IJEBM | UNCITRAL Model Law Development of Arbitration Framework for EPC Disclosure of Travaux Preparatoires using Political Expediency of Tax Planning

Indexing and Abstracting

UNCITRAL Model Law Development of Arbitration Framework for EPC Disclosure of Travaux Preparatoires using Political Expediency of Tax Planning

Zharama Llarena

International Journal of Engineering, Business And Management(IJEBM), Vol-6,Issue-6, November - December 2022, Pages 25-29 , 10.22161/ijebm.6.6.4

Download | Downloads : 6 | Total View : 560

Article Info: Received: 18 Oct 2022; Received in revised form: 04 Nov 2022; Accepted: 10 Nov 2022; Available online: 18 Nov 2022

Abstract:

Corporate Governance is a conceptual framework of business designs intended to illustrate the various activities of a company towards fulfilling its profit goals as private stakeholder and contributing to public interests for social obligation of sustainable development. Disclosure of corporate social responsibility is the central mechanism of corporate governance. Based on stakeholder theory, corporate governance strongly influences corporate social responsibility disclosure to enhance the relationship of stakeholders and its business community. Tax aggressiveness is utilized by board director and its members to lessen tax contribution which is contrary to the government sector goals of maximizing tax impositions for public welfare and safety. Unlawful behavior on tax aggressiveness is known as tax evasion while tax avoidance is not a violation and serves as a loophole to the taxation system. UNCITRAL model law is a legal arbitration concept of making “commercial” expand to other comparable jurisdiction of international trade. The European Patent Commission is the legal authority that delineates medical policies from patented products. Travaux preparatoires is a design practice within legal context of restricted jurisdiction for commercial exercise of strict liability. This paper aims to develop arbitration framework based on stakeholder theory of corporate governance to explain the correlation of tax planning with patented products and medical processes involving therapeutic, surgical, and veterinary policies. Therefore, tax evasion is not apparent criminal behavior and tax planning on medical policies and patented drugs must have a separate strategic means of increasing monetary success for tax avoidance to be clearly managed by the company.

Keywords:

corporate governance, corporate social responsibility, tax aggressiveness, tax avoidance, tax evasion, travaux preparatoires

References:

[1] J. Widiatmoko, “Corporate Governance Mechanism and Corporate Social Responsibility on Firm Value,” vol. 3(1), Relevance: Journal of Management and Business, 2020.
[2] Q.L. Huynh, “A Triple of Corporate Governance, Social Responsibility and Earnings Management,” vol. 7(3), Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 2020.
[3] G.M. Gouda, and R. Sharma, “A Study of Corporate Governance and Social Responsibility,” vol. 4(1), International Journal of Advance Research and Innovative Ideas in Education, 2018.
[4] R. Handayani, “Analysis of Corporate Social Responsibility and Good Corporate Governance to Tax Aggressiveness,” vol. 9(3), International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, 2019.
[5] B. Salhi, J. Al Jabr, and A. Jarboui, “A Comparison of Corporate Governance and Tax Avoidance of UK and Japanese Firms,” vol. 23(3), Comparative Economic Research, 2020.
[6] K.M. Hidy, and K.W. Diener, “Damages under CISG: Attorneys’ Fees and other Losses in International Commercial Law,” vol. 29(1), Journal of Transnational Law and Policy,” 2020.
[7] M.F. Hoellering, “The UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration,” vol. 20(1), The International Lawyer, 1986.
[8] E. Ventose, “Patent Protection for Second and Further Medical Uses Under the European Patent Convention,” vol. 6(1), SCRIPTed, 2009.
[9] R. O’Keefe, “Protection of Cultural Property under International Criminal Law,” vol. 11(2), Melbourne Journal of International Law, 2010.
[10] F. Mantilla-Serrano, & J. Adam, “UNCITRAL Model Law: Missed Opportunities for Enhanced Uniformity,” vol. 31(1), UNSW Law Journal, 2008.
[11] O. Obaretin, “Corporate Governance Mechanisms and Tax Aggressiveness of Listed Firms in Nigeria,” vol. 3(1), Amity Journal of Corporate Governance, 2018.
[12] A. Dias, L. Rodrigues, and R. Craig, “Corporate Governance Effects on Social Responsibility Disclosures,” vol. 11(2), Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 2017.
[13] N. Sanson, “Statutory Interpretation,” 2nd ed., Oxford University Press: Australia, 2016.