scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Kim Brooks

Other affiliations: York University
Bio: Kim Brooks is an academic researcher from Dalhousie University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Double taxation & Tax policy. The author has an hindex of 9, co-authored 46 publications receiving 215 citations. Previous affiliations of Kim Brooks include York University.

Papers
More filters
Posted Content
Kim Brooks1
TL;DR: Tax-Sparing provisions are ineffective in preserving tax incentives designed to attract foreign investment as mentioned in this paper, and they are an ill designed mechanism through which to improve social and economic conditions in low-income countries.
Abstract: Low income countries often offer tax incentives to induce foreign investment, but the effectiveness of these measures may he limited by the domestic tax practices of investors' high income home countries. Most high-income countries provide a tax credit for the amount of tax paid to a foreign jurisdiction on the international profits of resident companies or individuals. Where no tax, or reduced tax, is paid to the foreign jurisdiction because of a tax incentive, the result is that the investor pays the same amount of tax they would have paid in the absence of the tax incentive, but simply pays a larger proportion of it to the resident (high income) state. In other words, the tax incentive offered by the low income country has operated as a revenue transfer from the treasury of the low income state to the treasury of the high income state. A tax sparing provision, included in a tax treaty negotiated between the two countries, preserves the tax incentive by reducing the tax owed to the high income country by the amount of tax that would have been paid to the low income country, but for the tax incentive. In theory, by incorporating tax sparing provisions into tax treaties with low income countries, high income countries assist those countries in their efforts to attract investment by protecting their ability to offer effective tax incentives. However, there has been much debate over whether these provisions are effective in practice. The author outlines the history of tax sparing provisions in Canada, Australia, the U.K. and the U.S., and illustrates the early reluctance of these countries to follow the recommendations of international bodies regarding tax sparing. The OECD has opposed these incentives and has concluded they have long term shortcomings: they are vulnerable to abuse, may erode tax bases and may fail to achieve their purported goal: attracting investment to low income countries. The author argues that despite some recent empirical evidence to the contrary, tax sparing provisions are ineffective in preserving tax incentives designed to attract foreign investment. She concludes that tax sparing provisions used to support tax incentives are an ill designed mechanism through which to improve social and economic conditions in low income countries. Cognizant that some low income countries will continue to seek tax sparing provisions in their tax treaties, the author recommends design features of those provisions that should maximize their contribution to the development of the low income countries while minimizing the potential for their abuse.

18 citations

MonographDOI
10 Jun 2010
TL;DR: This book discusses Queer Theory, Neoliberalism and Urban Governance, and the use of Comparative and International Law in Arguments about LGBT Rights.
Abstract: Chapter 1 Introduction, Robert Leckey and Kim Brooks Part 1: Constitution Chapter 2 Queer Theory, Neoliberalism and Urban Governance, Jon Binnie Chapter 3 Regulating 'Perversion': The Role of Tolerance in De-Radicalizing the Rights Claims of Sexual Subalterns, Ratna Kapur Part 2: Representation Chapter 4 Cinema of Queer Desires: Bombay Cinema and Emergent Sexualities, Shohini Ghosh Chapter 5 Post-Apartheid Fraternity, Post-Apartheid Democracy, Post-Apartheid Sexuality: Queer Reflections on Jane Alexander's 'Butcher Boys', Jaco Barnard-Naude Chapter 6 The Judicial Virtue of Sexuality, Leslie J Moran Part 3: Regulation Chapter 7 Reproductive Outsiders - The Perils and Disruptive Potential of Reproductive Coalitions, Jenni Millbank Chapter 8 Queer/Religious Potentials in US Same-Sex Marriage Debates, Jeffrey A Redding Chapter 9 What's Queer about Polygamy?, Margaret Denike Part 4: Exclusion Chapter 10 An 'Imperial' Strategy? The Use of Comparative and International Law in Arguments about LGBT Rights, Nicholas Bamforth Chapter 11 Reproducing Empire in Same Sex Relationship Recognition and Immigration Law Reform, Nan Seuffert Chapter 12 UnSettled, Ruthann Robson

