Explanation of Proposed Income Tax Treaty Between the United States and Belgium

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Explanation of Proposed Income Tax Treaty Between the United States and Belgium EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED INCOME TAX TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND BELGIUM Scheduled for a Hearing Before the COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE On July 17, 2007 ____________ Prepared by the Staff of the JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION July 13, 2007 JCX-45-07 CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 I. SUMMARY........................................................................................................................ 2 II. OVERVIEW OF U.S. TAXATION OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND INVESTMENT AND U.S. TAX TREATIES .................................................................... 4 A. U.S. Tax Rules .............................................................................................................. 4 B. U.S. Tax Treaties .......................................................................................................... 6 III. OVERVIEW OF TAXATION IN BELGIUM................................................................... 8 A. National Income Taxes................................................................................................. 8 B. International Aspects of Taxation in Belgium............................................................ 10 C. Other Taxes................................................................................................................. 12 IV. THE UNITED STATES AND BELGIUM: CROSS-BORDER INVESTMENT AND TRADE.................................................................................................................... 13 A. Introduction................................................................................................................. 13 B. Overview of International Transactions Between the United States and Belgium..... 14 C. Income Taxes and Withholding Taxes on Cross-Border Income Flows .................... 17 D. Analyzing the Economic Effects of Protocols to Income Tax Treaties...................... 18 V. EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED TREATY AND PROTOCOL .................................. 19 Article 1. General Scope.................................................................................................. 19 Article 2. Taxes Covered ................................................................................................. 22 Article 3. General Definitions.......................................................................................... 22 Article 4. Resident ........................................................................................................... 24 Article 5. Permanent Establishment................................................................................. 26 Article 6. Income from Real Property.............................................................................. 28 Article 7. Business Profits................................................................................................ 29 Article 8. Shipping and Air Transport ............................................................................. 33 Article 9. Associated Enterprises..................................................................................... 34 Article 10. Dividends....................................................................................................... 35 Article 11. Interest ........................................................................................................... 41 Article 12. Royalties ........................................................................................................ 44 Article 13. Gains .............................................................................................................. 45 Article 14. Income from Employment............................................................................. 47 Article 15. Directors’ Fees............................................................................................... 47 Article 16. Entertainers and Sportsmen ........................................................................... 48 Article 17. Pensions, Social Security, Annuities, Alimony, and Child Support.............. 50 Article 18. Government Service ...................................................................................... 54 i Article 19. Students, Trainees, Teachers and Researchers .............................................. 55 Article 20. Other Income ................................................................................................. 56 Article 21. Limitation on Benefits ................................................................................... 57 Article 22. Relief from Double Taxation......................................................................... 68 Article 23. Non-Discrimination ....................................................................................... 72 Article 24. Mutual Agreement Procedure........................................................................ 73 Article 25. Exchange of Information and Administrative Assistance ............................. 79 Article 26. Assistance in Collection................................................................................. 80 Article 27. Members of Diplomatic Missions and Consular Posts.................................. 81 Article 28. Entry into Force ............................................................................................. 81 Article 29. Termination.................................................................................................... 82 VI. ISSUES ............................................................................................................................. 83 A. Arbitration................................................................................................................... 83 B. Treaty Shopping.......................................................................................................... 92 C. Zero Rate of Withholding Tax on Direct Dividends .................................................. 96 D. Students, Trainees, Teachers and Researchers ......................................................... 