Charles Edward Andrew Lincoln IV

This article offers an interpretation of the United States' structure of government outlined in the Constitution of 1789 from an anthropological perspective. Simultaneously this article seeks to analyze and explain the continued three-part structure of the United States federal government as outlined in the Constitution. Subsequently, this article defines the three parts of the federal government·judiciary, executive, and legislative·as explained through the lens of the anthropologist Georges Dumézil's trifunctional hypothesis of the Proto-Indo-European paradigm of society. Dumézil's trifunctional hypothesis is broken into the following three functions: productivity, military, and sovereignty. This article aims to demonstrate that the productivity represents the legislative function, the military represents the executive function, and the sovereignty represents the judicial function in the U.S. system of government. This article draws from a previous article by this author titled A Structural Etiology of the U.S. Consti- tution.1 That article also provided a tripartite analysis of the U.S. Constitu- tion. However, the analysis in that article occurred through the lens of the Ancient Greek philosopher Plato's tripartite conception of the soul where (logos = word = law), (thumos = external driving spirit = executive), and (eros = general welfare = legislative) extrapolated from Plato's dialogues – primarily the Republic and Phaedrus. This article swerves from that interpretation on Plato's Republic.

The structure of this article is as follows: First, this article establishes a working understanding of the French anthropologist Georges DumézilÊs (1898–1986) trifunctional hypothesis of prehistoric Proto-Indo-European society that applied to Indo-European society universally. Dumézil's tri- functional theory is the major premise, as in a syllogism. Second, the article lays out the generally accepted division of the U.S. Constitution of 1789 by laying out three parts to the federal government: the legislative as de- scribed in Article I, the executive as described in Article II, and the judicial as described in Article III. This second part represents the minor premise syllogistically. Third, the syllogism completes by weaving in the major premise of Dumézil's conception of the trifunctional hypothesis into the minor premise of the three parts of the United States federal government. This third step of analysis suggests possible future evolution of the structure of the U.S. federal government.

This article fits into the broader issue of the functionally efficient and naturally adaptive structure of the U.S. federal government. Providing a historical and anthropological context to this structural analysis will serve as a framework for future research on the operation of the federal government. When the branches of the federal government step out of their roles, then the balance of the structure of the federal government becomes disrupted, occurring in liminal periods of paradigmatic change.

Peer Reviewed.

Atwater v. Lago Vista is a stand-alone case in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. Often basic Fourth Amendment jurisprudence builds off other case law. There is a clear buildup regarding the exclusionary rule from Weeks v. United States (1914) to Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States (1920) to the expansion of “the fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine to Mapp v. Ohio (1961) incorporating U.S. Constitution the Fourth Amendment to the states.

Likewise, there are cases building up from the incorporation into the states from United States v. Leon (1984) to Arizona v. Evans (1995), expanding Fourth Amendment case law and rights. The cavalcade of these cases somewhat plays a ballet of expanding and contracting the rights in certain circumstances. But the rights build off and limit each other in a cognizable method.

Atwater v. Lago Vista is not based on such a cavalcade of cases. It is a stand-alone case at best citing 1600s case law, norms, and rules from before the founding of the United States. Granted, the United States adopted much of the English jurisprudence in the founding of the United States.

Although Atwater does not deal with the exclusionary rule, the case law of the exclusionary rule depicts how Fourth Amendment Supreme Court cases build on top of oneanother. Atwater does not. It is a stand-alone case in the jurisprudence neither adhering nor not adhering to the principles of stare decisis.

This article first summarizes the facts of the Atwater v. Lago Vista case and comments on the social and cultural implications of such facts. Then the article lays out the procedural posture of the Atwater case. Thereafter, this article examines the unique legal reasoning of the case suggesting that the case was incorrectly decided. After discussing the Atwater case, the article explores how subsequent case law interpreted and cited the Atwater case. Finally, the article concludes with the implications of Atwater, its progeny, and what this case means for future case law.

Thomas Hobbes wrote in his Leviathan that money exchanging hands, monetary policies, activities, and transactions are the blood of the “Leviathan” - the eponymous subject of the book. Hobbes writes that this Leviathan's “blood” includes the “collectors, receivers, and treasurers; of the second are the treasurers again, and the officers appointed for payment of several public or private ministers.” Hobbes, follows this with an analogy of a living man, stating that this “artificial man maintains his resemblance with the natural [man]; whose veins, receiving the blood from the several parts of the body, carry it to the heart; where, being made vital, the heart by the arteries sends it out again, to enliven and enable for motion all the members of the same.” Hobbes maintains a parallel between the natural man and what he calls the “artificial man”, the state throughout his Leviathan.

Ultimately, the mechanisms of finance in the United States are the accumulation of historical precedents - both legal and non-legal (such as economic, but also social). These precedents have led to the current system, on a continuing and settled basis. The legal and economic systems merging for the best system of an international monetary order can represent a balance of legal realism and legal formalism.

“Money” is printed by the U.S. government, designated as an official note. Value is correlated with how many of those printed pieces of paper exist. This is the basic concept of inflation. This concept of value and inflation is said to be connected to a commodity - such as how much gold or silver existed in the Federal Reserve's physical locations or Fort Knox. Such systems have been in place since at least Mesopotamia, where clay tablets were used to represent credit, or comparable contracts that seem to resemble modern forms of fiat currency.

The foundation of the modern tax system in the United States is based on the 16th Amendment passed in 1909. The amendment was Congress's response to the 1895 Supreme Court decision in Pollock, 1 which held that an income tax levied on the U.S. population on "dividends, royalties, and rents" was unconstitutional. Pollock is a seminal case in the history of taxation and tax law in the United States. Theoretically, the key question is whether a tax on property is the same as a tax on "dividends, royalties, and rents" arising from that property. Understanding the reasoning of this case illuminates the history of taxation and key concepts underlying our tax system. It also has implications for constitutional interpretation. Pollock and the definition of a direct and indirect tax on differing kinds of property have recently been debated in the ABA Tax Times by Professors Calvin H. Johnson 2 and Erik M. Jenson in the context of considering the constitutionality of a wealth tax. 3 I. What Was the Court's Justification for the Pollock Decision? Chief Justice Fuller, writing for the Court, provided a succinct explanation. First. We adhere to the opinion already announced-that, taxes on real estate being indisputably direct taxes, taxes on the rents or income of real estate are equally direct taxes. Second. We are of opinion that taxes on personal property, or on the income of personal property, are likewise direct taxes.

(c) Charles Edward Andrew Lincoln IV

Source on American Bar Association Tax Times:  https://www.americanbar.org/groups/taxation/publications/abataxtimes_home/21sum/21sum-pop-lincoln-pollock/

The substantive story of Gaston Leroux’s The Phantom of the Opera (Le Fantôme de l’Opéra) is largely about contract analysis and whether the managers and “the phantom” have had a “meeting of the minds”—consensus ad idem.

The question is whether the Phantom and the Managers reached a “meeting of the minds” or manifested mutual assent in their contractual remedies.

In short, the plot surrounds new managerial team—Armand Moncharmin and Firmin Richard—at the Palais Garnier have refused to abide by the former managerial team’s contract with the Phantom as successors in kind.

The relevant legal facts are that Armand Moncharmin and Firmin Richard have assumed the roles of managers of the Palais Garnier. Gaston Leroux and the Phantom himself often point out that the managers have a lack of experience. Indeed, the Phantom appears to have similar access to private information that was at issue in the Supreme Court case Laidlaw v. Organ (1817) and which would be allowed to be used in a negotiation over the managers.

Published at The Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law Blog

In this article, Willis and Lincoln emphasize that the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, allows some businesses to deduct expenses paid for with Paycheck Protection Program funds, and they share ways that taxpayers could take advantage of the new rules.

This article considers whether digital services taxes are taxes "in lieu of a tax on income."  This has been one of the unanswered questions from the 2017 tax legislation that falls at the intersection of statutory and regulatory interpretation. In addition to the potential impact on the doctrine of Chevron deference, the resolution of this issue has ramifications for the future of the digital economy. Several articles have touched on this specifically and peripherally.

