Abstract

This Article discusses, compares, and analyzes the transplanted General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR) in China and the GAAR in Canada. It demonstrates the similarity between the GAARs on paper and the divergence between the GAARs in action. It argues that the divergence is largely attributable to the differences between Canada and China in the general legal system, legal institutions, judicial and taxpayer attitudes towards tax avoidance, and the ideology of tax avoidance.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.