• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.33-52
• /
• 2014

Although climate change is a global scale question, some concerns have been raised that principles of investment arbitration may not adequately address the domestic implementation of climate change measures. A recent ICSID investment arbitration of Vattenfall v. Germany with regard to the investor's alleged damages from the phase-out of nuclear plants is a salient climate change case. The 2005 Kyoto Protocol was made to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and it provides a number of flexible mechanisms such as Joint Implementation (JI) and Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Implementation of the Kyoto Protocol allows dispute settlement through investor-state arbitration. Any initiation of stricter emission standards can violate the prohibition on expropriations in investment agreements, regardless of the measures created to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The effect-based expropriation doctrine can charge changes to existing emission standards as interference with the use of property that goes against the legitimate expectation of a foreign investor. In regulatory chill, threat of investor claims against the host state may preclude the strengthening of climate change measures. Stabilization clauses also have a freezing effect on the hosting state's regulation and a new law applicable to the investment. In the fair and equitable standard, basic expectations of investors when entering into earlier carbon-intensive operations can be affected by a regulation seeking to change into a low-carbon approach. As seen in the Methanex tribunal, a non-discriminatory and public purpose of environmental protection measures should be considered as non-expropriation in the arbitral tribunal unless its decision would intentionally impede a foreign investor's investment.

• Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information
• /
• v.25 no.10
• /
• pp.185-191
• /
• 2020

This article proposes the unified an arm's length price of transfer pricing for thin capitalization since the scope of permanent establishment has been enlarged under Digital Economy and the implementation of Blackchain system to resolve the drawback of finding an arm's length price. The rule of current thin capitalization runs against the non-discrimination of taxation of the tax treaties and the national treatment which deals fairly with goods, sercice and capital money within the country under the treaty of commerce and navigator. In addition, the information of comparable uncontrolled debt are not available of current system to prove the debt which is not subject to the rule of thin capitalization. The united an arm's length price of transfer pricing for thin capitalization can apply to foreign investment as well as domestic corporations, thereby resolving the problem of the non-discrimination of taxation of the tax treaties and the treaty of commerce and navigation. The availability of transaction level data through Blockchain platform to decide whether the debt can be subject to thin capitalization can resolve the issue of comparable uncontrolled debt transaction which can't be found in current business transactions. This article should shed light on the proposing of the unified an arm's length price of transfer pricing for thin capitalization and Blockchain system to prevent the income shifting. This propose provide implication for policymakers on current system of thin capitalization and arm's length principles.