This article deals with one of the many unanswered questions of the 2017 tax legislation—the potential impact of a basis adjustment on sale of a lower-tier controlled foreign corporation’s (CFC’s) stock for an upper-tier CFC’s global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI) and Subpart F calculations. The question, a classic exercise in statutory interpretation, revolves around a seemingly incommensurable overlap between the existing rules and the newly enacted statutory language. The implications are far reaching—from fundamentally altering the tax structuring of multinational enterprises to providing a vital precedent to statutory and regulatory interpretation.

An Online Publication of the ABA Tax Section Spring

Is there a basis adjustment for the sale of stock from a lower tier CFC to an upper tier CFC?  Would such an increase in basis for subpart F earning already have flown up?

Assuming you get both basis bumps—you were the direct benefiting shareholder at the time of the earnings—then the top CFC would get the bump from the lower tiers subpart F on the sale so you wouldn’t be duplicating subpart F.

A dearth of attention has come to this issue.  The New York State Bar Association (NYSBA) Tax Section wrote discussing this issue on October 11, 2018.  The NYSBA discussed this issue in relation to stock basis adjustments for PTI by asking, “Does Section 961(c) basis increase to stock of lower-tier CFCs apply for purposes of determining GILTI tested income of upper-tier CFCs?”

The NYSBA pointed out there is a conflicting interpretation of two provision:  does the Section 961(c) basis adjustment apply for determining the amount included for GILTI?  The agglutinative provisions conflate where the GILTI regime expressly requires that certain provisions—such as Section 961—treat GILTI inclusions in the same way as Subpart F inclusions.  Conceivably, this GILTI requirement clashes with Section 961(c) itself because “only for the purposes of determining the amount included under section 951 in the gross income.”  The potential fray arises because no direction is given for applying Section 961(c) for purposes of determining GILTI tested income.

Χεγκελιανό διαλεκτική ανάλυση του Η.Π.Α. Οι νόμοι ψηφοφορίας Κάρολ Έντουαρντ Άντριου Λίνκολν IV[*] I. Εισαγωγή Αυτό το σχόλιο χρησιμοποιεί το διαλεκτικό παράδειγμα του γερμανικού φιλόσοφου Γκέοργκ Βίλχελμ Φρήντριχ Χέγκελ (Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel) (1770-1833) για την ανάλυση της εξέλιξης των νόμων ψήφου των Ηνωμένων Πολιτειών από τα αποικιακά θεμέλια μιας συμμετοχικής δημοκρατικής διαδικασίας στη χώρα αυτή. Αυτή η ανάλυση μπορεί να χρησιμοποιηθεί για να ερμηνεύσει το παρελθόν σχάσης των δικαιωμάτων σης στις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες , καθώς και μια προκλητική τρόπος για να προβλέψουμε τις μελλοντικές τάσεις στην μελών δικαιώματα ψήφου-ως μια συνεχής «προοδευτική» πολιτική διαδικασία ή ρητορική μέθοδο διαγραφής κατηγορίες ή ταξινομήσεων και την εξάλειψη των διακρίσεων μεταξύ προσώπων. Πρώτον, η διαλεκτική μέθοδος του Χέγκελ καθιερώνεται ως βασική προϋπόθεση. Αυτό το Σχόλιο χρησιμοποιεί τη γλώσσα της "διατριβής-αντισύλληψης-σύνθεσης" και τη διαλεκτική μέθοδο ως απλοποιημένο παράδειγμα της περίπλοκης σκέψης του Hegel για το " aufheben ". Ο Michael H. Hoffheimer εξηγεί τη λεπτομερή διάκριση μεταξύ "διαλεκτικής" και " aufheben " : Ο ίδιος ο Χέγκελ δεν χρησιμοποιεί πολύ συχνά τους όρους "διαλεκτική" ή "διαλεκτική". Εμφανίζονται μόνο τρεις φορές στα τμήματα της φιλοσοφίας του νόμου στην πρώτη έκδοση

Greek Abstract: Αυτό το σχόλιο χρησιμοποιεί το διαλεκτικό παράδειγμα του γερμανικού φιλόσοφου Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1833) για την ανάλυση της εξέλιξης των νόμων ψήφου των Ηνωμένων Πολιτειών από τα αποικιακά θεμέλια μιας συμμετοχικής δημοκρατικής διαδικασίας στη χώρα αυτή. Αυτή η ανάλυση μπορεί να χρησιμοποιηθεί για να ερμηνεύσει το παρελθόν progre σχάσης των VOT δικαιωμάτων σης στις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες , καθώς και μια προκλητική τρόπος για να προβλέψουμε τις μελλοντικές τάσεις στην U ΝΩΜΕΝΟ μελών δικαιώματα ψήφου - ως μια συνεχής «προοδευτική» πολιτική διαδικασία ή ρητορική μέθοδο διαγραφής κατηγορίες ή ταξινομήσεων και την εξάλειψη των διακρίσεων μεταξύ προσώπων .

Πρώτον, η διαλεκτική μέθοδος του Χέγκελ καθιερώνεται ως βασική προϋπόθεση. Αυτό το Σχόλιο χρησιμοποιεί τη γλώσσα της "διατριβής-αντισύλληψης-σύνθεσης" και τη διαλεκτική μέθοδο ως απλοποιημένο παράδειγμα της περίπλοκης σκέψης του Hegel για το " aufheben " . Ο Michael H. Hoffheimer εξηγεί τη λεπτομερή διάκριση μεταξύ "διαλεκτικής" και " aufheben ".


To confirm, this is the author's personal translation into Modern Greek of an article that has already been published by University of Dayton Law Review.

The substantive story of Gaston Leroux’s The Phantom of the Opera (Le Fantôme de l'Opéra) is largely about contract analysis and whether the managers and “the phantom” have had a “meeting of the minds”—consensus ad idem.
The question is whether the Phantom and the Managers reached a “meeting of the minds” or manifested mutual assent in their contractual remedies. In the end, there was no contract and the managers could have claimed significant losses directly through their contractual terms with the Phantom.

The substantive story of Gaston Leroux’s The Phantom of the Opera (Le Fantôme de l'Opéra) is largely about contract analysis and whether the managers and “the phantom” have had a “meeting of the minds”—consensus ad idem.

The question is whether the Phantom and the Managers reached a “meeting of the minds” or manifested mutual assent in their contractual remedies. In the end, there was no contract and the managers could have claimed significant losses directly through their contractual terms with the Phantom.

Indeed, there have been many comparisons of Hebrew mythology and Wagner's-and generally Nordic mythology-evoking Biblical imagery.  Scholar H.C. Washington has described the comparison and even gone as far to suggest that Biblical imagery has inspired Nordic myths, "a wide-ranging ethnographic argument for the universality of sacral warfare among "Naturvölker," and draws parallels between Hebrew sacral war motifs and those of Old Germanic mythology. The Hebrew celestial hosts, צבאות‎, who accompany Yhwh in battle are compared to the wild heavenly army of Wotan, to the ghostly troops of the war-god Skanda, and to the Valkyries. Schwally likens the Hebrew military banners, דִּגְל֤וֹ (Num. 2:2; Ps. 74:4,9), or הוָ֥ה (Num. 10:14), to those of the Old Germans who, because they also "knew no divine images," used an attribute like Wotan's spear or Thor's hammer to depict the divinity on the battle flag. He compares the rampages of Samson to those of the Berzekers in Nordic lore."
In the Bible, first (after Adam & Eve's original disobedience, at least), the Abrahamic covenant was one of ecclesiological identity,  a promise that one old man's Adamic descendants would be more numerous than the stars in the sky or the sands by the seashore,  in exchange for a simple promise of obedience and devotion (the very covenant which Adam and Eve had broken).  Next, the Mosaic Covenant shaped his descendants into a nation with a strong foundation in fundamental law (the ten commandments + Leviticus 19) and an elaborated law of social and economic relations stated throughout Exodus, Deuteronomy, Leviticus, and Numbers.  Following the Christian theological story, Christ came to relieve the people of Israel and the world of both covenants  (the Abrahamic Covenant and the "Absolutism of Law" inherent in the Mosaic Covenant),  by and through the power of love and forgiveness.  Covenants such as these can inform international covenants and even set up the basis for modern contract law.