16 citations

Posted Content
Kim Brooks1
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors make the general case for source taxation of royalty payments, and compare Canadian and Australian tax treaty policies to see to what extent those countries have followed the OECD model convention in negotiating with low-income countries.
Abstract: The proposal made in this paper is a modest one: that high-income countries should further the cause of reducing global inequality by ensuring that in their tax treaties with low-income countries they do not usurp needed revenues by reducing low-income countries' ability to collect tax on income with a source in the low-income country. This argument is made in the specific context of the taxation of royalty payments, which present one of the most extreme examples of high-income countries unfairly confiscating revenues that appropriately belong to their low-income treaty partners. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) model tax treaty, which most high-income countries in the world closely follow in negotiating their own tax treaties, provides that to avoid double taxation, source countries (invariably low-income countries) should reduce their rate of withholding tax on royalty payments to zero. Thus low-income countries that enter into tax treaties modelled on the OECD model convention are unable to levy a tax on royalty payments that have a source in their jurisdiction. In many cases, this simply results in a net transfer of revenue from the low-income country's treasury to the treasury of the high-income country. In making the general case for source taxation of royalty payments, the paper examines and compares Canadian and Australian tax treaty policies to see to what extent those countries have followed the OECD model convention in negotiating with low-income countries.

14 citations

Posted Content
Kim Brooks1
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors discuss the importance of protecting and enhancing the state's revenue-raising and international revenue distribution roles, and propose a feminist approach to allocating a greater portion of international tax revenues to low-income countries.
Abstract: This article has a modest aim - to engage feminists and progressive international tax scholars in a shared dialogue about the importance of protecting and enhancing the state’s revenue-raising and international revenue distribution roles. To this end, the article reviews some of the feminist and critical race scholarship that might assist international tax scholars and policy makers concerned with issues of international revenue distribution; explains the role of tax treaties in allocating tax revenues between nations; applies a feminist analysis to the problem of this international revenue allocation project; and offers some tentative thoughts about a feminist approach to allocating a greater portion of international tax revenues to low-income countries.

12 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Given contemporary attention to diversity and inclusion on Canadian university campuses, and given human rights protections for sexual orientation and gender identity, it is tempting to believe that Canada is a tolerant country as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: Given contemporary attention to diversity and inclusion on Canadian university campuses, and given human rights protections for sexual orientation and gender identity, it is tempting to believe tha...

12 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
01 Nov 2008
TL;DR: Jasbir Puar as mentioned in this paper argues that by accepting their new civil rights, gay people in the USA become complicit in war and imperialism, and argues that it is not just assimilated gay people who are complicit, but also transgressive queers who, she suggests, too frequently elide their own class and racial privilege.
Abstract: Jasbir Puar's ambitious book offers a densely woven web of engagements with key debates in queer theory. The central focus is the multiple biopolitical configurations of sex, sexuality, race, and gender that have been unleashed by the war on terror, examining how the limited extension of civil rights for lesbians and gay men in the USA and Europe has allowed the USA and its allies to present the continuing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as human rights missions against `backward' Islamic states that oppress women and gay men. She suggests sexual freedom is no longer perverse, but a strand of US and British exceptionalism that provides the `moral authority' to intervene in the affairs of other states. Puar argues that, by accepting their new civil rights, gay people in the USA become complicit in war and imperialism. Her work seeks to `̀ exhume the convivial relations'' (page xiv) between queerness and militarism. And she does mean `queerness'; Puar maintains that it is not just assimilated gay people who are complicit, but also transgressive queers who, she suggests, too frequently elide their own class and racial privilege. In this context, Puar's work extends recent debates surrounding homonormativity, moving away from a class-centred critique of the ways in which certain lesbian and gay populations have been incorporated into mainstream consumption, and refocusing the terms of the debate around homonationalism, or the ways in which lesbians and gay men (in the USA) have become aligned with the interests of the state. While her argument may be valid for the USA, I found Puar's attempt to extend her analysis to a European context both challenging and less convincing. Terrorist Assemblages opens with an interrogation of the links between contemporary homonationalism and biopolitics. The rise of homonationalism is then explored further through an excavation of the `sexuality of terrorism'. This chapter charts the trajectories of different sexualised discourses in the years since 9/11, noting how queer and feminist critiques have frequently, if unwittingly, reproduced imperialist representations of the queer sexualities of terrorists. This theme is pursued subsequently through a discussion of US sexual exceptionalism and how, in the aftermath of the revelations of torture at Abu Ghraib, Muslim masculinities were represented through a number of contradictory frames, as simultaneously `̀ sexually excessive and repressive'' (page xxv). Although these initial chapters highlight the conservative consequences of US homonationalism, the third chapter examines the simultaneous production of queer, liberal subjects through a discussion of the debates surrounding the decriminalisation of sodomy in the USA in 2003. Puar argues that celebratory queer readings of the 2003 Lawrence v Texas ruling, framed as it was on an assumption that same-sex couples are worthy of having their domestic privacy protected from state surveillance, only stand up if they ignore the biopolitical economies of control and the intensified surveillance of other bodies unleashed by the US Patriot Act. The exploration of queer, liberal subject formations is extended through a discussion of the pressures on South Asian queer diasporas in the USA to conform to homonormative imperatives. In this final chapter, Puar begins an affective reading of the troubling and confusing bodies of turban-wearing Sikh Americans (who are frequently mistaken for Muslim terrorists). This affective approach is intensified in the conclusion of the book, where Puar proposes rethinking queerness as neither identity, nor anti-identity, but as a spatially and temporally contingent assemblage with a focus on becoming; a queerness that offers corporeal convergences beyond intersectionality, attuning instead to the movements, intensities, and energies inhabiting events, spaces, and corporealities. She seeks a queerness that challenges the fixity of racial and sexual taxonomies that can be measured and used to separate us from them. This queerness deprivileges the queer/not queer binary, moving beyond an approach that is exclusively resistant and dissenting, to one that acknowledges its own complicity in the production Reviews Environment and Planning A 2008, volume 40, pages 2791 ^ 2792

