elimination of the corporate surtax and federal capital tax.

July 1 sees the start of a significant expansion of the Tax Avoidance Disclosure regime in the UK. Richard Collier-Keywood, of PricewaterhouseCoopers explains what the new regulations aim to capture and comments on whether they are likely to be successful

Joel Walters, the new leader of Vodafone's tax department, tells Ralph Cunningham about the role and how it fits in with the rest of the company

Highlights and photos from the first-ever Asia Tax Executive Forum in Singapore in April

The Opinion from an advocate-general of the European Court of Justice in the Cadbury Schweppes case hints that the court could follow its recent trend of giving some hope to both national governments and taxpayers at the same time, when its decision is issued at the end of 2006 or early next year.

The Indian Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) in the case of Morgan Stanley & Co v DIT recently examined whether a US company had a permanent establishment (PE) in India under the India-USA tax treaty (the treaty) on account of outsourcing certain services to its affiliate subsidiary in India and from deputation of personnel to the subsidiary. The personnel who were to be deputed to India were to be engaged either for providing stewardship services to the Indian company or were to be seconded to work under the control of the Indian company.