To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In 2010, we proposed a personal factor classification which was published in this journal. Since then, the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the biopsychosocial model were increasingly incorporated into the German Social Law Code for participation and rehabilitation, implying that personal factors are indispensable for individual assessments. For the present study, we aimed to come up with an updated version of the personal factors classification based on current research. To achieve this goal, we employed a qualitative approach to re-examine the basic structure, consistency, and selection of categories in the classification from our 2010 study, to amend and supplement the categories to reflect best practice personal factor classifications. Our findings indicate that the basic structure remained largely unchanged, with relatively minor changes, including the deletion of 5 categories from our 2010 classification, 10 categories revised in format or content, and 13 new categories. We believe our revised classification to be useful for supporting users in systematically, comprehensively, and transparently reporting influences on specific aspects of individuals’ life and living background on their functioning and participation, thus facilitating an equitable allocation of disability benefits.
Despite the increased focus on improving advance care planning (ACP) in African Americans through community partnerships, little published research focused on the role of the African American church in this effort. This study examines parishioner perceptions and beliefs about the role of the church in ACP and end-of-life care (EOLC).
Qualitative interviews were completed with 25 church members (parishioners n = 15, church leader n = 10). The coding of data entailed a direct content analysis approach incorporating team experts for final themes.
Seven themes emerged: (1) church role on end-of-life, (2) advocacy for health and well-being, (3) health literacy in EOLC, (4) lay health training on ACP and EOLC, (5) church recognized as a trusted source, (6) use of church ministries to sustain programs related to ACP and EOLC, and (7) community resources for EOLC needs.
Significance of results
The church has a central role in the African American Community. These findings suggest that involving African American churches in ACP and EOLC training can have a positive effect on facilitating planning and care during illness, dying, and death for their congregants.
The Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Consortium, about 60 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-supported CTSA hubs at academic health care institutions nationwide, is charged with improving the clinical and translational research enterprise. Together with the NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), the Consortium implemented Common Metrics and a shared performance improvement framework.
Initial implementation across hubs was assessed using quantitative and qualitative methods over a 19-month period. The primary outcome was implementation of three Common Metrics and the performance improvement framework. Challenges and facilitators were elicited.
Among 59 hubs with data, all began implementing Common Metrics, but about one-third had completed all activities for three metrics within the study period. The vast majority of hubs computed metric results and undertook activities to understand performance. Differences in completion appeared in developing and carrying out performance improvement plans. Seven key factors affected progress: hub size and resources, hub prior experience with performance management, alignment of local context with needs of the Common Metrics implementation, hub authority in the local institutional structure, hub engagement (including CTSA Principal Investigator involvement), stakeholder engagement, and attending training and coaching.
Implementing Common Metrics and performance improvement in a large network of research-focused organizations proved feasible but required substantial time and resources. Considerable heterogeneity across hubs in data systems, existing processes and personnel, organizational structures, and local priorities of home institutions created disparate experiences across hubs. Future metric-based performance management initiatives across heterogeneous local contexts should anticipate and account for these types of differences.
Considers bilateral tax administration issues. Identifies the core areas of tax administration (provision of information, assessment, dispute resolution and collection of tax) and tax treaty rules targeted at three of these. Discusses automatic exchange of information, spontaneous exchange of information and information on request. Notes the importance of the 1988 multilateral convention on assistance in tax matters and developments and the BEPS project including the common reporting standard, country-by-country reporting and the tax inspectors without borders project. With regard to dispute resolution, the mutual agreement procedure in tax treaties is discussed as a logical extension to a domestic binding rulings system. The extension of that procedure to arbitration of tax disputes is considered, particularly the push toward arbitration under the BEPS project and the MLI. Finally, assistance in the collection of tax by one tax authority on behalf of another tax authority is discussed. The discussion considers the recent break down of an original resistance to assistance in collection and the importance of the 1988 multilateral convention is again noted. Relevant EU Law is discussed, including the Directive on Cooperation in the Field of Taxation, Directive on Dispute Resolution Mechanisms and Directive on Mutual Assistance for Recovery of Tax Claims.