101 ii INTRODUCTION This pamphlet,1 prepared by the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation, describes the proposed income tax treaty between the United States and Belgium as supplemented by a protocol (the “proposed protocol”). Unless otherwise specified, the proposed treaty and the proposed protocol are hereinafter referred to collectively as the “proposed treaty.” The proposed treaty was signed on November 27, 2006. The Senate Committee on Foreign Relations (the “Committee”) has scheduled a public hearing on the proposed treaty for July 17, 2007.2 Part I of the pamphlet provides a summary of the proposed treaty. Part II provides a brief overview of U.S. tax laws relating to international trade and investment and of U.S. income tax treaties in general. Part III contains a brief overview of Belgian tax laws. Part IV provides a discussion of investment and trade flows between the United States and Belgium. Part V contains an article-by-article explanation of the proposed treaty. Part VI contains a discussion of issues relating to the proposed treaty. 1 This pamphlet may be cited as follows: Joint Committee on Taxation, Explanation of Proposed Income Tax Treaty Between the United States and Belgium (JCX-45-07), July 13, 2007. References to “the Code” are to the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. 2 For a copy of the proposed treaty, see Senate Treaty Doc. 110-3. 1 I. SUMMARY The principal purposes of the proposed treaty are to reduce or eliminate double taxation of income earned by residents of either country from sources within the other country and to prevent avoidance or evasion of the taxes of the two countries. The proposed treaty also is intended to promote close economic cooperation between the two countries and to eliminate possible barriers to trade and investment caused by overlapping taxing jurisdictions of the two countries. As in other U.S. tax treaties, these objectives principally are achieved through each country’s agreement to limit, in certain specified situations, its right to tax income derived from its territory by residents of the other country. For example, the proposed treaty contains provisions under which each country generally agrees not to tax business income derived from sources within that country by residents of the other country unless the business activities in the taxing country are substantial enough to constitute a permanent establishment (Article 7). Similarly, the proposed treaty contains certain exemptions under which residents of one country performing personal services in the other country will not be required to pay tax in the other country unless their contact with the other country exceeds specified minimums (Articles 14 and 16). The proposed treaty provides that dividends and certain gains derived by a resident of either country from sources within the other country generally may be taxed by both countries (Articles 10 and 13); however, the rate of tax that the source country may impose on a resident of the other country on dividends may be limited by the proposed treaty and source-country tax may be eliminated on certain dividends in which certain ownership thresholds and other requirements are satisfied (Article 10). The proposed treaty provides that, subject to certain rules and exceptions, interest and royalties derived by a resident of either
Recommended publications
  • Owens: the Foreign Tax Credit
    REVIEWS THE FoREIGN TAx CREDIT. By Elizabeth A. Owens. Cambridge: The Law School of Harvard University, 1961. Pp. xxxi, 634. $20.00. THE foreign tax credit provisions of the Internal Revenue Code embody United States policy toward the taxation of the foreign source income of do- mestic taxpayers. By allowing credit for foreign income taxes paid, or con- sidered paid, by domestic corporations, citizens and residents, the United States asserts only a secondary claim to the foreign source income of such taxpayers. In other words, foreign governments are regarded as having the primary right to tax income arising from sources within their borders up to the burden im- posed by the United States. The foreign tax credit device thereby serves the dual purpose of eliminating double taxation and of maintaining tax equality between domestic taxpayers with only domestic source income and those with foreign source income. The credit system, however, does not work perfectly in all instances; the statutory provisions contained in five sections of the Code ' have been subject to considerable controversy and many unanswered questions remain. These questions of law and policy are the main concern of The Foreign Tax Credit. The scope of the work may be considered from a number of viewpoints. In the first place, it may be considered from the standpoint of how fully the prob- lems of the foreign tax credit have been developed. Second, the scope of the treatment of important collateral areas may be appraised. Third, the book may be examined in terms of the depth of its analysis of common as well as the heretofore neglected problems.
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of the European Tax Havens
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Maftei, Loredana Article An Overview of the European Tax Havens CES Working Papers Provided in Cooperation with: Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University Suggested Citation: Maftei, Loredana (2013) : An Overview of the European Tax Havens, CES Working Papers, ISSN 2067-7693, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi, Centre for European Studies, Iasi, Vol. 5, Iss. 1, pp. 41-50 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/198228 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ www.econstor.eu AN OVERVIEW OF THE EUROPEAN TAX HAVENS Loredana Maftei* Abstract: In the actual context of economic globalization, tax havens represent a significant obstacle for global governments seeking to increase their fiscal incomes and a source of polarization of income and wealth.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Revenue Ordinance
