Issued since 1995
Welcome to the Finance of Ukraine site (demo).
Login | Register
ACADEMY
OF FINANCIAL
MANAGEMENT
.


№ 8/2023

№ 8/2023

Fìnansi Ukr. 2023 (8): 7–37
https://doi.org/10.33763/finukr2023.08.007

PUBLIC FINANCE MANAGEMENT

IEFYMENKO Tetiana 1, OLEYNIKOVA Liudmyla 2, SVIRIDOVSKA Anastasiia 3

1SESE “Academy of Financial Management”
OrcID ID : https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9163-3959
2SESE “The Academy of Financial Management”
OrcID ID : https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8204-4434
3SESE “Academy of Financial Management”
OrcID ID : https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1112-5584


Mobilization of internal state revenues in emergency situations: countering tax base erosion and profit shifting


Introduction. Against the background of the post-covid recovery, destroyed by the strengthening phenomena of deglobalization, fragmentation, uncertainty, conflictogenicity, considerable efforts of the member states of the European Union (EU) are aimed at provision of increased financial resources for state needs through restriction of unfair tax practices.
Problem Statement. Domestic Revenue Mobilization (DRM) directs the efforts of countries to increase their own incomes and resources of domestic economy by collecting taxes, duties and other revenues. The task must be completed without additional pressure on the business environment and does not aim to increase the tax burden on small and medium-sized enterprises that have been significantly negatively impacted by the COVID-19 epidemic, the main tools of impact should be focused on combating tax evasion by multinational companies and their beneficiaries and preventing tax base erosion in Ukraine in the post-pandemic and post-war recovery period.
The purpose of the article is to substantiate the fact that for Ukraine, as a candidate for members of the EU, it is important not only to implement the experience of the EU member states in limiting the ability of multinational companies (MNCs) to apply hybrid instruments for tax base erosion using international structures, but also further systemic harmonization of domestic fiscal regulation in accordance with the best practices and modern rules for the prevention of profit shifting and base erosion (BEPS), which are constantly changing within the framework of supranational norms.
Methods. The methods of system-structural analysis, retrospective analysis, analytical, systematization, comparative, dialectical and formal logic were used.
Results. The crisis period of post-Covid recovery has become more complicated by the armed invasion of the Russian Federation on the territory of our country, which requires a search of internal revenue mobilization mechanisms to solve current state obligations, as well as for the formation of economic and epidemiological security of the state in the period of post-war recovery for the sake of preservation of socio-economic development and formation of reliable nation’s health care system.
Conclusions. The introduction of reporting on controlled transactions, CIC, as well as tax payment by jurisdiction (Country by Country reports) is a progressive step in the direction of overcoming the asymmetry of tax information at the global level. For the effective implementation of all mentioned tools after the accession of the country to the Multilateral Agreement on Competent Authorities (MCAA CRS), it is necessary to focus efforts on the regulatory framework for the implementation of European directives, such as ATAD I and II, the implementation of the provisions of DAC7 for the control of digital activities and inclusion in the exchange information on income from intellectual property in the digital economy, as well as the formation of institutional conditions for the implementation of Pillar 1 and 2 at the national level.

Keywords:transmission mechanism, monetary policy, key policy rate, central bank, coronavirus pandemic, interest rate, inflation targeting

JEL: H22, H26, H87


Iefymenko T. . Mobilization of internal state revenues in emergency situations: countering tax base erosion and profit shifting / T. . Iefymenko, L. . OLEYNIKOVA, A. Sviridovska // Фінанси України. - 2023. - № 8. - C. 7-37.