Considers source country taxing rights under tax treaties. Initially follows the schedular approach of the OECD Model, the distributive provisions of which give source countries full taxing rights (immovable property, business, employment), limited taxing rights (dividends, interest) or no taxing rights (royalties, capital gains, other income). Source country rights, even if full, may be limited by treaty nondiscrimination provisions, which are compared to EU fundamental freedoms. Particular attention is devoted to taxation of business profits, including source country subsidiaries and permanent establishments. Problems inherent in the dual fictions of the authorised OECD approach to taxation of permanent establishments are noted. The second heading considers source country deductibility of payments made to non-residents. Deductibility of these payments can lead to base erosion while denying deductions raises issues of discrimination. The final heading first considers two fundamental features of payments that are critical for source country taxation; quantification and characterisation. Quantification raises issues of transfer pricing. Varying taxation based on characterisation raises issues of fungibility of payments, particularly in the definitions of ‘dividends’, ‘interest’ and ‘royalties’. These issues crossover in excessive interest payments and thin capitalisation. Finally, the chapter deals with reconciliation of provisions under the schedular approach.
This book has set about identifying, explaining, categorising and analysing, at a basic level, the rules that govern income taxation of international commercial transactions. The lasting impression is one of various sets of overlaying, largely uncoordinated and complex measures that deal with some matters (not necessarily the most important) better than others.
Focuses on cross-border acquisitions, mergers and reconstructions, particularly those involving permanent establishments and subsidiaries. Previous chapters presume a stable jurisdiction to tax on the basis of source or residence. This chapter considers changes of source and changes of residence. There are limited ways in which a source of income may be changed. It may be created, such as where assets are transferred to a new subsidiary or permanent establishment. Source may be terminated, such as where an existing subsidiary or permanent establishment is liquidated. A source may be transferred, such as on the sale of a subsidiary or permanent establishment. Finally, a source of income may be varied, such as on the conversion of a permanent establishment into a subsidiary, conversion of a subsidiary into a permanent establishment or in cases of mergers and demergers involving corporate groups. Changes of residence are simpler. The tax consequences of commencing residence or terminating residence are considered. In all these matters, the dearth of tax treaty rules is compared with the position under EU Law and particularly the Mergers Directive.
Considers tax treaty limitations on residence country taxing rights, including the obligation to provide foreign tax relief and methods of relief for double taxation, especially the exemption method and credit method. The treaty obligation is compared to the limited approach under EU Law. The separate legal identity of corporations causes two problems for foreign tax relief. First, economic double taxation of corporate income results if the tax charge cascades on distributions up a chain of corporations. Methods of underlying foreign tax relief or indirect foreign tax relief are considered. Second, controlled foreign corporations may be used as a dividend trap or method of avoiding tax. Rules to address these are discussed. The second heading considers methods of calculating foreign income and the impact on foreign tax relief. Here there are few rules in tax treaties but burgeoning EU case law. Allocating expenses between foreign and domestic activities is critical when calculating the volume of exempt foreign income or, under the foreign tax credit method, the limitation on credit. Expenses may produce losses. The treatment of foreign losses on domestic income and domestic losses on foreign income are considered. Finally, cross-border intragroup losses under various systems of group relief are considered.
Considers the limited scope of tax treaties (i.e., things that tax treaties do not cover). Initially continues in a bilateral scenario investigating mismatches between source and residence countries regarding the fundamental features of payments. These may cause income to disappear or be recognised twice. Particularly considers hybrid entities, hybrid financial instruments, corresponding adjustments and secondary adjustments, as well as BEPS recommendations regarding hybrid mismatch arrangements. The second heading discusses limits inherent in the bilateral nature of tax treaties, particularly when three or more countries are involved (triangular situations). Tax treaties seek to resolve issues of source and residence in bilateral situations. Triangular situations can produce a mismatch of source of income or mismatch of residence of entities. Dual source of income and dual residence are discussed. Finally, re-sourcing and re-characterisation using intermediaries in third countries is considered. Two issues here are use of tax havens and treaty shopping, which are considered from the perspectives of intermediate, source and residence countries. Discusses rules on beneficial ownership, limitation of benefits, most favoured nation and the principal purpose test in tax treaty GAARs, as well as offshore indirect transfers. Responses under the BEPS project are compared to expanding EU rules and case law.
