• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.6 no.6
• /
• pp.117-124
• /
• 2006

Thanks to globalization and multi-corporations which have further created complex economic systems over the years, we are now experiencing new aspects of economic challenges as well. Any country abiding by law and order is required to have taxpayer's consent and cooperation upon levying taxes, however, taxpayers will resist or try to avoid paying taxes at all if they can. Particularly, it becomes easier for them to do by using tax haven wherever they we, and their endeavor is not likely to stop as long as they can. These kinds of actions have undoubtedly created tax loopholes which have in fact surfaced and brought to attention to many. Inevitably, each country aggressively pursuits to exchange tax information with others and cooperate each other Thus this study will look into various types of international tax avoidance cases and its root causes and focuses on ways to cooperate amongst nations. The study also suggests possible ways to develop and enhance international tax systems for all the parties concerned.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.19 no.4
• /
• pp.95-124
• /
• 2017

The dispute analysed in this article concern eight measures taken by Argentina regarding finance, taxation, foreign exchange, and registration. The dispute centered on whether these measures were in violation of the Member's obligations under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), namely most-favored national treatment, national treatment and market access, and whether they are justified by Article XIV and Article 2(a) of the Annex on Financial Services. Important arguments raised in the dispute include whether the services and the service providers of cooperative and non-cooperative countries and/or Argentina subjected to the measures are like for the purposes of Article II and Article XVII of the GATS, whether the regulatory aspects of the measures are to be considered in determining the inconsistency with Article II and Article XVII of the GATS, and whether the measures are justified in that they were taken in accordance with the national laws and regulations aimed at implementing the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes and the Financial Action Task Force. The essence of this dispute lies in the balance of each Member's right to regulate commercial and/or financial activities and its obligations under the GATS. The Appellate Body tried to strike such a balance in its assessment of: (i) likeness of services and service suppliers, (ii) no less favorable treatment under Articles II and XVII, and (iii) the scope of measures under Article 2(a) of the Annex on Financial Services. This article aims to provide an analysis of the Appellate Body's findings, giving light to the relevant jurisprudence and scholars' writings.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.57-104
• /
• 2022

The government has supported the innovation of private firms by intervening the market for various purposes, such as preventing market failure, alleviating information asymmetry, and allocating resources efficiently. Although the government's R&D budget increased rapidly in the 2000s, it is not clear whether the government intervention has made desirable impact on the market. To address this, the current study attempts to explore this issue by doing a systematic literature review on foreign and domestic papers in an integrated way. In total, 168 studies are analyzed using contents analysis approach and various lens, such as policy additionality, policy tools, firm size, unit of analysis, data and method, are adopted for analysis. Overlapping policy target, time lag between government intervention and policy effects, non-linearity of financial supports, interference between different polices, and out-dated R&D tax incentive system are reported as factors hampering the effect of the government intervention. Many policy prescriptions, such as program evaluation indices reflecting behavioral additionality, an introduction of policy mix and evidence-based policy using machine learning, are suggested to improve these hurdles.