Article original in Ukrainian (pp. 7 - 37) DownloadDownloads :47
1. Armstrong, C. S., Blouin, J. L., & Larcker, D. F. (2012). The incentives for tax planning. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 53 (1-2), 391–411. doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2011.04.001
2. DeSimone, L., Stomberg, B., & Williams, B. (2019). How tax enforcement disparately affects domestic corporations around the world. Research Papers, 3746. doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3225191
3. Gupta, S., Newberry, K. (1997). Determinants of the variability in corporate effective tax rates: Evidence from longitudinal data. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 16 (1), 1–34. doi.org/10.1016/S0278-4254(96)00055-5
4. Hanlon, M., & Slemrod, J. (2009). What does tax aggressiveness signal? Evidence from stock price reactions to news about tax shelter involvement. Journal of Public Economics, 93 (1-2), 126–141. doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2008.09.004
5. Johansson, A., Skeie, O. B., & Sorbe, S. (2017). Anti-avoidance rules against international tax planning: A classification. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, 1356. doi.org/10.1787/1a16e9a4-en
6. Johansson, A., Skeie, O. B., Sorbe, S., & Menon, C. (2016). Tax planning by multinational firms: Firm-level evidence from a cross-country database. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, 1355. doi.org/10.1787/9ea89b4d-en
7. Scholes, M. S., Wolfson, M. A., Erickson, M., Maydew, E. L., Shevlin, T. (2009). Taxes and business strategy: A planning approach (4th Ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.
8. Angyridis, C. (2006). Optimal Capital Income Taxation in an Asymmetric Small Open Economy. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 3 (1), 87–101. doi.org/10.1016/j.jeca.2006.01.005
9. Rangan, G. (2005). Asymmetric Information, Tax Evasion and Alternative Instruments of Government Revenue. Economics Working Papers, 200533. Retrieved from digitalcommons.uconn.edu/econ_wpapers/200533.
10. Roemer, J. E. (2012). The political economy of income taxation under asymmetric information: the two-type case. SERIEs – Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, 3 (1–2), 181–199. doi.org/10.1007/s13209-011-0047-6
11. Cowx, J., & Kerr, N. (2019). The general anti-avoidance rule. Ohio State University. Retrieved from nta.confex.com/nta/2019/mediafile/ExtendedAbstract/Paper3050/10-21-2019%20Draft.pdf.
12. Deloitte. (2017). General anti-avoidance rules (GAAR): India and international experience. Retrieved from www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/in/Documents/tax/in-tax-gaar-india-and-international-experience-noexp.pdf.
13. McGill, R. K., Haye, A. R., & Lipo, S. (2017). G.A.T.C.A. A Practical Guide to Global Anti-Tax Evasion Frameworks. Palgrave Macmillan Cham. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61783-1
14. Carrero, J. M. K., & Seara, A. Q. (2016). The Concept of ‘Aggressive Tax Planning’ Launched by the OECD and the EU Commission in the BEPS Era: Redefining the Border between Legitimate and Illegitimate Tax Planning. Intertax, 44 (3), 206–226. doi.org/10.54648/TAXI2016015
15. Cai, Q., & Zhang, P. (2018). A Theoretical Reflection on the OECD’s New Statistics Reporting Framework for the Mutual Agreement Procedure: Isolating, Measuring, and Monitoring. Journal of International Economic Law, 21 (4), 867–884. doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgy043
16. Filipova-Slancheva, A. (2017). Automatic exchange of tax information: initiation, implementation and guidelines in Bulgarian context. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 15 (2), 510–517. doi.org/10.21511/ppm.15(si).2017.04
17. Mardan, M. (2013). The effects of thin capitalization rules when firms are financially constrained. 8th Norwegian-German Seminar on Public Economics, CESifo, Munich, pp. 4–15.
18. Ruf, M., & Schindker, D. (2015). Debt Shifting and Thin-Capitalization Rules – German Experience and Alternative Approaches. Nordic Tax Journal, 1, 17–33. doi.org/10.1515/ntaxj-2015-0002
19. Iefymenko T., Zhuk, V., & Lovinska, L. (2015). Information in Crisis Management: A Global Aspect of the Standardization of Accounting and Financial Reporting. Kyiv: Academy of Financial Management [in Ukrainian].
20. Oliynyk, Ya., & Chyzhykova, O. (2019). Institutional implementation of transfer pricing: global context and prospects for Ukraine. Finance of Ukraine, 2, 99–110 [in Ukrainian]. doi.org/10.33763/finukr2019.02.099
21. Kucheriavenko, M. P. (2009). Tax procedures: legal nature and classification. Kyiv: Alerta [in Ukrainian].
