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 email@example.com
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.
Many people think that people with mental disorders might be dangerous or unpredictable. These patients face various sources of disadvantages and experience discrimination in job interviews, in education, and housing. Mental health-related stigma occurs not only within the public community, it is a growing issue among professionals as well. Our study is the first that investigates the stigmatising attitude of psychiatrists across Europe.
We designed a cross-sectional, observational, multi-centre, international study of 33 European countries to investigate the attitude towards patients among medical specialists and trainees in the field of general adult and child and adolescent psychiatry.
An internet-based, anonymous survey will measure the stigmatising attitude by using the local version of the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers. Data gathering started in July this year and will continue until December 2020.
This study will be the first to describe the stigmatising attitude of psychiatric practitioners across Europe from their perspectives.
The study will contribute to knowledge of gaps in stigmatising attitude towards people with mental health problems and will provide with new directions in anti-stigma interventions.
In Chapter 4, some of the tax obstacles arising in the cross-border movement of companies were examined, the emphasis being firstly on direct investment. It was reiterated that EU law does not impose any immediate obligations on Member States on how to structure their corporate tax systems in terms of rates, taxable base, depreciation and so on. What EU law does is to prevent Member States from imposing rules that hinder a domestic company from carrying on its business in another Member State (home State obstacles), or rules that hinder a non-resident company from carrying on its business in a similar way to domestic companies (host State obstacles). As far as companies were concerned, issues such as expenses in foreign holdings and cross-border loss relief were considered. As far as permanent establishments are concerned, apart from different treatment compared to subsidiaries, issues such as loss relief, notional expenses, attribution of profits were examined.
Chapter 8 reviewed the increasing impact of the State aid prohibition on EU corporate tax law. This Chapter showed how this prohibition has affected the design of a country’s tax system and certain aspects of its administration. The central role of the Commission and, to a lesser extent, national courts was explored. Relevant soft law and some important case law in this area were considered, before some of the high profile investigations focusing on tax rulings were analysed (e.g. Belgian Excess Profits, Staburcks, Fiat, Apple etc)
Chapter 2 examined the current instruments of positive integration that affect Member State corporate tax systems. It was shown that, notwithstanding the limitations of the Union’s power to legislate in the direct tax field, there has been legislation in areas where it was deemed expedient for the proper functioning of the Internal Market. This legislation is, however, limited and targeted to specific situations. The Chapter examines the Parent-Subsidiary Directive, the Interest and Royalties Directive, the directives on mutual assistance, the Arbitration Convention and the Tax Dispute Resolution Mechanisms Directive. There is also a review of the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive.
Chapter 7 examined the concept of tax avoidance in the context of EU law. This chapter also examined various types of anti-abuse rules and their compatibility with EU law. An attempt was made to assess the Court’s judgments in the area of controlled foreign companies, thin capitalization and transfer pricing. The position following the introduction of the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive was also assessed, whenever relevant. It was shown that there is some tension between established case law and the provisions of the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive, most of which apply primarily in a mechanical way. What was also notable was the shift of emphasis from having the Court of Justice scrutinize national anti-abuse rules, to demanding from Member States to introduce de minimis anti-abuse rules based on this Directive. As regards transfer pricing rules, it was argued that the current judgments of the Court of Justice could give rise to variable interpretation of basic concepts of international tax law, due to the obscure relationship between the Court’s commercial justification test and the OECD’s arm’s length principle.
The Court’s general methodology in direct tax cases was considered in Chapter 3. The application of the various fundamental freedoms in the context of direct tax law were examined. Chapter 3 identified some trends and ad hoc principles that have developed in the Court’s case law. The status of tax treaties and of the OECD Model Tax Convention in the Court’s jurisprudence was also examined. It was shown that even though the Court of Justice is generally reluctant to consider the overall situation in which a national measure is applied and often ignores out-of-state benefits or burdens, tax treaties have been interpreted as forming part of the (domestic) legal context in which the measure arises. The unsatisfactory nature of the litigation process was also discussed in Chapter 3.
