Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 21 JULY 2008

Arbitration Provision Takes Aim At Competent Authority Deadlock

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
Contributor
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

As one of Canada’s top business law firms, Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP (Blakes) provides...

View firm profile
Explore more from Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

Where a taxpayer considers that the assessing actions of one of the Contracting States to the Canada-U.S. Income Tax Convention (the Treaty) will result in double taxation, the taxpayer may present its case to the competent authority of the Contracting State of which the taxpayer is a resident.

CanadaTax

Copyright 2008, Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

Originally published in Blakes Bulletin on Tax, July 2008

Where a taxpayer considers that the assessing actions of one of the Contracting States to the Canada-U.S. Income Tax Convention (the Treaty) will result in double taxation, the taxpayer may present its case to the competent authority of the Contracting State of which the taxpayer is a resident. This triggers a process under which the competent authorities of the two states must endeavour to reach a resolution of the issue that is mutually acceptable to both competent authorities. The basic principles that govern this process are set out in Article XXVI – Mutual Agreement Procedure, commonly known as "MAP," and in Article IX. This provision also governs cases submitted for an Advance Pricing Agreement, which the governments undertake as competent authorities.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from