22. Brekhov, S. S., & Korotun, V. I. (2016). Conceptual foundations and directions of development counteraction system of aggressive tax planning in Ukraine. Efektyvna ekonomika, 11. Retrieved from www.economy.nayka.com.ua/?op=1&z=5249 [in Ukrainian].
23. Tymchenko, O. (2011). International informational collaboration as the factor of counteract tax evasion. Finance of Ukraine, 12, 11–20. Retrieved from finukr.org.ua/?page_id=723&aid=424 [in Ukrainian].
24. OECD. (n. d.). Base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS). Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/beps-actions/.
25. EU Council. (2016, July 12). Directive (EU) 2016/1164 laying down rules against tax avoidance practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market. Retrieved from eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2016.193.01.0001.01.ENG&toc=OJ:L:2016:193:TOC.
26. EU Council. (2017, May 29). Directive (EU) 2017/952 amending Directive (EU) 2016/1164 as regards hybrid mismatches with third countries. Retrieved from eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32017L0952.
27. European Commission. (2016, January). Anti Tax Avoidance Package. Retrieved from taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/anti-tax-avoidance-package_en.
28. The Role of a General Anti-Avoidance Rule in Protecting the Tax Base of Developing Countries (Session 1). (2017, November 9). The General Anti-Avoidance Rule. Retrieved from https//www.un.org/esa/ffd/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/2017TB_08_GAARs_D3_1_Role-of-GAAR.pdf.
29. OECD. (2015). Preventing the Granting of Treaty Benefits in Inappropriate Circumstances, Action 6 - 2015 Final Report, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi.org/10.1787/9789264241695-en
30. OECD. (2015). Developing a Multilateral Instrument to Modify Bilateral Tax Treaties, Action 15 - 2015 Final Report, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi.org/10.1787/9789264241688-en
31. OECD. (n. d.). Action 13. Country-by-Country Reporting. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/beps-actions/action13/.
32. OECD. (2013). Action Plan on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi.org/10.1787/9789264202719-en
33. OECD. (2019). Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital 2017 (Full Version). Paris: OECD Publishing. doi.org/10.1787/g2g972ee-en
34. OECD. (n. d.). Action 6. Prevention of tax treaty abuse. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/beps-actions/action6/.
35. OECD. (n. d.). Action 7. Permanent establishment status. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/beps-actions/action7/.
36. European Commission. (2015). Study on Structures of Aggressive Tax Planning and Indicators (Final Report). Retrieved from taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2016-09/taxation_paper_61.pdf.
37. European Commission. (2017). Aggressive tax planning indicators (Final Report). Retrieved from irihs.ihs.ac.at/id/eprint/4590/1/2017-loretz-sellner-brandl-aggressive-tax-planning-indicators.pdf.
38. UNCTAD. (2018). Trade and Development Report 2018. Retrieved from unctad.org/system/files/official-document/tdr2018_en.pdf.
39. Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe. (2015). Retrieved from eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52015DC0192.
40. Connectivity for a European Gigabit Society. (2019). Retrieved from digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/connectivity-european-gigabit-society-brochure.
41. Digital Europe 2025. (n. d.). Retrieved from www.digitaleurope.org/policies/strongerdigitaleurope/.
42. European Parliament, & EU Council. (2021, 18 May). Business taxation for the 21st century (Communication). Retrieved from taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-06/20210615_communication_on_business_taxation.pdf.
43. Statement on a Two-Pillar Solution to Address the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy. (2021, October 8). Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/statement-on-a-two-pillar-solution-to-address-the-tax-challenges-arising-from-the-digitalisation-of-the-economy-october-2021.htm.
44. Members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS joining the October 2021 Statement on a Two-Pillar Solution to Address the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy as of 9 June 2023. (n. d.). Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/oecd-g20-inclusive-framework-members-joining-statement-on-two-pillar-solution-to-address-tax-challenges-arising-from-digitalisation-october-2021.pdf.
45. OECD. (2019). Programme of Work to Develop a Consensus Solution to the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy, OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/programme-of-work-to-develop-aconsensus-solution-to-the-tax-challenges-arising-from-the-digitalisation-of-the-economy.htm.