    2021 Revenue Ordinance As Proposed on December 5, 2019 ii Revenue Ordinance of 2021 to Levy Taxes and Fees and Raise Revenue For the City of Savannah Georgia As adopted on December 18, 2020 Published by City of Savannah Revenue Department Post Office Box 1228 Savannah, GA 31402-1228 CITY OF SAVANNAH 2021 CITY COUNCIL Mayor Van R. Johnson, II Post 1 At-Large Post 2 At-Large Kesha Gibson-Carter Alicia Miller Blakely District 1 District 2 Bernetta B. Lanier Detric Leggett District 3 District 4 Linda Wilder-Bryan Nick Palumbo District 5 District 6 Dr. Estella Edwards Shabazz Kurtis Purtee Revenue Ordinance Compiled By Revenue Director/City Treasurer Ashley L. Simpson Utility Billing Manager Nicole Brantley Treasury Manager Joel Paulk Business Tax & Alcohol License Manager Judee Jones Revenue Special Projects Coordinator Saja Aures Table of Contents Revenue Ordinance of 2021 ....................................................................................................................... 1 ARTICLE A. GENERAL ............................................................................................................................... 1 Section 1. SCOPE; TAXES AND FEES .................................................................................................... 1 Section 2. DEFINITIONS ........................................................................................................................... 1 Section 3. JANUARY 1 GOVERNS FOR YEAR ......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre
    arqus Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre www.arqus.info Diskussionsbeitrag Nr. 3 Caren Sureth / Ralf Maiterth Wealth Tax as Alternative Minimum Tax ? − The Impact of a Wealth Tax on Business Structure and Strategy − April 2005 arqus Diskussionsbeiträge zur Quantitativen Steuerlehre arqus Discussion Papers on Quantitative Tax Research ISSN 1861-8944 Wealth Tax as Alternative Minimum Tax ? – The Impact of a Wealth Tax on Business Structure and Strategy – Caren Sureth∗ † and Ralf Maiterth∗∗ April 2005 ∗ Prof. Dr. Caren Sureth, University of Paderborn, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Warburger Str. 100, D-33098 Paderborn, Germany, e-mail: [email protected] † corresponding author ∗∗ Dr. Ralf Maiterth, University of Hanover, Department of Economics, K¨onigsworther Platz 1, D-30167 Hanover, Germany, e-mail: [email protected] Wealth Tax as Alternative Minimum Tax ? – The Impact of a Wealth Tax on Business Structure and Strategy – Abstract An alternative minimum tax (AMT) is often regarded as desirable. We analyze a wealth tax at corporate and personal level that is designed as an AMT as proposed by the German Green Party. This wealth tax is imputable to profit taxes and is hence intended to prevent multiple (multistage) taxation. Referring to data from annual reports and the German Central Bank we model enterprises of different structure, industry, size and legal status. We show that companies in the service sector which generally maintain rather high gearing rates are more frequently subjected to the wealth tax than capital intensive industries. This result runs counter to well-known effects of a common wealth tax. Capital intensive firms, e.g. in the metal industry, are levied with definitive wealth tax only if they have large loss carry-forwards or extremely volatile profits.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 Foreign Tax Credit P.302 Structural Tax Options for an Outbound U.S
    Chapter 5 Foreign Tax Credit p.302 Structural tax options for an outbound U.S. enterprise in (1) foreign destination country and (2) any conduit country: 1) Branch (e.g., a disregarded entity) - current U.S. income taxation on profits & loss deduction availability in the U.S. 2) Foreign corporate subsidiary - income tax deferral of U.S. income tax & no possible U.S. loss utilization Is the entity decision controlled by (1) tax planning or (2) non-tax business considerations? 4/9/2013 (c) William P. Streng 1 Mitigating Possible Double National Level Taxation Possible double taxation exposure exists (1) since the U.S. income tax is imposed on a worldwide basis & (2) assuming foreign country income tax. Options for unilateral relief (as provided by U.S.): 1) a tax deduction for the foreign tax paid (not completely eliminating double taxation) 2) a (limited) credit for the foreign tax paid (primarily used by U.S.); limited to offsetting U.S. tax on taxpayer’s foreign income. 3) exemption under a territorial system (only 4/9/2013source country taxation)(c) William P. Strengand not in U.S. 2 Bilateral (i.e., Income Tax Treaty) Relief p.306 Double tax relief accomplished under a U.S. bilateral income tax treaty. See U.S. Model, Article 23 (2006). - possible shifting of the primary income tax liability from source location to residence jurisdiction. - but, a U.S. income tax treaty does include a “savings clause” - enabling the continuing worldwide tax jurisdiction of U.S. citizens, residents or corporations. 4/9/2013 (c) William P.
    [Show full text]
  • Panama Papers Leaks
    GRAY TOLUB1 LLP Focusing on Domestic & International Taxation, Real Estate, Corporate, and Trust & Estate Matters. Client AlertAPRIL 04, 2016 AUTHORS Armin Gray Benjamin Tolub PANAMA PAPERS LEAKS: SUBJECT THE TAX MAN COMETH OVDP Panama On April 03, 2016, the press reported that 11.5 million records were leaked from Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca. The records detail offshore holdings of the celebrities, politicians, and the mega-rich many of which were purportedly engaged in illegal activities including tax evasion. Such leaks have been referred to as the “Panama papers” or the “Wikileaks of the mega-rich” by some newspapers.1 More details can be found at the website of the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (“ICIJ”), which have summarized their findings as follows: The largest cross-border journalism collaboration ever has uncovered a giant leak of documents from Mossack Fonseca, a global law firm based in Panama. The secret files: • Include 11.5 million records, dating back nearly 40 years – making it the largest leak in offshore history. Contains details on more than 214,000 offshore entities connected to people in more than 200 countries and territories. Company owners 1 See Toppo, Greg, “Worldwide, jaws drop to Panama Papers’ Leak”, USA Today, last accessed April 3, 2016, available at: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/04/03/reactions- panama-papers-leak-go-global/82589874/. www.graytolub.com Client Alert Page 2 in [sic] billionaires, sports stars, drug smugglers and fraudsters. • Reveal the offshore holdings 140 politicians and public officials around the world – including 12 current and former world leaders.