Wilson in his Fourteen Points laid out various attempts to prevent future catastrophic wars, such as WWI. The drafting of the Treaty of Versailles called for the creation of a League of Nations, an organization that would prevent future war. However, with an isolationist majority in the US Senate under the lead of the Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, the US did not join the League of Nations in order to maintain the ability to freely conduct its relationships with other countries without the League of Nations acting as a mediator. Thus, with Woodrow Wilson suffering a stroke while campaigning for the League of Nations, the US did not join the League even though it proposed its creation in the first place. The League failed largely due to US isolationism, and moreover secret agreements continued to be used. Incidentally, universal suffrage became more popular throughout much of the West following the war; but, this was not part of Wilson's points. The League's purpose involved guaranteeing the political independence of all states in the world. However, this could not be easily achieved without the cooperation of all these nations. Poland became a state and France's territories were restored. Colonies continued to be more widespread, especially

Wilson in his Fourteen Points laid out various attempts to prevent future catastrophic wars, such as WWI. The drafting of the Treaty of Versailles called for the creation of a League of Nations, an organization that would prevent future war.


However, with an isolationist majority in the US Senate under the lead of the Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, the US did not join the League of Nations in order to maintain the ability to freely conduct its relationships with other countries without the League of Nations acting as a mediator.  Thus, with Woodrow Wilson suffering a stroke while campaigning for the League of Nations, the US did not join the League even though it proposed its creation in the first place. The League failed largely due to US isolationism, and moreover secret agreements continued to be used.

When dealing with permanent establishments and attribution of profits, the OECD and UN Models create a fiction of a “separate and independent enterprise” or of a “distinct and separate enterprise.” However, each — all three — approach provides a different way for how to determine the internal profits and expenses between the enterprise and the PE. The Commentary of each respective approach further provides different ways for remunerating and attributing profits between the permanent establishment and the enterprise.

Dealings are the transactions between the head office and the PE. Because the permanent establishment is not a separate legal entity — the permanent establishment is just part of the enterprise — such transactions between the two are called “dealings.” Expenses can be deductible based on the rules set out in the OECD Commentary through tax treaties. It depends in what scenarios profits and expenses may be attributed to a PE. The ultimate “profits”/income that may be taxed by a permanent establishment by a source state are the profits attributed to the permanent establishment minus the expenses.


Approaches to Attribution of Profits in International Corporate Permanent Establishments’ Taxable Separate Entities

Charles Lincoln, The Myth of the Separate Enterprise: Approaches to Attribution of Profits in International Corporate Permanent Establishments’ Taxable Separate Entities, 22 Trinity L. Rev. 30 (2017).

The decision by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Kerckhaert Morres, 1Link to the text of the note allowing double taxation of the same income, led to stagnation in the European internal market. Over the past thirteen years, reservation of competences to member states has created tension between the European Community's goal of a common internal market and the goal to eliminate double taxation. 2Link to the text of the note

By exploring and comparing the constitutional basis for taxation in the United States and the treaty basis for taxation in the European Union, one discovers how American New Deal legislation in the 1930s, as a departure from Lochner Era, 3Link to the text of the note could provide the basis for an analogous departure from Kerckharet-Morres in a European New Deal.

The common understanding of the evolution between the Lochner Era and the New Deal denotes the reversal of decades of judicial intervention that prevented states from enacting economic regulation, 4Link to the text of the note with reference to substantive due process rights under the Commerce Clause, and a judicial policy to approve all economic regulations based on a different reading of the U.S. Constitution's Commerce Clause. 5Link to the text of the note As the New Deal in the 1930s brought the  [*117]  United States out of the Lochner Era, a similar New Deal should be conducted in the European Union to bring it out of the Kerckhaert-Morres era.

The European Union should adopt a true federal system akin to that of the United States, avoid pretending to maintain a Hamiltonian 6Link to the text of the note system, or avoid fiscal coherence issues all together for a non-common market. The Lochner-style Kercharet-Morres era damages the unity of the "federal" system of the European Union.

The European Union exhibits some markers of a federal system of finance, 7Link to the text of the note such as a national bank in the European Union Bank. However, a common codified system of taxation enacted through a directive or new multi-lateral treaty negotiation amongst states, such as the 1916 Constitutional Amendment or the United States Commerce Clause, could lead to the creation of a proper federal system in the European Union.




Document Type
Article
First Page
115
Last Page
130

Recommended Citation

Charles Edward Andrew Lincoln IV, A New Deal for Europe? The Commerce Clause as the Solution to Tax Discrimination and Double Taxation in the European Union, 11 J. Bus. Entrepreneurship & L. 115 (2018)

Available at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/jbel/vol11/iss1/5

When reviewing transfer pricing cases from the U.S. Tax Court (or other judiciary or tax administrations around the world), the analyses usually begin with a study of the industry.  This is often analogous to an MBA style analysis.

The industry analysis helps in the comparability analysis – that is mandated by US regulations. This aims for having an uncontrolled transaction be priced sufficiently similarly as a controlled transaction. If the transactions are not within a certain margin, then the relevant tax administrations will perform adjustments.  Comparability factors include: functions, contractual terms, risks, economic conditions, and the type of property or services in question.  These economic conditions are brought out in the industry analysis.

After the comparability analysis, the functional analysis occurs. This functional analysis involves, identification of the activities undertaken or to be undertaken, resources employed or to be employed, use of plant and equipment, intangible assets, work force in place, etc. This analysis depends on the transaction and industry, the functional analysis should focus on understanding critical activities that may have an impact on prices or profits: product design and development; product manufacturing; branding and the importance of marks; and supply chain of inputs and outputs.

Often, contractual terms are important because they can have significant impact on prices. Contractual terms may be stated or implied. If they are not stated, it does not mean they should not be adjusted if identified. Contractual terms may include collateral transaction where, for example, services may be embedded in a tangible goods transaction.  Economic substance must exist within the contracts. Economic substance means if there is no written contract, the actual conduct of the parties will be given greater weight. Written contracts where risks have been shifted to a party that has no capacity to bear risk would likely not be respected. This could trigger a substance over form analysis by the tax authorities.

Economic conditions are often a matter of identifying risks in the market. These risks can include market risks (input costs, demand, pricing, inventory, etc.); and they can include financial risks (capital, foreign currency, and interest rates, etc.).

Economic conditions for the firm and/or the industry may have significant impact on prices or profits. Moreover, economic conditions are relevant primarily in evaluating the firm in the context of: market for the firm’s products; market structure (whether perfectly competitive, monopolistic, or somewhere in between); market size and market share; market conditions related to contraction or expansion; location-specific costs – relevant especially for manufacturers, high-inflation countries, non-business friendly locations; and alternatives realistically available to the buyer and seller. Much of this information is often presented to the tax authorities required by regulations.


One way to conduct an industry analysis is through a Porter analysis. This sets up a framework for visualizing the bargaining power of suppliers, threats of new entrants, threat of substitutes, bargaining power, and how this all affects industry rivalry.  This can be further informed by Porter’s four corners model that helps predict the action of market players.

Taxation of the income of individuals and legal entities in Greece is regulated by Law 2238/1994 (the Hellenic Income Tax Code-HITC).

The HITC has undergone numerous changes over the last decade, increasing or decreasing tax rates, increasing or decreasing tax breaks, or introducing or abolishing presumed sources of income depending on the circumstances from time to time.




https://profwilliambyrnes.com/transfer-pricing/


"Charles Edward Andrew Lincoln, IV, is currently the chapter update editor for LexisNexis’ Foreign Tax & Trade Briefs (Greece, Cyprus, Finland, and Iceland), Wolters Kluwer’s International Trust and Company Laws & Analysis (Greece). He also edits LexisNexis’ Guide to FATCA Compliance (Greece). Previously, Charles Lincoln worked as a tax policy adviser at Loyens & Loeff in the Amsterdam office. In 2017, Charles completed his LL.M. study in International Tax Law at the University of Amsterdam. In 2016, Charles received his Juris Doctor from Texas A&M University School of Law after completing his bachelor’s degree from Harvard University, cum laude, in 2013. He may be contacted at charlieealincolniv@yahoo.com. His contribution includes chapter XX: Diverging Adherence to Contracts of BEPS and the US Tax Court Approach Regarding Risk Allocation."

