Market leading insight for tax experts
View online issue


Robert Langston (Saffery) provides a practical case study on the operation of the corporate interest restriction where related party guarantees and withholding tax issues are involved.
The multinational top-up tax regime appears to be endlessly complicated. Matthew Mortimer and Tamar Ruiz (Mayer Brown) examine ten aspects of the regime, including a ten-step process to navigating the rules.
In this month’s review, Mike Lane and Zoe Andrews (Slaughter and May) consider the Court of Appeal decisions in Royal Bank of Canada and Civic Environmental Systems and the consultation on transfer pricing, DPT and permanent establishment. 
The UK’s approach may require taxpayers to take a leap of faith that the final legislation will align with the GloBE rules, write Chris Sanger and Jack Gifford (EY).
Card image Laura Hodgson, Elena Rowlands, Jessica Kemp
Laura Hodgson, Elena Rowlands and Jessica Kemp (Travers Smith) analyse the UK’s draft multinational top-up tax legislation and consider what developments are still to come.
Brin Rajathurai and May Smith (Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer) explain how pillar two will have an uneven impact on the attractiveness of different target companies and potentially favour certain types of bidders over others.
Mark Bevington (ADE Tax) highlights the ‘traps’ on the operation of the pillar two model rules which might generate a tax charge when none was expected.
BEPS 2.0 and ATAD 3 represent the latest challenge to the tax status of holding companies, renewing focus on issues of substance and withholding taxes, write Gregory Price and Sarah Ling (Macfarlanes).
The recent international agreement on the OECD’s two-pillar approach is intended to take unilateral digital tax measures off the table and put an end to these trade wars. But that does not necessarily mean there is no further role for trade law in this area, write Brin Rajathurai and Lorand Bartels (Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer).
Rhiannon Kinghall Were and Lucy Urwin (Macfarlanes) consider what the agreement means for the international taxation of multinationals.