    [Show full text]
  • Tax Avoidance Due to the Zero Capital Gains Tax
    2 Capital gains tax regimes abroad—countries without capital gains taxes Tax avoidance due to the zero capital gains tax Some indirect evidence from Hong Kong BERRY F. C . H SU AND CHI-WA YUEN Consistent with its image as a free-market economy with minimal government intervention, Hong Kong is a city with low and simple taxation. Unlike most industrial and developed economies with full-fledged tax structures, Hong Kong has a relatively narrow tax base. It has direct taxes, which account for about 60% of the total tax revenue. These direct levies fall on earnings and profits and in- clude an estate duty. Hong Kong also has indirect taxes, which ac- count for the remaining 40%. These consist of rates, duties, and taxes on motor vehicles and so on.1 Nonetheless, Hong Kong has neither a sales or value-added tax nor a capital gains tax. In this paper, we explain the absence of the capital gains tax and provide some indirect evidence on the tax-avoidance effects induced by this fact. Notes will be found on pages 51–53. 39 40 International evidence on capital gains taxes Why is there no capital gains tax in Hong Kong? Under the British colonial rule, no tax was levied on capital gains in Hong Kong.2 This continues to be the case since the Chinese gov- ernment took over in 1997. During the pre-1997 (colonial) period, the tax structure in Hong Kong was based on the British tax system, which uses the source concept of income for the taxation of different kinds of in- come.
    [Show full text]
  • Doing Business in Belgium
    DOING BUSINESS IN BELGIUM CONTENTS 1 – Introduction 3 2 – Business environment 4 3 – Foreign Investment 7 4 – Setting up a Business 9 5 – Labour 17 6 – Taxation 20 7 – Accounting & reporting 29 8 – UHY Representation in Belgium 31 DOING BUSINESS IN BELGIUM 3 1 – INTRODUCTION UHY is an international organisation providing accountancy, business management and consultancy services through financial business centres in over 100 countries throughout the world. Business partners work together through the network to conduct transnational operations for clients as well as offering specialist knowledge and experience within their own national borders. Global specialists in various industry and market sectors are also available for consultation. This detailed report providing key issues and information for investors considering business operations in Belgium has been provided by the office of UHY representatives: UHY-CDP PARTNERS Square de l’Arbalète, 6, B-1170 Brussels Belgium Phone +32 2 663 11 20 Website www.cdp-partners.be Email [email protected] You are welcome to contact Chantal Bollen ([email protected]) for any inquiries you may have. A detailed firm profile for UHY’s representation in Belgium can be found in section 8. Information in the following pages has been updated so that they are effective at the date shown, but inevitably they are both general and subject to change and should be used for guidance only. For specific matters, investors are strongly advised to obtain further information and take professional advice before making any decisions. This publication is current at July 2021. We look forward to helping you doing business in Belgium DOING BUSINESS IN BELGIUM 4 2 – BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT OVERVIEW COUNTRY AND NATION Belgium is a small country (30,528 square kilometres) at the centre of the most significant industrial and urban area in Western Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • The Government of the Hungarian People's Republic
    CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE HUNGARIAN PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME AND CAPITAL AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION.1 The Government of the Hungarian People's Republic and the Government of the Italian Republic, desiring to promote and facilitate the economic relations between the two countries, have agreed to conclude a Convention for the avoidance of double taxation with respect to taxes on income and capital and the prevention of fiscal evasion of which the provisions are the following: Article 1 - Personal scope This Convention shall apply to persons who are residents of one or both of the Contracting States. Article 2 - Taxes covered 1. This Convention shall apply to taxes on income and on capital imposed on behalf of each Contracting State or its political or administrative subdivisions or local authorities, irrespective of the manner in which they are levied. 2. There shall be regarded as taxes on income and on capital taxes imposed on total income, on total capital, or on elements of income or of capital, including taxes on gains from the alienation of movable or immovable property, taxes on the total amounts of wages or salaries paid by enterprises, as well as taxes on capital appreciation. 3. The existing taxes to which this Convention shall apply are the following: (a) in the case of the Italian Republic: (1) the individual income tax (imposta sul reddito delle persone fisiche); (2) the tax on the income of legal entities (imposta sul reddito delle persone giuridiche); and (3) the local income tax (imposta locale sui redditi), even if withheld at the source (hereinafter referred to as "Italian tax"); (b) in the case of the Hungarian People's Republic: (1) the income taxes (j”vedelemad¢k); (2) the profit taxes (nyeres‚gad¢k); (3) the enterprises' special tax (v llalati kl”nad¢); (4) the tax on buildings (h zad¢); 1 Date of Conclusion: 16 May 1977.