Worked for main Author Professor William Byrnes, IV:

Table of Contents of Tanzania Chapter:

"1Tax information
TZA.1Individual Taxes
1Other Deductions
TZA.2Partnership or Business Profits Tax
1Controlled Enterprises
TZA.3Corporation Tax
1Depreciation
2Investment Allowance
TZA.4Capital Tax
TZA.5Dividend Tax
1Deductions
TZA.6Remittance Tax and Dollar Limit Transfer
TZA.7Revenue Taxes
TZA.8Real Estate Tax
TZA.9Miscellaneous Taxes
TZA.10Remarks
2Trade information
TZA.11Import License
TZA.12Exchange
TZA.13Credit Experience"

https://profwilliambyrnes.com/transfer-pricing/


"Charles Edward Andrew Lincoln, IV, is currently the chapter update editor for LexisNexis’ Foreign Tax & Trade Briefs (Greece, Cyprus, Finland, and Iceland), Wolters Kluwer’s International Trust and Company Laws & Analysis (Greece). He also edits LexisNexis’ Guide to FATCA Compliance (Greece). Previously, Charles Lincoln worked as a tax policy adviser at Loyens & Loeff in the Amsterdam office. In 2017, Charles completed his LL.M. study in International Tax Law at the University of Amsterdam. In 2016, Charles received his Juris Doctor from Texas A&M University School of Law after completing his bachelor’s degree from Harvard University, cum laude, in 2013. He may be contacted at charlieealincolniv@yahoo.com. His contribution includes chapter XX: Diverging Adherence to Contracts of BEPS and the US Tax Court Approach Regarding Risk Allocation."

In recent years, the international exchange of information on tax matters has become an extremely important issue with regard to tax transparency and the combat of tax evasion. States are realising that a more intense mutual assistance is required in order for the proper assessment, audit and collection of taxes due in each of the countries concerned. In addition, it was realised that the information exchange, which was based on double tax conventions or the tax information exchange agreements were not adequate standards for the avoidance of tax evasion.

Within this framework a significant number of international and EU agreements and conventions have entered into force and/or amended in order to provide for a more robust and systematic information exchange system with a view to promoting the financial and tax transparency.

The U.S. has introduced FATCA, OECD has implemented a wider range of automatic information exchange and the EU legislation has been amended accordingly in order to comply with the international developments.

Greece has adopted all the current amendment on OECD and EU level, thus fully complying with the requirements on information exchange for tax purposes. In relation to FATCA, Greece has currently in place an agreement in substance with the U.S. thus is treated as having an Intergovermental Agreement (IGA) in effect.

This chapter aims to provide an overview of the information exchange obligations of Greece arising out of the bilateral and multilateral agreements currently in place and the Greek acts implementing the Multilateral Conventions of OECD as well as the EU directives. In addition, the duty of disclosure towards the duty of confidentiality and the protection of personal data and secrecy with regard to the domestic legislation will be also briefly analysed. In the last section, the current status of FATCA implementation in Greece will be described.
The purpose of the present report is to provide a summary of the applicable Greek legal background on the exchange of information for tax purposes as currently amended following the recent amendments of the EU and international tax law. Reference is made to the Greek law as in force on October 2016.

https://profwilliambyrnes.com/transfer-pricing/


"Charles Edward Andrew Lincoln, IV, is currently the chapter update editor for LexisNexis’ Foreign Tax & Trade Briefs (Greece, Cyprus, Finland, and Iceland), Wolters Kluwer’s International Trust and Company Laws & Analysis (Greece). He also edits LexisNexis’ Guide to FATCA Compliance (Greece). Previously, Charles Lincoln worked as a tax policy adviser at Loyens & Loeff in the Amsterdam office. In 2017, Charles completed his LL.M. study in International Tax Law at the University of Amsterdam. In 2016, Charles received his Juris Doctor from Texas A&M University School of Law after completing his bachelor’s degree from Harvard University, cum laude, in 2013. He may be contacted at charlieealincolniv@yahoo.com. His contribution includes chapter XX: Diverging Adherence to Contracts of BEPS and the US Tax Court Approach Regarding Risk Allocation."

From an international tax law perspective, what might be the effects of the new proposed partnership rules in the US?

Partnerships are a complex combination of sole proprietorship rules, corporate rules, and financial accounting rules—the tax consequences are outlined primarily in Subchapter K of the US Internal Revenue Code. Partnerships often involve individuals and individuals with corporations acting as partners engaging in business. However, when comparing the US approach to partnerships, there can be differences—especially in the concept of opaque and flow entity through taxation. Opaque is when the profits are taxed at the corporate entity level and flow through is when the profits are taxed at the individual level.

In the United States, there is an option to “check the box” whereby one can qualify for flow through status—and this has been a rule since the 1990s. In other countries, there can be different approaches and modes of analysis to determine whether an entity is flow through or opaque. It is important to consider how the US system as it stands currently relates to other countries—and how the proposed changes could alter these inter-national relations.


Charles Lincoln, What are the implications for partnerships and partnership taxation under the Republican proposals for tax reform?, Int'l Fin. Law Prof Blog (Tuesday, November 21, 2017)



http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/intfinlaw/2017/11/what-are-the-implications-for-partnerships-and-partnership-taxation-under-the-republican-proposals-for-tax-reform.html

Central management and control is the best test for determining corporate residency because it is the test most likely to accurately reflect economic reality of a corporate entity.1 The place where decisions are made that affect the core of the business, not where incorporation exists, should be the most important factor in the tax assessment process.2 The two tests are the “incorporation test,” a legal test, and the “central management control test,” which is a substantive test.3 Many countries combine the two tests.4 An argument running through this essay is that the control and management test is more akin to economic reality.5

The determination of corporate residency is important, because the resident country can tax the company on its worldwide income--not just *360 income within its borders.6 A jurisdiction with a particular tax system can become a magnate to attract income and business profits from other countries, unless a company is a permanent establishment in the other countries or subject to source state taxation, such as dividends or interests.7 The test for residency can be determined by the incorporation test or the central management and control test (or a derivative thereof).8

Having these various tests can lead to abuse, such as a jurisdiction that has only adopted the incorporation test and then has a 0% or low tax--this structure can draw worldwide income to a low tax jurisdiction.9 This would be considered abuse.10 These scenarios have prompted the enactment of anti-abuse rules.11