46. OECD. (n. d.). Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy – Global Anti-Base Erosion Model Rules. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/tax-challenges-arising-from-the-digitalisation-of-the-economy-global-anti-base-erosion-model-rules-pillar-two.htm.
47. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. (2018). About currency and currency transactions (Act No. 2473-VIII, June 21). Retrieved from zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2473-19#Text.
48. OECD, & Council of Europe. (2011). The Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters: Amended by the 2010 Protocol. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi.org/10.1787/9789264115606-en
49. Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement on Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information. (n. d.). Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/automatic-exchange/about-automatic-exchange/cbc-mcaa.pdf.
50. OECD. (2017). Standard for Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information in Tax Matters. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi.org/10.1787/9789264267992-en
51. Oleynikova, L., & Dolzhenko, I. (2020). Improvement of tax control in Ukraine on the basis of implementing BEPS plan tools and automatic information exchange. RFI Scientific Papers, 3, 79–94 [in Ukrainian]. doi.org/10.33763/npndfi2020.03.079
52. OECD. (2016). Multilateral convention to implement tax treaty related measures to prevent base erosion and profit shifting. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/treaties/multilateral-convention-to-implement-tax-treaty-related-measures-to-prevent-BEPS.pdf.
53. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. (2023). On amendments to the Tax Code of Ukraine and other legislative acts of Ukraine regarding the implementation of the international standard of automatic exchange of information on financial accounts (Act No. 2970-IX, March 20). Retrieved from zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2970-20#Text [in Ukrainian].
54. Ministry of Finance of Ukraine. (2023). On the approval of the Procedure for applying the general reporting standard and proper verification of information on financial accounts (Common Standard on Reporting and Due Diligence for Financial Account Information) (Order No. 282, May 26). Retrieved from zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z1090-23#Text [in Ukrainian].
55. IMF. (n. d.). Government Finance Statistics. Retrieved from data.imf.org/?sk=a0867067-d23c-4ebc-ad23-d3b015045405.
2. DeSimone, L., Stomberg, B., & Williams, B. (2019). How tax enforcement disparately affects domestic corporations around the world. Research Papers, 3746. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3225191.
3. Gupta, S., Newberry, K. (1997). Determinants of the variability in corporate effective tax rates: Evidence from longitudinal data. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 16 (1), 1–34. DOI: 10.1016/S0278-4254(96)00055-5.
4. Hanlon, M., & Slemrod, J. (2009). What does tax aggressiveness signal? Evidence from stock price reactions to news about tax shelter involvement. Journal of Public Economics, 93 (1-2), 126–141. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2008.09.004.
5. Johansson, A., Skeie, O. B., & Sorbe, S. (2017). Anti-avoidance rules against international tax planning: A classification. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, 1356. DOI: 10.1787/1a16e9a4-en.
6. Johansson, A., Skeie, O. B., Sorbe, S., & Menon, C. (2016). Tax planning by multinational firms: Firm-level evidence from a cross-country database. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, 1355. DOI: 10.1787/9ea89b4d-en.
7. Scholes, M. S., Wolfson, M. A., Erickson, M., Maydew, E. L., Shevlin, T. (2009). Taxes and business strategy: A planning approach (4th Ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.
8. Angyridis, C. (2006). Optimal Capital Income Taxation in an Asymmetric Small Open Economy. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 3 (1), 87–101. DOI: 10.1016/j.jeca.2006.01.005.
9. Rangan, G. (2005). Asymmetric Information, Tax Evasion and Alternative Instruments of Government Revenue. Economics Working Papers, 200533. Retrieved from digitalcommons.uconn.edu/econ_wpapers/200533.
10. Roemer, J. E. (2012). The political economy of income taxation under asymmetric information: the two-type case. SERIEs – Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, 3 (1–2), 181–199. DOI: 10.1007/s13209-011-0047-6.
11. Cowx, J., & Kerr, N. (2019). The general anti-avoidance rule. Ohio State University. Retrieved from nta.confex.com/nta/2019/mediafile/ExtendedAbstract/Paper3050/10-21-2019%20Draft.pdf.
