International Tax Dialogues
All sessions will take place from 6.30 to 8pm.
Discussion Moderator: Hans Mooij, International Tax Consultant
Date: 27 March 2018, Tuesday
Venue: Withers KhattarWong, 80 Raffles Place, #25-01 UOB Plaza 1 Singapore 048624
Singapore and Mandatory Binding Arbitration in Tax Treaty Disputes
While almost all major countries in Asia signed the BEPS Multilateral Treaty, Singapore so far is the only non-OECD member in the region that also opted in for mandatory binding arbitration. This commitment to tax treaty arbitration fits in with Singapore’s ambition to further expand as a hub for arbitration, adding to the already substantial facilities present for other types of arbitration. This introduction of tax treaty arbitration in Singapore may give rise to various questions on its relevance for Singapore’s business and advisory community.
For instance, are there going to be many of such arbitrations involving Singapore? Another question is, what prospects could there be for the Singapore legal and advisory practice? Also, there is still the implementation for Singapore to work on. Unless Singapore wants to simply rely on the default procedure of the Multilateral Treaty, it will need to discuss and agree alternative procedures country per country, maybe having use of the revised sample Memorandum of Understanding in the recent 2017 Update of the OECD Model Income Tax Convention. Furthermore, if Singapore is ready indeed for having regular arbitrations, it may wish to consider agreeing permanent lists of arbitrators, and hiring in external case administration, like for instance what the United States has done. In his presentation, Prof Hans Mooij will address all of these issues and questions, and others, and as many as time permits.
Discussion Moderator: Liu Hern Kuan, Tan Peng Chin LLC
Date: 18 April 2018, Wednesday
GBU v CIT case on Section 10(1)(g)
This case concerned a taxpayer company who made substantial gains from the sale of shares, over a period of just 1 to 2 years. The Comptroller of Income Tax (CIT) sought to impose tax on section 10(1)(g) of the Income Tax Act, a sweeping up provision that imposes tax on “gains of an income nature,” a provision that is now more commonly invoked by the CIT. The taxpayer persuaded the Income Tax Board of Review (ITBR) that the gains were capital gains and the CIT chose not to appeal the decision to the High Court.
How is this approach under section 10(1)(g) different from a case where the CIT proceeds under section 10(1)(a)? Mr Liu Hern Kuan of Tan Peng Chin LLC, who successfully represented the taxpayer in the ITBR, will share his views.
CPE hours: 1.5/session
A certificate of attendance will be provided after each session.
Presentation Material: All material will be available to IFA members for download through the IFA website (https://www.ifasingapore.org/).
Type of member
|IFA Individual members||FREE||FREE|
|IFA Corporate members||FREE for up to 2 persons per firm||FREE for up to 2 persons per firm|
|SIATP and STEP members||S$30||S$80|
To register, please email Aileen Chung (firstname.lastname@example.org) and Rachel Ong (email@example.com).