This Comment uses the dialectical paradigm of German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1833) to analyze the progression of United States voting laws since the colonial foundations of a participatory democratic process in this country. This analysis can be used to interpret past progression of voting rights in the United States as well as a provoking way to predict future trends in United States voting rights--as an ongoing “progressive” political process or rhetorical method of erasing categories or classifications and eliminating distinctions amongst persons.
First, Hegel's dialectical method is established as a major premise. This Comment employs the language of “thesis-antithesis-synthesis” and the dialectical method as a simplified paradigm of Hegel's complex thoughts of “aufheben”; Michael H. Hoffheimer explains the detailed distinction between “dialectic” and “aufheben”:
Hegel himself does not use the terms “dialectic” or “dialectical” very often. They appear only three times in the sections on philosophy of law in the first edition of his Encyclopedia (1817). That text refers to the dialectical conflict among various duties--a conflict that lacks any resolution. It refers to “true dialectic” as constituting the subject that knows its subordination under another. And it terms the “justice of the world” as the representation (darstellt) of the dialectic of spirits of particular peoples. None of these passages apply the term “dialectic” to the transcendental resolution of an opposition or to the move to a new phase or level of the system.
The term Hegel employs most frequently to denote the transcending resolution of oppositions, contradictions and conflicts, is “aufheben.” Variously translated as “transcend,” “supersede,” or “sublimate,” the term “aufheben” is best translated by the neologism “sublate.” Unlike “dialectic,” the term “sublation” figures prominently in important transitions in Hegel's system. It occurs twice in the first, cryptic section of Hegel's philosophy of law from 1817:
Objective spirit is the unity of theoretical and practical spirit. Free will for itself appears in the form of free will now that the *89 formalism, contingency, and subjectivity of its practical activity is sublated. Through the sublation of this mediation, spirit becomes the unmediated self-posited particularity, which in the form of universal is freedom itself.
Other passages apply the term “sublation” to express the overcoming of contradiction and to describe the resolution of a progress in a third judgment. Unlike the term “dialectic,” “sublation” denotes resolution of an unmediated opposition into a higher category--a resolution that marks the movement to a new level of the system. Thus, Hegel applies the term “sublation” in the 1817 philosophy of law to the resolution or mediation of unmediated existence and unmediated singularity. In the final appearance of the term “sublation” in the philosophy of law, a mediated relationship is itself overcome or resolved into the higher category of order based on custom.
It is thus the term “sublation,” not “dialectic” or “thesis-synthesis-antithesis,” that is linked most closely to distinctive, transcending features of Hegel's treatment of conflict and contradiction. Hegel did not coin the term “aufheben.” Vernacular meanings in the eighteenth century included to pick up, to preserve, and to cancel. Commentaries always emphasize that he used the term “sublation” with the double meaning of both to cancel and to preserve, referring to the reconciliation of an opposition in a manner that somehow both cancels and preserves the opposed elements at a higher level. But the term also had technical meanings. In mathematics, it meant to reduce a fraction. In law, it meant to repeal or annul a statute. Hegel was not the first to import the term into philosophy or legal philosophy. His friend Schelling employed the term widely throughout his early writings, and notably in his New Deduction of Natural Law (1796), but Schelling almost always used the term “aufheben” in the univocal sense of “to cancel.” Similarly, some of Hegel's followers returned to this more vernacular use of the term.1
Second, the generally accepted history of United States voting laws from the 1770s to the current day is laid out as a minor premise.
*90 Third, the major premise of Hegel's dialectical method weaves and applies itself to the progression of United States voting laws to explain the progressive elimination of distinctions and categories. This third step of application suggests possible future scenarios.
Hegel was a philosopher in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.2 His ideas have been applied to interpret a wide range of academia and law, including torts,3 contracts,4 property,5 criminal,6 and evidence.7




42 U. Dayton L. Rev. 87
University of Dayton Law Review
Spring, 2017

This article offers an interpretation of the problems addressed by and the eventual purpose of the United States government. Simultaneously, it seeks to analyze and explain the continued three-part structure of the United States federal government as outlined in the Constitution. Subsequently I define the three parts of the federal government—judiciary, executive, and legislative—as explained through the lens of the Platonic paradigm of (logos = word = law), (thymos = external driving spirit = executive), and (eros = general welfare = legislative) extrapolated from Plato’s dialogues.

First, the article establishes Plato’s theory of the three-part Platonic soul as a major premise, as in a syllogism. Second, the article lays out the generally accepted division of the U.S. Constitution as creating three parts to the federal government as a minor premise. Third, the syllogism completes by weaving in the major premise of Plato’s soul into the three parts of the United States federal government. This third step of application suggests possible future evolution of the structure.

This article fits into the wider issue of the functionally efficient and naturally adaptive structure of the U.S. federal government. Providing a historical and philosophical context to this structural analysis will serve as a framework for future research on the operation of the federal government. When the branches of the federal government step out of their roles, the balance of the structure of the federal government becomes disrupted occurring in liminal periods of paradigmatic change.

The notion of law as such is subject to contradictions.  Nietzsche found the concept of the philosophy of law as flawed. 

This article seeks to find the implications of the question of what the ramifications of Nietzsche’s critique of religion is on the law. If one accepts the proposition that law and systems of laws came from religion, then what would Nietzsche’s critique of law be? The origin of law as emanating from religion is the minor premise of this article. The French sociologist Émile Durkheim’s sociological thought argued that law and laws came from religions. Durkheim’s thought constitutes the minor premise of this article. The major premise of this article is the philosopher’s Fredrich Nietzsche’s critique of religion in his writings. The syllogistic argument will be the combination of the two systems of thought. If religion is accepted as the origin of law, then what value does Nietzsche’s critique of religion and law have? What would Nietzsche’s critique of law be? This article seeks to answer these questions.

Likewise, the title of this article is in part a pun on Nietzsche’s consistent discussion of the “death of God.” If God is dead, does this mean law is dead as well?

A HOMERIC ANALYSIS OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION: ANCIENT GREEK POETRY AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETATION

This article offers an interpretation of the United States’ structure of government outlined in the Constitution from the perspective of Ancient Greek poetry – specifically the Homeric tradition based on The Iliad and The Odyssey. Simultaneously it seeks to analyze and explain the continued three-part structure of the United States federal government as outlined in the Constitution.  Subsequently, this article defines the three parts of the federal government—judiciary, executive, and legislative—as explained through the lens of the Homeric Ancient Greek account of the Judgment of Paris where Paris of Troy is given a “choice” to pick among three goddesses regarding the fate of Troy. Hera, Athena, and Aphrodite.  Paradigmatically, the goddesses as such are Aphrodite, Aphrodite, and Athena whereby Aphrodite represents the legislative function, Hera represents the executive function, and Athena represents the judicial functions of government in the U.S. system of government. This article picks up from where a previous article by this author titled A Structural Etiology of the U.S. Constitution.  That article also provided a tripartite analysis of the U.S. Constitution. However, the analysis occurred through the lense of Plato’s tripartite conception of the soul where (logos = word = law), (thymos = external driving spirit = executive), and (eros = general welfare = legislative) extrapolated from the Plato’s dialogues.

First, this article establishes a working understanding of the Homeric account and references to the Judgement of Paris.  The Homeric account of the Judgement of Paris and the representation of the three goddesses is the major premise – as in a syllogism.  Second, the article lays out the generally accepted division of the U.S. Constitution of 1789 as laying out three parts to the federal government – the legislative as described in Article I, the executive as described in Article II, and the judicial as described in Article III. This second part represents the minor premise. Third, the syllogism completes by weaving in the major premise of the three goddesses in the Judgment of Paris into the three parts of the United States federal government. This third step of application suggests possible future evolution of the structure.

This article fits into the wider issue of the functionally efficient and naturally adaptive structure of the U.S.  federal government. Providing a historical and poetic context to this structural analysis will serve as a framework for future research on the operation of the federal government. When the branches of the federal government step out of their roles, then the balance of the structure of the federal government becomes disrupted occurring in liminal periods of paradigmatic change.

This article offers an interpretation of the United States' structure of government outlined in the Constitution from an anthropological perspective. Simultaneously this article seeks to analyze and explain the continued three-part structure of the United States federal government as outlined in the Constitution of 1789. Subsequently, this article defines the three parts of the federal government—judiciary, executive, and legislative—as explained through the lens of the anthropologist Georges Dumézil’s trifunctional hypothesis of Proto-Indo-European paradigm of society. Dumézil’s trifunctional hypothesis is broken down into the following three functions: productivity, military, and sovereignty. This article aims to demonstrate that the productivity represents the legislative function, the military represents the executive function, and the sovereignty represents the judicial function in the U.S. system of government. This article picks off from a previous article by this author titled A Structural Etiology of the U.S. Constitution.  That article also provided a tripartite analysis of the U.S. Constitution. However, the analysis occurred through the lens of the Ancient Greek philosopher Plato’s tripartite conception of the soul where (logos = word = law), (thymos = external driving spirit = executive), and (eros = general welfare = legislative) extrapolated from Plato’s dialogues.

The structure of this article is as follows: First, this article establishes a working understanding of the anthropologist Georges Dumézil’s (1898–1986) trifunctional hypothesis of prehistoric Proto-Indo-European society. Dumézil’s trifunctional theory is the major premise – as in a syllogism. Second, the article lays out the generally accepted division of the U.S. Constitution of 1789 by laying out three parts to the federal government – the legislative as described in Article I, the executive as described in Article II, and the judicial as described in Article III. This second part represents the minor premise syllogistically. Third, the syllogism completes by weaving in the major premise of Dumézil’s conception of the trifunctional hypothesis into the minor premise of the three parts of the United States federal government. This third step of analysis suggests possible future evolution of the structure of the U.S. federal government.

