英文_OECD_使争端解决更加有效——简化同行评审_塞拉利昂（第一阶段）_BEPS包容性框架_行动14_42页_955kb

AI报告摘要

OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project – Simplified Peer Review, Sierra Leone (Stage 1)

Core Content

This document is part of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS), specifically focusing on Action 14, which aims to improve the effectiveness of dispute resolution mechanisms in international taxation. The report evaluates Sierra Leone's implementation of the Action 14 Minimum Standard through a simplified peer review process, highlighting areas for improvement and recommendations.

Main Points

1. Context and Purpose

Digitalisation and Globalisation have challenged traditional international tax rules, creating opportunities for base erosion and profit shifting.
The BEPS project, launched in 2013, introduced a comprehensive package of 15 actions to improve coherence, substance, and transparency in international taxation.
The Two-Pillar Solution was agreed upon in 2021 to address the tax challenges of the digital economy.
Action 14 focuses on dispute resolution, aiming to make it more effective through the implementation of the Minimum Standard.

2. Sierra Leone's Current Status

Sierra Leone has four tax treaties, of which three are in force.
Only two of these treaties include a Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP).
Sierra Leone does not meet the Action 14 Minimum Standard in most aspects, particularly regarding:
- MAP availability and access
- Implementation of MAP agreements
- Resources allocated to MAP
- Statistics reporting and transparency
No bilateral APA programme exists, limiting the ability to prevent disputes.
No MAP profile or guidance has been provided by Sierra Leone.
No information was shared about MAP cases or resources allocated to the competent authority.

Key Recommendations

Element	Areas for Improvement	Recommendations
[A.1]	Two tax treaties lack a provision equivalent to Article 25(3), first sentence, of the OECD Model Tax Convention.	Sierra Leone should request the inclusion of this provision via bilateral negotiations and develop a plan to update the treaties.
[B.1]	Two tax treaties lack a provision equivalent to Article 25(1), first sentence, of the OECD Model Tax Convention.	Sierra Leone should request the inclusion of this provision via bilateral negotiations and develop a plan to update the treaties.
[B.7]	Two tax treaties lack a provision equivalent to Article 25(3), second sentence, of the OECD Model Tax Convention.	Sierra Leone should request the inclusion of this provision via bilateral negotiations and develop a plan to update the treaties.
[C.1]	Two tax treaties lack a provision equivalent to Article 25(2), first sentence, of the OECD Model Tax Convention.	Sierra Leone should request the inclusion of this provision via bilateral negotiations and develop a plan to update the treaties.
[D.3]	Two tax treaties lack a provision equivalent to Article 25(2), second sentence, or alternative provisions in Article 9(1) and Article 7(2).	Sierra Leone should request the inclusion of this provision via bilateral negotiations and develop a plan to update the treaties.

Summary of Action 14 Minimum Standard Elements

A. Tax Treaty Network

MAP provision: Only two of Sierra Leone's four tax treaties include a MAP mechanism.
Article 25 compliance:
- Article 25(3), first sentence: 2 treaties in line, 2 not in line.
- Article 25(1), first sentence: 2 in line, 2 not in line.
- Article 25(3), second sentence: 2 in line, 2 not in line.
- Article 25(2), first sentence: 2 in line, 2 not in line.
- Article 25(2), second sentence: 2 in line, 2 not in line.

B. MAP Guidance and MAP Profile

Sierra Leone has no MAP guidance or MAP profile.
No peer input was provided regarding its implementation of the Action 14 Minimum Standard.
No cooperation was shown during the peer review process.

C. MAP Statistics and Related Analysis

No MAP statistics were submitted for the review period (2016–2023).
No information was provided on the resources allocated to the MAP function.
No performance indicators were established for the MAP function.
No transparency on MAP arbitration positions was provided.

D. Practical Application of the Action 14 Minimum Standard

No implementation of MAP agreements.
No timely implementation of MAP agreements.
No domestic statute of limitation for the implementation of MAP agreements, risking their enforceability.

Conclusion

Sierra Leone's current tax treaties and administrative practices fall short of the Action 14 Minimum Standard, particularly in terms of MAP availability, guidance and transparency, and statistical reporting. To align with the standard, Sierra Leone should:

Amend and update two of its tax treaties.
Engage in bilateral negotiations to include the required provisions.
Develop a comprehensive plan for treaty updates.
Provide guidance and a MAP profile.
Submit MAP statistics and establish performance indicators.
Ensure adequate resources for the competent authority.
Implement MAP agreements in a timely manner.

These improvements will help Sierra Leone enhance its dispute resolution mechanisms, align with international standards, and support the broader goals of the BEPS project and the Two-Pillar Solution.

展开完整摘要