Can Investment Treaties Defeat Pillar 2?

Authors

Reuven S. Avi-Yonah, University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

5-2024

Abstract

In their excellent recent Tax Notes International article, “Using Investment Treaties to Prevent Pillar 2’s Revocation of Promised Tax Incentives,” Javier Rubinstein, Lauren Friedman, and Tamsin Parzen make an interesting new argument about the interaction between bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and pillar 2. They argue that an investor benefiting from an existing BIT can rely on it to prevent the imposition of a qualified domestic minimum top-up tax (QDMTT) even without resorting to treaty arbitration. This argument is problematic, however, because it does not fully address the likely reaction of other countries that are not party to the BIT.

Comments

Reprinted with the permission of Tax Analysts.

Recommended Citation

Avi-Yonah, Reuven S. "Can Investment Treaties Defeat Pillar 2?" Tax Notes International 114, no. 6 (2024): 877-880.