This article fits into the wider issue of the functionally efficient and naturally adaptive structure of the U.S. federal government. Providing a historical and anthropological context to this structural analysis will serve as a framework for future research on the operation of the federal government. Such an analysis could be seen as a merger of the schools of legal formalism and legal realism When the branches of the federal government step out of their roles, then the balance of the structure of the federal government becomes disrupted occurring in liminal periods of paradigmatic change.

This article offers an interpretation of the United States’ structure of government outlined in the Constitution from the perspective of Ancient Greek poetry – specifically the Homeric tradition based on The Iliad and The Odyssey. Simultaneously it seeks to analyze and explain the continued three-part structure of the United States federal government as outlined in the Constitution.  Subsequently, this article defines the three parts of the federal government—judiciary, executive, and legislative—as explained through the lens of the Homeric Ancient Greek account of the Judgment of Paris where Paris of Troy is given a “choice” to pick among three goddesses regarding the fate of Troy. Hera, Athena, and Aphrodite.  Paradigmatically, the goddesses as such are Aphrodite, Aphrodite, and Athena whereby Aphrodite represents the legislative function, Hera represents the executive function, and Athena represents the judicial functions of government in the U.S. system of government. This article picks up from where a previous article by this author titled A Structural Etiology of the U.S. Constitution.  That article also provided a tripartite analysis of the U.S. Constitution. However, the analysis occurred through the lense of Plato’s tripartite conception of the soul where (logos = word = law), (thymos = external driving spirit = executive), and (eros = general welfare = legislative) extrapolated from the Plato’s dialogues.

First, this article establishes a working understanding of the Homeric account and references to the Judgement of Paris.  The Homeric account of the Judgement of Paris and the representation of the three goddesses is the major premise – as in a syllogism.  Second, the article lays out the generally accepted division of the U.S. Constitution of 1789 as laying out three parts to the federal government – the legislative as described in Article I, the executive as described in Article II, and the judicial as described in Article III. This second part represents the minor premise. Third, the syllogism completes by weaving in the major premise of the three goddesses in the Judgment of Paris into the three parts of the United States federal government. This third step of application suggests possible future evolution of the structure.

This article fits into the wider issue of the functionally efficient and naturally adaptive structure of the U.S.  federal government. Providing a historical and poetic context to this structural analysis will serve as a framework for future research on the operation of the federal government. When the branches of the federal government step out of their roles, then the balance of the structure of the federal government becomes disrupted occurring in liminal periods of paradigmatic change.

The foundation of the modern tax system in the United States is based on the 16th Amendment passed in 1909.  The Amendment was Congress’s response to the Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429 (1895), affirmed on rehearing, 158 U.S. 601 (1895).  Pollock held that an income tax levied on the US population based on “dividends, royalties, and rents” was unconstitutional.  Because of this, Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company was a key case in the history of taxation and tax law in the United States.  Theoretically, the key question is whether a tax on property is the same as “dividends, royalties, and rents” arising from that property.  Understanding the reasoning of this case illuminates key concepts in taxation, the history of taxation, and has implications on Constitutional history and interpretation.

Author:  Charles Edward Andrew Lincoln Iv

Incompleteness specifically refers to the fact that given any system of symbols, there will always be questions that can be formulated in that system that cannot be answered using just the symbols of that system.

An example would be that if a person had a box of objects that person was holding, and an interrogator asked to show the objects in the box which cannot be shown. That would be a paradoxical question with no possible answer.
Those sorts of questions can always be formulated, and this shows that there are some propositions that will be unresolvable no matter what the premises are of a system.
So, if one wanted to judge an axiomatic system—as David Hilbert did at the turn of the last century —by whether it could have an answer for any question one could ask of it, then one will not be able to make that judgement of some system being more thoroughly 'complete' (able to answer questions asked of it) relative to another.

Can, this, then can be applied to law and moral judgements?  If one perceives law or morality as a propositional system then, yes, it would be applicable to moral judgements. Many pragmatists do not perceive law as such a propositional system, though. Some of the quotes I have collected refer to such pragmatists with that different approach.

Morality cannot be approved and everything is subjective intent including law. So, in the same way that in the early 1900s Bertrand Russell’s attempts with mathematics were approved futile in Principia Mathematica. Are the philosophical foundations of law proved futile?

How is Gödel's incompleteness theorem as being a problem for morals? Nobody has "true" premises to go from? Therefore—it can be said—all our conclusions are subjective. Is this accurate?

The historical Battle of the Alamo was a thirteen day siege between the dates of February 23 and March 6, 1836.  The belligerents were the Mexican Republic—under command of Antonio López de Santa Anna —versus the newly declared Republic of Texas—under command of William Barret Travis.  Historians often credit the Battle of the Alamo and the Battle of Goliad as giving enough time and spirit for Samuel Houston to organize the newly formed Republic at Washington on the Brazos to ultimately repel the Mexican army at the Battle of San Jacinto on April 21, 1836.  However, there is another – possibly second “Battle of the Alamo.” The Internal Revenue Service, “has declared war on tax shelters, and privileged communication is at risk of becoming a civilian casualty. In his “Remember the Alamo” speech, the Service's Chief Counsel compared the fight against tax shelters to the epic battle of the Alamo, but, unlike the fallen heroes of that battle, he declared that the Service would emerge victorious.”  Tax havens affect the funds necessary for public revenue and disparage the fairness of the taxation.  However, there are many maneuvers that taxpayers have used to create double non taxation and double taxation. In 1794, the Federalists who created the Constitution could likely not have envisioned the vast amount of double tax treaties in existence in the modern day.  How do we end double non-taxation, tax havens, and base erosion when certain rules still exist? The answer may be found through application of Hegelian dialects to combat the rules that allow it and the laws that contradict those rules through a synthesis. But the answer possibly resides in the founding laws of the United States and the interpretations purported by the Federalist Papers—that also influenced in part the revolutionaries in Texas in 1836.

At the outset, the story starts within a story as Charles Marlow on the Nellie sailing on the Thames telling the story of his expedition into the Congo River. Beyond the dichotomy of black juxtaposed with white and the horrors of imperialism, Conrad shows rivers as the structures of empire. The empire, like the story begins at one river, the home Thames River of the British Empire. All of the story's emotionally riveting moments occur on rivers. Marlow's main objective is to be a company agent for ivory; his job is to ride up river and down river collecting ivory. In the same way Empire is structured like a river: resources come from up river and down to the port to go to the empire. In the same way empires collect from their territories resources and bring them to the river. Given that the dichotomy of a river with a higher class at one end receiving wealth from the less refined people of a more conservative core at its source; then, it may be a reasonable step to define Empire, not just as a unification of different cultures, but of a connection of resources or unprocessed goods to an urban city for manufacture. Indeed, empires seem to combine antithetical elements and maintaining control of them for the purpose of refining unprocessed resources. Rivers act like a metaphor or allegory of empire bringing in resources from the frontier from the source to the ports where resources cane come from.

If a seller has been estopped legally from denying the existence of ghosts and poltergeists on the premises—thus meaning the house is haunted a matter of law, then how should the haunting be added in to the cost basis for tax purposes? More generally, if a house is legally haunted, what does this mean for tax purposes?


In the famous popular 1st year law student case—colloquially known as the Ghostbusters case—Stambovsky, v. Ackley, the New York Court of Appeals deftly wrote, “as a matter of law, the house is haunted”  If a seller has been estopped legally from denying the existence of ghosts and poltergeists on the premises—thus meaning the house is haunted a matter of law, what does this mean for tax purposes?

To answer this, one must set up a premise of what tax consequences usually are and how they arise. This is a philosophical question. Indeed, there is debate on the origins of what conceptual metaphysical origin brought up tax basis and adjusted basis.