Discusses fundamentals of income tax that are relevant to international commercial transactions, including identification of the fundamental features of payments as the building blocks of the income tax base. Considers the major sources of rules for taxation of international commercial transactions, including the OECD Model, the UN Model, EU direct tax law and their interaction with domestic tax rules. This consideration includes the coverage of tax treaties, their status, whether a dualist or monist approach to implementation is adopted as well as treaty override and treaty underride. There is a particular focus on how countries might implement rules so as to avoid the restrictions of tax treaties. The chapter moves to consider the interpretation of tax treaties including the relevance of the Vienna Convention on the interpretation of treaties and the status and relevance of the Commentary on the OECD Model. The abuse of tax treaties is also considered including its link with interpretation of tax treaties, the specific tax treaty GAAR based on principal purpose test and the interaction between tax treaties and domestic anti-abuse rules. In all of these matters there is a comparison with EU direct tax law, its implementation and interpretation.
Discusses the jurisdiction or right to tax international commercial transactions, including identification of relevant connecting factors, which may be based on the person deriving the income or activities producing the income. In the context of persons, the discussion considers the characterisation of persons under domestic law and its interaction with entity characterisation under tax treaties. It moves to consider residence as a connecting factor, both under domestic law and tax treaties and tax treaty tiebreakers applicable to dual residents. Residence is fundamental to the application of tax treaties. The discussion briefly considers the location of activities that found a jurisdiction to tax based on source of income. These matters are compared to the scope of the fundamental freedoms and relevant Directives under EU Law. The discussion then considers divided economic allegiance and particularly where source and residence are divided between countries. Various notions of neutrality and efficiency are discussed, as well as rules preventing cross-border restrictions, including nondiscrimination. Focus moves to the internation relationship including the OECD harmful tax competition project and BEPS project. These are compared with EU state aid rules and the EU code of conduct on harmful tax practices. Methods of allocating tax rights are discussed.
Tax law is a dynamic area where politics, law, economics, commerce and accountancy intersect. It is renowned for its complexity and intricacy; typically, the income tax law (or general tax code, if applicable) is the longest law that a country has. At least in the UK, this has been the case for centuries.
International Commercial Tax, 2nd edition takes account of the substantial developments of the last decade. With more than sixty percent new material, the book considers the outcomes of the OECD's BEPS project and the substantial consequential 2017 revisions of the OECD and UN Model tax treaties. With the continuing rise in the economic importance of non-OECD countries and the UK distancing itself from the EU, there has been a refocusing with less direct attention on UK domestic law and greater focus on the approaches of other significant countries, especially other common law jurisdictions. This provides greater flexibility as to how a particular point or issue is illustrated with practical examples. Greater attention is given to the UN Model, which is increasingly important. The book continues to compare the approach under model tax treaties with EU law and is updated with copious references and illustrations from the burgeoning jurisprudence of the EU Court.
To determine sociodemographic factors associated with occupational, recreational and firearm-related noise exposure.
This nationally representative, multistage, stratified, cluster cross-sectional study sampled eligible National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey participants aged 20–69 years (n = 4675) about exposure to occupational and recreational noise and recurrent firearm usage, using a weighted multivariate logistic regression analysis.
Thirty-four per cent of participants had exposure to occupational noise and 12 per cent to recreational noise, and 13 per cent repeatedly used firearms. Males were more likely than females to have exposure to all three noise types (adjusted odds ratio range = 2.63–14.09). Hispanics and Asians were less likely to have exposure to the three noise types than Whites. Blacks were less likely than Whites to have occupational and recurrent firearm noise exposure. Those with insurance were 26 per cent less likely to have exposure to occupational noise than those without insurance (adjusted odds ratio = 0.74, 95 per cent confidence interval = 0.60–0.93).
Whites, males and uninsured people are more likely to have exposure to potentially hazardous loud noise.