358 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: The authors argued that some scholars of color write in a distinctive "voice" by virtue of their experience and background and pointed out the paradigmatic gap between critical race theory and mainstream scholarship.
Abstract: Analyzes and responds to an article criticizing the idea that some scholars of color write in a distinctive "voice" by virtue of their experience and background. Summarizes how conventional liberal discourse views the issue of voice. Contrasts that view with outsider perspectives and illuminates the paradigmatic gap between critical race theory and mainstream scholarship.

169 citations

Book ChapterDOI
Tsilly Dagan1
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine the interactions between the unilateral policies of different types of countries and demonstrate how these interactions reduce tax levels to as great an extent as treaties do, and show that these ubiquitous treaties are not necessary for preventing double taxation, and that they serve much less heroic goals, such as easing bureaucratic hassles and coordinating tax terms between the contracting countries, and may have much more cynical consequences, particularly redistributing tax revenues from the poorer to the richer signatory countries.
Abstract: The prevailing view regarding tax treaties emphasizes their role as the indispensable mechanism for alleviating double taxation of international transactions. Policymakers assume that tax treaties benefit everyone involved. By reducing the burden of double taxation, the treaties facilitate the free movement of capital, goods and services, and help achieve allocational efficiencies. In this Article, I show that these ubiquitous treaties are not necessary for preventing double taxation. Rather, they serve much less heroic goals, such as easing bureaucratic hassles and coordinating tax terms between the contracting countries, and may have much more cynical consequences, particularly redistributing tax revenues from the poorer to the richer signatory countries. Using game theory, I examine the interactions between the unilateral policies of different types of countries and demonstrate how these interactions reduce tax levels to as great an extent as treaties do. Without offering any significantly greater degree of stability, treaties often just replicate the mechanism that countries unilaterally use to alleviate double taxation. One substantial difference, however, does distinguish the unilateral solution from the treaty mechanism. While equilibria of the interaction between unilateral strategies tend to allow "host" countries to benefit from collecting tax revenues, tax treaties usually allocate the revenues more to the benefit of "residence" countries. The revenue disparity is probably insignificant in cases involving two developed countries. But in treaties between developing and developed countries, usually host and residence countries, respectively, reallocating tax revenues means regressive redistribution - to the benefit of the developed countries at the expense of the developing ones.

81 citations