An interesting phenomenon explaining to some extent the content and structure of seventeenth century English poetry is the influence upon it by Counter Reformation schools of meditation. Louis Martz has devoted an entire book to this subject, showing definitely that Ignatius of Loyola, Francis de Sales and others were either directly quoted or used in other ways in formation of the poetry written by the English Poets contemporary with them.

Prominent among these writers was the poet, John Donne. Although Donne became an Anglican priest in later life, his mother was a Roman Catholic and his uncle was a Jesuit. Since his childhood training was Catholic and Jesuit, and since it was customary for Protestants to I make use of Catholic devotional work. It is small wonder that the meditative tradition manifest in Donne's poetry.

Porter Analysis: A Business Strategy of Amazon.com through a Value Chain and Comparative Advantage Analysis of Amazon's Trademarks and Intangibles

Amazon is considered the preeminent online retailer in the world. It operates in varying areas from robotics, movie databases, web services, audio books, food markets, etc. Its expansive reach is a matter of e-commerce highly dependent on the logos and Amazon trademarks, such as the Amazon smiling face, the Amazon logo, etc. The E-commerce industry falls into the category of internet and software services according to S&P's Industry Surveys on "Internet Software & Services. E-commerce can be categorized into two major segments on the internet: business-to-consumer (B2C) and business-to-business (B2B). Amazon.com falls into the B2C category, because Amazon's main target is consumers. Amazon is the largest online retailer in the world. But it operates with a great deal of competitors. Below is a chart of the main competitors Amazon deals with in the economy. Working Paper.

Shakespeare’s King Lear appears to reaffirm the importance of the law of civilization, because if we do not, then catastrophes like this tragedy take place. However, at the same time the play makes a reader wonder what happens when the law is not adequate to hold upright against the winds that blow when there is no thick forest of laws.

The “scientific” work of Darwin and the “social Darwinists,” Europeans considered life in nature to be a fight for survival using “fang and claw” against all others - as Edmund, Goneril, Regan, and Cornwall seem to be doing. Although this was preceded in Shakespearean times by a concept of civilization or society to be good while the state of nature was base or primitive in behavior that was far from the conduct sanctioned by religion.

As depicted in Dante’s Divine Comedy, the base natural aspects of humanity exist in hell while the intellect that defines humans in the image of God, exists in heaven; thus, urging people to act rationally or more Godly, not basely natural. Incidentally, Emile Durkheim in his The Elementary Forms of Religious Life put forth the notion that religion equals society – or that at least one function of religion is to enforce social mores, cultural behavior patterns or norms that together form cultures. Perhaps Durkheim may have interpreted King Lear as a representation of what happens when a clash of the norms of society and how humans act naturally occurs.

Draft of Working Paper

This article argues that ontologically, the right to habeas corpus comes from an ability to have a cognitive capacity. This is not intended as a scientific journal. Arguments have been made for theoretical and philosophical basses for animal rights—as well as philosophical natural rights in general. Aristotle has provided a foundation for analyzing the nature of rights.

The definition of the soul Aristotle has three levels to the soul. This theory of Aristotle’s soul is not novel, it has influenced thinkers from pre-Christian times to even to being featured in the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade regarding abortion rights. first level is the nutritive aspect of the soul that includes plants. The locomotive aspect of the soul distinguishes animals from plants. The rational part of the soul distinguishes humans and animals. This is the key part of the soul for humans. One example of the rational aspect of the soul comes from the ability of speech. Regarding humans and the soul, Aristotle writes, “The proper function of man, then, consists in an activity of the soul in conformity with a rational principle or, at least, not without it. In speaking of the proper function of a given individual we mean that it is the same in kind as the function of an individual who sets high standards for himself.” However, it is true that many animals partake in this part of the soul.

In that case, animals and humans should be afforded habeas corpus rights. Partaking in the locomotive and rational part of the soul should grant rights, such as habeas corpus.

The problems and symptoms of a non-uniform system of interstate transportation can manifest problems for both trade and military movement.

The uniform and harmonious interstate highways based on states in the US has a direct connection to the non-uniform system of railways that the Austro-Hungarian Empire had during World War I under the command of Franz Conrad von Hötzendorf as Chief of Staff for the Austro-Hungarian Empire during the war. This non-uniform system meant that given different track widths and sustainable weights that some trains couldn't cross over between various states in the empire. In general, such problems still exist. Some historians attribute the inability to move troops around efficiently to one of the demises of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.


This is a work in progress.

The nature of identity in the U.S. lies in the Constitution. Perhaps this is due to “veneration” of the document. It has also been argued that the Declaration of Independence holds a seminal role in the American identity.

The rift seems to occur with the concept of a “living constitution,” whereby the concept of an ever-evolving jurisprudence allows for an evolving interpretation of the Constitution as society changes.
This rift is demonstrated the world of J.R.R. Tolkien. In The Lord of the Rings and Silmarillion, the various being of Middle Earth have distinct natures. The elves seek beautiful things, the orcs are former elves that have been corrupted, the dwarves are logical, etc. However, their natures are subject to change. This is exemplified when Melkor one of the original beings, created by Eru Ilúvatar (the original being), turns dark when the original singing of the Ainur becomes dissonant with Melkor’s choice to sing differently.

Natural law has been compared to originalism. Again, it may be fair to compare natural law to the order set by Eru Ilúvatar. If this premise is accepted that natural law is originalism, the order set by Eru Ilúvatar, then the dissonance caused by Melkor can arguably be the concept of a living constitution.

This deviation from Eru Ilúvatar’s original plan does not have to necessarily be negative. There are others who fall out of line with the original conception of Eru Ilúvatar, such as men who are endowed with the gift of a short life and thus are industrious and creative. Arguably, it could also be extended to the world of Hobbits who are evidently related to men--but their origin story is never clearly delineated in any of Tolkien’s writings.

Thus, this shows that the story of the Silmarillion primarily and in part The Lord of the Rings can exemplify rifts of originalism and living constitution doctrines. These perhaps are not just relevant for US Constitutional interpretation purposes.

Why do different cultures lead to different laws? After all, the way law operates is based in logic best and most efficient way for the laws to govern human society to carry out their lives – if it were not so, we would change our patterns of existence. Why do people around the world persist in continuing with different law structures contrary to the United Nations and other international organizations expect them to conform? All social scientists try to answer such questions, but anthropologists work through contact with exotic societies and attempt to explain their behavior. Of course by explaining the behavior of others, these scientists ultimately try to understand their own society.

Social scientists interested in the populations in the world developed different answers to the basic questions: are all humans alike or are they different? How are they alike and how are they different? This is the fundamental problem in anthropology. It is easy to see material and cultural differences when encountering different cultures. Using the concepts of culture and cultural relatively that were popularized and made fundamental in anthropology by the students of Franz Boas, this “American school of Anthropology” emphasized the differences between populations. At the same time, most Europe scholars accepted the psychological unity of mankind, the hypothesis that all humans think alike.

Cultural relativity, the argument that all socially approved behavior can only be understood in the context of its own cultural setting can be interpreted in a manner that discourages cross-cultural comparison and even negates the notion that all humanity uses the same thinking process.

This book aims to contribute a single idea – a new way to interpret legal decisions in any field of law and in any capacity of interpreting law through a theory called legal dialects. This theory of the dialectical path of law uses the Hegelian dialectic which compares and contrasts two ideas, showing how they are concurrently the same but separate, without the original ideas losing their inherent and distinctive properties – what in Hegelian terms is referred to as the sublation. To demonstrate this theory, Lincoln takes different aspects of international tax law and corporate law, two fields that seem entirely contradictory, and shows how they are similar without disregarding their key theoretical properties. Primarily focusing on the technical rules of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) approach to international tax law and the United States approach to tax law, Lincoln shows that both engage in the Hegelian dialectical approach to law.

Publisher:  https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781793632265/The-Dialectical-Path-of-Law

Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Dialectical-Path-Law-Charles-Lincoln/dp/1793632251

This chapter examines the costs incurred in the creation of technological intellectual properties can often be currently deducted although certain costs are required to be capitalized (some of which may be recovered over time and others of which can only be recovered upon sale or disposition of the property), while costs to purchase (as opposed to create) existing technological intellectual properties must generally be capitalized and recovered over extended period of time. This chapter will assist in making the determination of which costs are currently deductible, which are amortizable over a period of time and which must be capitalized into the basis of the property and cannot be recovered until sale or disposition.


Proper Citation:  Chapter 3: Charles Lincoln, Development and Purchase of Technological Intellectual Properties Including Patents and Trade Secrets, William Byrnes, Taxation of Intellectual Property and Technology (2019), Lexis Nexis. Chapter Update Editor.

This subchapter explores the difference of review of risk allocation by contract between the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD) Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Actions 8-10 revisions to the 2017 OECD Guidelines and the U.S. Tax Court in its decisions since 2010. The OECD and the U.S. Tax Court diverge in their adherence to the language of contracts as the basis for assessing and controlling risk allocation. On the one hand, the U.S. Tax Court following the prescription of the Internal Revenue Code has focused largely on contractual language and terms of agreement. On the other hand, the OECD analyzes actual economic behavior and reality, independent of the contractual language of the related parties.

One of the changes to the 2017 OECD Guidelines initiated by BEPS in the Action Plan 8-10 is the interpretation of conduct in relation to reviewing the allocation of risk via a contractual arrangement between related parties, in particular with regards to intangibles. The OECD at first glance indicates that for application of the arm’s length principle, contractual arrangements should still be followed, but only as long as they conform to actual economic reality.1 At a second glance, the OECD states that legal ownership and contractual relationships serve merely as ‘reference points’ for identifying and analyzing an intragroup transaction.2 The OECD proposes a substance over form analysis:
“… where the facts of the case, including the conduct of the parties, differ from the written terms of any agreement between them or supplement these written terms, the actual transaction must be deduced from the facts as established, including the conduct of the parties.”

The OECD approach is that a contract may be respected as long as the arrangements in the contract reflect what would be agreed between arm’s length actors in consideration of several factors that the OECD lists as relevant to a third party’s negotiating position. Such factors include, non-exclusively, the functions performed by each party, the assets employed by each party, the risks assumed by each party, and the contributions made by other group members.

The main difference in the U.S. Transfer Pricing approach for risk allocation is that the U.S. Tax Court examines to validate the contractual arrangement in the first instance and then determines if the contracts conform to economic reality.5 While on the other hand, the OECD through BEPS has stated in a disguised manner—and as uncovered by Rutger Hafkenscheid—that contracts will only be considered if they are what “should” have been contracted under the functional analysis whereby a party has the control to bear risk and remuneration accordingly.6 Given these differences, there are many implications, such as a prospect of a political battle over the different jurisdictions’ rights to tax certain revenue streams and bases and a tension between the importance of the OECD versus the U.S. approach.

Following BEPS Action 8-9, there is a new six-step approach for risk. In short, the two prongs of step 5 in the new risk allocation analysis provide: (1) “control over risk” and (2) “whether the party assuming risk … has the financial capacity to assume risk”. Each prong has its own definition. Either prong trump the language of a contract. This two-pronged analysis may lead to different results comparing an affiliate within a corporate group or as a stand-alone tested party. Thus, step 5 of the new risk allocation analysis may create uncertainty in the fiction of the arm’s length principle.
Giammarco Cottani9 defines risk as volatility meaning that “business outcomes of an enterprise are heavily dependent on how their strategic choices expose them to certain types of volatility, e.g. fluctuations in the upside or downside of any given entrepreneurial direction.”10 Contractual allocation of risk is key for BEPS 8-10; and, Cottani points out that this contractual allocation of risk is normally referred to as the neoclassical economic concept of moral hazard applied in an international tax treaty scenario.11 Moral hazard in the neoclassical sense is the idea whereby a party insures itself from the probability of failure by shifting the potential of losing—monetary or other—value to another party.12
In order to manage risk, it appears key to (1) identify the source of volatility; and (2) assess the impact of risk on business activity. To reach an effective risk management, there must exist a uniform definition and categorization of risk.13 In other words, risk management does not eliminate risk, but provides analysis and advice with which to maximize returns while reducing losses—a “risk/return trade-off” scenario.14
The 2017 OECD Guidelines define risks as “the effect of uncertainty on the objectives of the business.”15 Indeed, every action a business takes involves risk. Generally, the more risk involved the higher the expected return will be. Specifically, BEPS Actions 8-10 provides a six-step approach to analyzing risk: (1) “identification of economically significant risks in the transaction; (2) Contractual assumption of the risks; (3) Functional analysis with respect to risks; (4) Interpretation of Steps 1 through 3; (5) Allocation of risks; and, (6) Pricing of the controlled transaction.”

The 2017 OECD Guidelines indicate that a company would not take risk without expecting return.17 Risk’s connection with return on value can be demonstrated by the concept of weighted average cost of capital (WACC) formula.18 “WACC is the expected rate of return for a company on the basis of the average portion of debt and equity in the company’s capital structure, the current required return on equity (i.e., cost of equity), and the company’s cost of debt.”

Given this idea that identifying risk is key to a transfer pricing analysis, multinationals may abuse this strategy by contractually re-allocating risks without any change to business operations. When multinationals abuse20 the transfer pricing methods, they create distortions in the tax revenue of host countries.21 The 2017 OECD Guidelines seeks to tackle this contractual re-allocation of risk.

To combat artificial contractual re-allocation of risk, the 2017 OECD Guidelines determines when risks are contractually assumed by a party that cannot “exercise meaningful and specifically defined control over the risks, or does not have the financial capacity to assume the risks.” Then the tax authorities should re-allocate risks to the party that actually—in economic reality—“does exercise such control and does have the financial capacity to assume the risks.”

Amazon is considered the preeminent online retailer in the world. It operates in varying areas from robotics, movie databases, web services, audio books, food markets, etc. Its expansive reach is a matter of e-commerce highly dependent on the logos and Amazon trademarks, such as the Amazon smiling face, the Amazon logo, etc.

The E-commerce industry falls into the category of internet and software services according to S&P’s Industry Surveys on “Internet Software & Services.1 E-commerce can be categorized into two major segments on the internet: business-to-consumer (B2C) and business-to-business (B2B).2 Amazon.com falls into the B2C category, because Amazon’s main target is consumers.

Amazon is the largest online retailer in the world. But it operates with a great deal of competitors. Below is a chart of the main competitors Amazon deals with in the economy.

Amazon can also be viewed in light of Michael Porter’s Five Forces analysis in terms of value drivers as well.

Amazon operates in the global marketplace as a web-based retail company, although it’s recent merger with or acquisition of Whole Foods suggests it sees a “brick-and-mortar” presence throughout the world as an integral part of its future in addition to the online market.6 However, Amazon still “mostly” operates online and sells products online. Amazon operates as an internet retailer company. It operates online and sells products online.

According to the 10k filing Amazon provided with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Amazon engages in a large variety of products.7 It primarily operates as an online retailer through its algorithms to predict what users want to buy and the integrated search engine that enhances the user’s experience.

This is a chapter in a book.

An Internal Consistency Test For Europe: A Comparative Analysis To U.S. Case Law

Why does the European Union allow state protectionist measures – often leading to double taxation to exist?  In the EU, the Kerckhaert-Morres (2004) case and its implications allowing double taxation.  In the US, the Wynne v. Maryland (2015) case does not allow double taxation.  The question this PhD research hopes to test is what would happen if the EU Kerckhaert-Morress case (and other cases) used the Wynne rule?  Would the result differ?

Presented at: 12th DOCTORAL SEMINAR ON INTERNATIONAL AND EU TAX LAW
30th June to 1st July 2022 — Heidelberg University

The Seminar is open to Ph.D. candidates in the fields of international, European and comparative tax law. It follows successful events held in Bergamo, Groningen, Heidelberg, Linz, Louvain-la-Neuve, Luxembourg and Valencia.

Ph.D. candidates in their second and third year are invited to present their research projects their major hypotheses and/or results, depending on the level of progress. Each presentation will be followed by feedback and discussion with a panel consisting of tax professors and leading experts from practice, including EU institutions. To allow sufficient time for in-depth debates and valuable feedback, the number of presentations is limited to 12 Ph.D. projects.