Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-7jgsp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-28T07:49:21.867Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

United States – Tax treatment for “Foreign Sales Corporations” Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement (WT/DS108/ARB) A Comment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2015

Robert Howse  and
Damien J. Neven
Robert Howse
Affiliation:
University of Michigan Law School
Damien J. Neven
Affiliation:
Graduate Institute of International Studies, Geneva
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Some of the legal analysis in this study derives from joint work between Robert Howse and Susan Esserman on this ruling, “Trade disputes quire fairer arbitration,” FT.com, Sep 12, 2002

This chapter discusses the decision by the arbitrator on suspension of concessions (“retaliation”) in the dispute between the US and the EU regarding the tax treatment of offshore corporate income under US legislation. By way of background, the first part of the chapter (section 2) describes the operation of the US scheme, including as revised after the first round of WTO rulings.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
World Trade Review , Volume 4 , Special Issue S1: The WTO Case Law Of 2002 , 2005 , pp. 36 - 63
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2005

References

Bernheim, D. and Whinston, M., (1986), Common Agency, Econometrica, 54 (4), 923–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, E., (1996), Competition Policy in Customs Unions: a Natural Experiment using State Level Antitrust Enforcement, mimeo, Pen State.Google Scholar
Cannizzaro, E., (2001), The Role of Proportionality in the Law of International Countermeasures, European Journal of International Law, 12.Google Scholar
Crawford, J., (2002), The International Law Commission's Articles on State Responsibility: Introduction, Text, and Commentaries, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mavroidis, P., (2000), Remedies in the WTO Legal System: between a Rock and a Hard Place, European Journal of International Law, 11 (4), 763–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pauwellyn, J., (2002), “The Nature of WTO Obligations”, Jean Monnet Working Paper, at http://www.jeanmonnetprogram.org, p. 8.Google Scholar
Schwartz, W. and Sykes, A., (2002), The Economic Structure of Renegotiation and Dispute Resolution in the World Trade Organisation, The Journal of Legal Studies, 31J.Google Scholar