检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:彭岳[1]
机构地区:[1]南京大学法学院
出 处:《北方法学》2016年第6期150-157,共8页Northern Legal Science
摘 要:《企业所得税法》第58条试图全面解决税收协定在国内适用的三个问题,即条约的国内法效力、适用方式和法律位阶。对于如何理解第58条中的"不同规定"与"办理",存在"绝对主权说"和"国际条约说"之争。虽然两种学说的理论依据和具体主张有所不同,但它们均以维护法律体系的纯粹性为最高目标。这两种学说并不符合中国的混合一元条约适用体制。当前,中国应采取更具实质主义导向的方法适用税收协定。Article 58 of the Enterprise Income Tax Law aims to solve three issues in domestic application of taxation treaties,namely,the validity of treaties by domestic laws,their application model and hierarchy of law. With regard to how to understand provisions on "different stipulations"and "handle"of Article 58,disputes arise from two theories of the "doctrine of absolute sovereignty"and the "doctrine of international treaty". Though differing in the theoretic foundations and detailed proposals,these two doctrines converge on preserving purification of legal system as their ultimate priority. However,these theories do not comply with China's hybrid monism regime in application of treaties. Therefore,it is suggested to adopt a more substantive- oriented method in application of taxation treaties.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.222