    [Show full text]
  • FINANCE Offshore Finance.Pdf
    This page intentionally left blank OFFSHORE FINANCE It is estimated that up to 60 per cent of the world’s money may be located oVshore, where half of all financial transactions are said to take place. Meanwhile, there is a perception that secrecy about oVshore is encouraged to obfuscate tax evasion and money laundering. Depending upon the criteria used to identify them, there are between forty and eighty oVshore finance centres spread around the world. The tax rules that apply in these jurisdictions are determined by the jurisdictions themselves and often are more benign than comparative rules that apply in the larger financial centres globally. This gives rise to potential for the development of tax mitigation strategies. McCann provides a detailed analysis of the global oVshore environment, outlining the extent of the information available and how that information might be used in assessing the quality of individual jurisdictions, as well as examining whether some of the perceptions about ‘OVshore’ are valid. He analyses the ongoing work of what have become known as the ‘standard setters’ – including the Financial Stability Forum, the Financial Action Task Force, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. The book also oVers some suggestions as to what the future might hold for oVshore finance. HILTON Mc CANN was the Acting Chief Executive of the Financial Services Commission, Mauritius. He has held senior positions in the respective regulatory authorities in the Isle of Man, Malta and Mauritius. Having trained as a banker, he began his regulatory career supervising banks in the Isle of Man.
    [Show full text]
  • The Notion of Tax and the Elimination of International Double Taxation Or Double Non-Taxation”
    IFA 2016 MADRID CONGRESS “The notion of tax and the elimination of international double taxation or double non-taxation” Luxembourg national report Branch reporters: Chiara Bardini*, Sandra Fernandes** Summary and conclusions The concept of tax under Luxembourg domestic law is based on the basic distinction between compulsory levies that qualify as taxes (“impôts”) and other compulsory levies, such as fees (“taxes”). In general, the term tax can be defined as a compulsory monetary levy imposed by public authorities on the taxpayers in order to mainly raise revenue for which nothing is received in return. In Luxembourg, taxes can only be raised by the Luxembourg State and the municipalities in accordance with the principles of legality, equality and annuality. The Luxembourg tax system relies on the basic distinction between direct and indirect taxes. The Luxembourg direct taxes are levied on items of income and of capital. The main Luxembourg income taxes are the individual income tax, the corporate income tax and the municipal business tax. The net wealth tax, the real estate tax and the subscription tax are the most important Luxembourg taxes levied on items of capital. The Luxembourg notion of “tax” is crucial for the purpose of granting the domestic unilateral foreign tax credit, of applying the domestic participation exemption regime. As a rule, a foreign levy only qualifies for the purpose of such domestic provisions provided that such foreign levy is an income tax and that its main features are comparable to the Luxembourg income tax (i.e. a national income tax imposed on a similar taxable base.
    [Show full text]
  • Australia Overview 2018-19 Individual Income and Social Taxes
    Australia Overview 2018-19 Individual Income and Social Taxes Gaining an understanding of the tax system in a new country is a critical step in addressing risks and reducing costs for companies with mobile employees. This overview summarizes key individual income and social tax compliance and tax planning considerations for companies sending employees to work in Australia. Individual income tax overview A resident of Australia is subject to Australian income tax on worldwide income at graduated tax rates that range up to 45% of taxable income. A temporary resident (defined below) is not taxed on their foreign investment income or capital gains. A non-resident of Australia is subject to Australian income tax only on Australian source income at graduated rates ranging from 32.5% to 45%. Residency A person is generally a resident of Australia if the person is domiciled in Australia or spends more than 183 days in Australia during the tax year. Domicile is the person’s permanent home (where they intend to live permanently). Individuals holding a Temporary Skills Shortage visa (i.e., subclass 482) are classified as temporary residents if they meet the following criteria: • they do not meet the definition of residency for Australian social security purposes (e.g., not a citizen, permanent resident), and • the taxpayer’s spouse is also not a resident of Australia for social security purposes. A visitor is a non-resident if they intend and actually spend less than 183 days in Australia. Available tax treaties should be considered in cases of dual-residence. Tax filings Tax Year: July 1 to June 30.
    [Show full text]