In Chapter 1, the inherent limitations in the powers of the EU institutions to enact legislation in the field of direct taxes were discussed. The lack of Union competence in this area and the sensitivity of Member States to any attempts for harmonisation were identified as the main reasons for the scarce legislation. Chapter 1 also considered the historical background to some of the legislative proposals for the removal of tax obstacles in the cross-border movement of companies.Proposals for harmonisation were followed by proposals for coordination and ad hoc targeted measures. These led to piecemeal legislative solutions and soft law. It was explained how with the advent of the BEPS project, the Commission produced various legislative proposals, most of which were very protective of Member State tax bases. The soft law initiatives also proved very important, as they laid the ground for the creation of a common external fiscal policy, even in the absence of a common internal fiscal policy. This has proven to be a springboard for further developments, as shown from recent developments and the Brexit discourse.
In Chapter 5, the treatment of portfolio investment was examined. For inbound dividends, the general principle is that shareholders (corporate or non-corporate) receiving foreign-sourced dividends should be treated the same way as shareholders receiving domestic dividends if they are in an objectively comparable situation, unless different treatment is justified. If the country of residence of the shareholder (the home State) chooses to provide reliefs for domestic dividends, then it must provide the same reliefs at least for EU-sourced dividends. The fact that economic double taxation is suffered because another State has imposed corporation tax on the underlying profits generating the dividends is not a relevant consideration. It has been found that a home State is not obliged to give to shareholders a credit for foreign withholding taxes, irrespective of whether it gives such credit for domestic withholding taxes. Recent cases were reviewed, some of which explored the equivalence of the credit and exemption methods in this context. Case law on the taxation of outbound dividends was very similar but with some subtle differences. This chapter also examined the payment of interest.
Chapter 6 examined aspects of reorganisations, focusing first on the Merger Directive. It was shown that as a result of the limitations of the Merger Directive, freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital have been used to ensure that a wider range of reorganisation operations are protected. Chapter 6 examined situations where a company migrates to another jurisdiction by transferring its seat and the exit tax implications of these. The early case law on exit taxes levied on individuals was briefly reviewed and contrasted with later case law . In this later case law, the Court of Justice mandated that Member States must give taxpayers the option to choose between immediate payment of the exit tax, or deferred payment with all its administrative difficulties, including (possibly) the payment of interest and the provision of a bank guarantee when there was a risk of non-recovery. In more recent cases, the Court of Justice found the phased deferral of exit taxes to be permissible and the payment of 5 yearly instalments proportional. The exit tax provision of the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive was also examined.
Chapter 9 is the final chapter which summarises some of the conclusions from each of the previous chapters. There is also a discussion as to the future of EU corporate tax law, in light of recent developments such as Brexit, the EU list of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions, covid-19 etc
The aim of this study was to determine the extent that appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), per Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance, was used during the coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic by health-care personnel (HCP) in Louisiana in 5 clinical settings.
An online questionnaire was distributed to the LA Nursery registry. Appropriate use of PPE in each of the 5 clinical scenarios was defined by the authors based on CDC guidelines. The scenarios ranged from communal hospital space to carrying out aerosol generating procedures (AGPs). A total of 1760 HCP participated between June and July 2020.
The average adherence in LA was lowest for the scenario of carrying out AGPs at 39.5% compliance and highest for the scenario of patient contact when COVID-19 not suspected at 82.8% compliance. Adherence among parishes varied widely. Commentary to suggest a shortage of PPE supply and the practice of re-using PPE was strong.
Use of appropriate PPE varied by setting. It was higher in scenarios where only face masks (or respirators) were the standard (ie, community hospital or when COVID-19 not suspected) and lower in scenarios where additional PPE (eg, gloves, eye protection, and isolation gown) was required.
How does EU law affect Member State corporate tax systems and the cross-border activities of companies? This book traces the historical development of EU corporate tax law and provides an in-depth analysis of a number of issues affecting companies, groups of companies, and permanent establishments. Christiana HJI Panayi examines existing legislation, soft law, and the case law of the Court of Justice, as well as the Commission's burgeoning external tax policy initiatives. The book not only explores the tax issues pertaining to direct investment, but also analyzes the taxation of passive investment income, corporate reorganisations, exit taxes, and the treatment of anti-abuse regimes. Through this careful analysis, the book highlights the convergences and divergences arising from the interplay between EU corporate tax law and international tax law, especially the OECD model tax convention. This second edition also reviews developments in the context of the State aid prohibition and high-profile cases on tax rulings.