12. Deloitte. (2017). General anti-avoidance rules (GAAR): India and international experience. Retrieved from www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/in/Documents/tax/in-tax-gaar-india-and-international-experience-noexp.pdf.
13. McGill, R. K., Haye, A. R., & Lipo, S. (2017). G.A.T.C.A. A Practical Guide to Global Anti-Tax Evasion Frameworks. Palgrave Macmillan Cham. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-61783-1.
14. Carrero, J. M. K., & Seara, A. Q. (2016). The Concept of ‘Aggressive Tax Planning’ Launched by the OECD and the EU Commission in the BEPS Era: Redefining the Border between Legitimate and Illegitimate Tax Planning. Intertax, 44 (3), 206–226. DOI: 10.54648/taxi2016015.
15. Cai, Q., & Zhang, P. (2018). A Theoretical Reflection on the OECD’s New Statistics Reporting Framework for the Mutual Agreement Procedure: Isolating, Measuring, and Monitoring. Journal of International Economic Law, 21 (4), 867–884. DOI: 10.1093/jiel/jgy043.
16. Filipova-Slancheva, A. (2017). Automatic exchange of tax information: initiation, implementation and guidelines in Bulgarian context. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 15 (2), 510–517. DOI: 10.21511/ppm.15(si).2017.04.
17. Mardan, M. (2013). The effects of thin capitalization rules when firms are financially constrained. 8th Norwegian-German Seminar on Public Economics, CESifo, Munich, pp. 4–15.
18. Ruf, M., & Schindker, D. (2015). Debt Shifting and Thin-Capitalization Rules – German Experience and Alternative Approaches. Nordic Tax Journal, 1, 17–33. DOI: 10.1515/ntaxj-2015-0002
19. Iefymenko T., Zhuk, V., & Lovinska, L. (2015). Information in Crisis Management: A Global Aspect of the Standardization of Accounting and Financial Reporting. Kyiv: Academy of Financial Management [in Ukrainian].
20. Oliynyk, Ya., & Chyzhykova, O. (2019). Institutional implementation of transfer pricing: global context and prospects for Ukraine. Finance of Ukraine, 2, 99–110. DOI: 10.33763/finukr2019.02.099 [in Ukrainian].
21. Kucheriavenko, M. P. (2009). Tax procedures: legal nature and classification. Kyiv: Alerta [in Ukrainian].
22. Brekhov, S. S., & Korotun, V. I. (2016). Conceptual foundations and directions of development counteraction system of aggressive tax planning in Ukraine. Efektyvna ekonomika, 11. Retrieved from www.economy.nayka.com.ua/?op=1&z=5249 [in Ukrainian].
23. Tymchenko, O. (2011). International informational collaboration as the factor of counteract tax evasion. Finance of Ukraine, 12, 11–20. Retrieved from finukr.org.ua/?page_id=723&aid=424 [in Ukrainian].
24. OECD. (n. d.). Base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS). Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/beps-actions/.
25. EU Council. (2016, July 12). Directive (EU) 2016/1164 laying down rules against tax avoidance practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market. Retrieved from eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2016.193.01.0001.01.ENG&toc=OJ:L:2016:193:TOC.
26. EU Council. (2017, May 29). Directive (EU) 2017/952 amending Directive (EU) 2016/1164 as regards hybrid mismatches with third countries. Retrieved from eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32017L0952.
27. European Commission. (2016, January). Anti Tax Avoidance Package. Retrieved from taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/anti-tax-avoidance-package_en.
28. The Role of a General Anti-Avoidance Rule in Protecting the Tax Base of Developing Countries (Session 1). (2017, November 9). The General Anti-Avoidance Rule. Retrieved from https//www.un.org/esa/ffd/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/2017TB_08_GAARs_D3_1_Role-of-GAAR.pdf.
29. OECD. (2015). Preventing the Granting of Treaty Benefits in Inappropriate Circumstances, Action 6 - 2015 Final Report, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/9789264241695-en.
30. OECD. (2015). Developing a Multilateral Instrument to Modify Bilateral Tax Treaties, Action 15 - 2015 Final Report, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/9789264241688-en.
31. OECD. (n. d.). Action 13. Country-by-Country Reporting. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/beps-actions/action13/.
32. OECD. (2013). Action Plan on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/9789264202719-en.
33. OECD. (2019). Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital 2017 (Full Version). Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/g2g972ee-en.
34. OECD. (n. d.). Action 6. Prevention of tax treaty abuse. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/beps-actions/action6/.
35. OECD. (n. d.). Action 7. Permanent establishment status. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/beps-actions/action7/.
