uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Sweden
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Law, Department of Law.
2012 (English)In: The Impact of the OECD and the UN Model Conventions on Bilateral Tax Treaties / [ed] Michael Lang, Pasquale Pistone, Josef Schuch, Claus Staringer, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012, 1056-1082 p.Chapter in book (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

The relevance of the OECD and UN Model Conventions and their Commentaries for the interpretation of Swedish tax treaties Introduction Sweden has currently concluded almost 100 double taxation conventions that are still in force, most of which closely follow the OECD Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital (OECD Model). This is also the case for the Swedish Model Tax Convention (Swedish Model), which was updated in September 2009. In this chapter I will concentrate on the deviations between Swedish policy (as expressed both in the treaty practice and in the Swedish Model) and the OECD Model. Since the differences in relation to the United Nations Model Double Taxation Convention between Developed and Developing Countries (UN Model) are more frequent, I will rather point to the occasions where Swedish policy corresponds to the UN solutions. However, when Swedish policy is in conformity with both the OECD and the UN Models, this will also be stated. The general, and formal, reason for the close conformity with the OECD Model is of course that Sweden is a Member country of the OECD. Another more pragmatic reason would be that Sweden is a developed country which exports capital to developing countries. It is true that the export of capital hardly dominates over the import of capital in Sweden, but the latter is foremost due to an inflow from other developed countries and, in relation to these countries, the levels of inflow and outflow are relatively similar.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. 1056-1082 p.
Series
Cambridge tax law series
National Category
Law (excluding Law and Society)
Research subject
Fiscal Law
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-260119DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139095686.036Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84953748114ISBN: 9781107019720 (print)ISBN: 1107019729 (print)ISBN: 9781139095686 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-260119DiVA: diva2:846407
Available from: 2015-08-17 Created: 2015-08-17 Last updated: 2016-12-09Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Berglund, Martin

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Berglund, Martin
By organisation
Department of Law
Law (excluding Law and Society)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 339 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf