Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. International & Comparative Law Quarterly
  4. Volume 58
Journal Home
Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Publication date:

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×
< Back to all issues

Volume 58 - January 2009

Contents

Page 2 of 4

Shorter Articles

Article

  • THE DIRECT SETTLEMENT OF EC CARTEL CASES

  • Andreas Stephan
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    14 July 2009, pp. 627-654

  • In June 2008 the European Commission adopted a system of direct settlement for cartel cases, inspired by a comparative glance across the Atlantic where the majority of antitrust defendants enter negotiated guilty pleas. Whereas settlements in Europe are viewed as a method for expediting the conclusion of cases (distinct from the leniency notice), in the US they complement the offer of immunity as a device for encouraging cooperation. In both jurisdictions they have the effect of reducing the levels of fines imposed. This paper compares how well the two systems fare at enhancing administrative efficiency and deterrence, while maintaining transparency.

Shorter Articles

Article

  • OPTIONS FOR TAXING FINANCIAL SUPPLIES IN VALUE ADDED TAX: EU VAT AND AUSTRALIAN GST MODELS COMPARED

  • RITA DE LA FERIA, MICHAEL WALPOLE
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    21 October 2009, pp. 897-932

  • The taxation of financial services is one of the most vexing aspects of a Value Added Tax (VAT). Conceptually, VAT should apply to any fee for service but where financial services are concerned there is a difficulty in identifying the taxable amount, ie the value added by financial institutions. As a result, most jurisdictions, including the EU, simply exempt financial services from VAT. Treating financial services as exempt, however, gives rise to significant legal and economic distortions. Consequently, a few countries have in recent years attempted an alternative VAT approach to financial services. Amongst these is Australia, which in 2000 introduced a Goods and Services Tax (GST) with a ‘reduced input tax credit’ system. This paper compares the current treatment of financial supplies, under a VAT-type system, in the EU and in Australia. The aim is to ascertain whether the Australian GST treatment of financial services is, as commonly thought, superior to the EU one, and consequently, whether introducing an Australian-type model should constitute a policy consideration for the EU.

Shorter Articles

Current Developments: Public International Law

Shorter Articles

Current Developments: Private International Law

Current Developments: Public International Law

Current Developments: European Union Law

Current Developments: Public International Law

Current Developments: European Union Law

Current Developments: Public International Law

Current Developments: Private International Law

Current Developments: Public International Law

Page 2 of 4