36. European Commission. (2015). Study on Structures of Aggressive Tax Planning and Indicators (Final Report). Retrieved from taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2016-09/taxation_paper_61.pdf.
37. European Commission. (2017). Aggressive tax planning indicators (Final Report). Retrieved from irihs.ihs.ac.at/id/eprint/4590/1/2017-loretz-sellner-brandl-aggressive-tax-planning-indicators.pdf.
38. UNCTAD. (2018). Trade and Development Report 2018. Retrieved from unctad.org/system/files/official-document/tdr2018_en.pdf.
39. Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe. (2015). Retrieved from eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52015DC0192.
40. Connectivity for a European Gigabit Society. (2019). Retrieved from digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/connectivity-european-gigabit-society-brochure.
41. Digital Europe 2025. (n. d.). Retrieved from www.digitaleurope.org/policies/strongerdigitaleurope/.
42. European Parliament, & EU Council. (2021, 18 May). Business taxation for the 21st century (Communication). Retrieved from taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-06/20210615_communication_on_business_taxation.pdf.
43. Statement on a Two-Pillar Solution to Address the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy. (2021, October 8). Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/statement-on-a-two-pillar-solution-to-address-the-tax-challenges-arising-from-the-digitalisation-of-the-economy-october-2021.htm.
44. Members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS joining the October 2021 Statement on a Two-Pillar Solution to Address the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy as of 9 June 2023. (n. d.). Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/oecd-g20-inclusive-framework-members-joining-statement-on-two-pillar-solution-to-address-tax-challenges-arising-from-digitalisation-october-2021.pdf.
45. OECD. (2019). Programme of Work to Develop a Consensus Solution to the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy, OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/programme-of-work-to-develop-aconsensus-solution-to-the-tax-challenges-arising-from-the-digitalisation-of-the-economy.htm.
46. OECD. (n. d.). Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy – Global Anti-Base Erosion Model Rules. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/beps/tax-challenges-arising-from-the-digitalisation-of-the-economy-global-anti-base-erosion-model-rules-pillar-two.htm.
47. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. (2018). About currency and currency transactions (Act No. 2473-VIII, June 21). Retrieved from zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2473-19#Text.
48. OECD, & Council of Europe. (2011). The Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters: Amended by the 2010 Protocol. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/9789264115606-en.
49. Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement on Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information. (n. d.). Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/automatic-exchange/about-automatic-exchange/cbc-mcaa.pdf.
50. OECD. (2017). Standard for Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information in Tax Matters. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/9789264267992-en.
51. Oleynikova, L., & Dolzhenko, I. (2020). Improvement of tax control in Ukraine on the basis of implementing BEPS plan tools and automatic information exchange. RFI Scientific Papers, 3, 79–94. DOI: 10.33763/npndfi2020.03.079 [in Ukrainian].
52. OECD. (2016). Multilateral convention to implement tax treaty related measures to prevent base erosion and profit shifting. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/tax/treaties/multilateral-convention-to-implement-tax-treaty-related-measures-to-prevent-BEPS.pdf.
53. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. (2023). On amendments to the Tax Code of Ukraine and other legislative acts of Ukraine regarding the implementation of the international standard of automatic exchange of information on financial accounts (Act No. 2970-IX, March 20). Retrieved from zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2970-20#Text [in Ukrainian].
54. Ministry of Finance of Ukraine. (2023). On the approval of the Procedure for applying the general reporting standard and proper verification of information on financial accounts (Common Standard on Reporting and Due Diligence for Financial Account Information) (Order No. 282, May 26). Retrieved from zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z1090-23#Text [in Ukrainian].
55. IMF. (n. d.). Government Finance Statistics. Retrieved from data.imf.org/?sk=a0867067-d23c-4ebc-ad23-d3b015045405.