1887

Browse by: "2024"

Index

Title Index

Year Index

/search?value51=igo%2Foecd&value6=2024&sortDescending=true&value5=2024&value53=status%2F50+OR+status%2F100&value52=&value7=&value2=&option7=&option60=dcterms_type&value4=subtype%2Freport+OR+subtype%2Fbook+OR+subtype%2FissueWithIsbn&value60=subtype%2Fbookseries&option5=year_from&value3=&option6=year_to&publisherId=%2Fcontent%2Figo%2Foecd&option3=&option52=&sortField=prism_publicationDate&option4=dcterms_type&option53=pub_contentStatus&option51=pub_igoId&option2=&operator60=NOT

In 2020, the Azerbaijan Investment Holding (AIH) was established to professionalise and improve the governance and performance of Azerbaijan’s key state-owned enterprises (SOEs). This review describes and assesses the corporate governance framework of AIH and its portfolio companies against the OECD Guidelines on Corporate Governance of State-owned Enterprises. It makes recommendations to help the Azerbaijani authorities reform their state-owned sector and align the exercise of state ownership and the governance of SOEs with international best practices.

Le Manuel sur la neutralité concurrentielle présente un ensemble de bonnes pratiques, fondées sur des exemples tirés de l'expérience de divers pays, dans le but d’aider les agents publics à repérer et à réduire des distorsions de la concurrence induites par une intervention de l’État. Il a pour objet d’accompagner la mise en œuvre des principes énoncés dans la Recommandation du Conseil de l'OCDE sur la neutralité concurrentielle visant à promouvoir l’équité des conditions de concurrence, et porte sur les principaux thèmes de la Recommandation : le droit de la concurrence et son application, l'environnement réglementaire, les marchés publics, les aides publiques et les compensations pour obligations de service public.

English

EU Funded Note

Lithuania is experiencing rapid demographic change, with the population ageing and significantly shrinking in recent decades. This trend has put pressure on the provision of public services, especially at the municipal level, and is expected to continue in the coming years. Ongoing efforts are made by Lithuania to improve the delivery of municipal services with the aim to mitigate territorial disparities and foster social inclusion. In this perspective, shared public service provision is viewed as a way to enhance the accessibility, affordability and quality of essential public services. This report provides recommendations and an action plan to address challenges inherent to the legal, fiscal and institutional frameworks for shared municipal service provision in Lithuania, while taking stock of these different challenges. The report also provides two roadmaps for piloting primary healthcare and long-term care services in Tauragė+ functional zone (Jurbarkas, Pagėgiai, Šilalė, Tauragė municipalities) through shared municipal service provision. The report draws lessons from peer country experiences, and in particular Finland, where inter-municipal cooperation has been used successfully for decades.

This report provides a year-by-year overview of the main trends in development finance with biodiversity-related objectives over 2015-22, considering a wide range of sources: bilateral providers from the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) members and beyond, including South-South and triangular co-operation providers, multilateral development banks (MDBs) and other multilateral institutions, private finance mobilised by development finance, and private philanthropy. The estimates are based on OECD statistical data, capturing both official development assistance (ODA) and non-concessional development finance. They include breakdowns by providers, sectors, financial instruments, recipient country groupings, as well as details on financial allocations to the mainstreaming of biodiversity; climate change; Indigenous Peoples and local communities; and gender equality. The evidence aims to help DAC members and other stakeholders implement the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework under the Convention on Biological Diversity, and track the contribution of development finance against its Target 19 on resource mobilisation.

  • 17 Sept 2024
  • OECD, World Trade Organization
  • Pages: 64

Cross-border data flows are the lifeblood of today’s social and economic interactions, but they also raise a range of new challenges, including for privacy and data protection, national security, cybersecurity, digital protectionism and regulatory reach. This has led to a surge in regulation conditioning (or prohibiting) its flow or mandating that data be stored or processed domestically (data localisation). However, the economic implications of these measures are not well understood. This report provides estimates on what is at stake, highlighting that full fragmentation could reduce global GDP by 4.5%. It also underscores the benefits associated with open regimes with safeguards which could see global GDP increase by 1.7%. In a world where digital fragmentation is growing, global discussions on these issues can help harness the benefits of an open and safeguarded internet.

  • 17 Sept 2024
  • OECD
  • Pages: 134

OECD Economic Surveys are periodic reviews of member and non-member economies. Reviews of member and some non-member economies are on a two-year cycle; other selected non-member economies are also reviewed from time to time. Each Economic Survey provides a comprehensive analysis of economic developments, with chapters covering key economic challenges and policy recommendations addressing these challenges.

Spanish

Under the Action 13 Minimum Standard, jurisdictions have committed to foster tax transparency by requesting the largest multinational enterprise groups (MNE Groups) to provide the global allocation of their income, taxes and other indicators of the location of economic activity. This unprecedented information on MNE Groups’ operations across the world has boosted tax authorities’ risk-assessment capabilities. The Action 13 Minimum Standard was translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review process. The peer review of the Action 13 Minimum Standard has completed six annual reviews in 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023. These cover the three key areas under review: the domestic legal and administrative framework, the exchange of information framework, and the confidentiality and appropriate use of Country-by-Country (CbC) reports. This seventh annual peer review report reflects the outcome of the seventh review which considered all aspects of implementation. It contains the review of 138 jurisdictions which provided legislation or information pertaining to the implementation of CbC Reporting.

French

Under BEPS Action 14, members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The initial peer review process was conducted in two stages. Stage 1 assessed countries against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focused on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' Stage 1 peer review report. Following the conclusion of the initial peer review process in 2022, a continued monitoring process has started whereby all Inclusive Framework member jurisdictions will be subject to continued monitoring: jurisdictions that have "meaningful MAP experience" would undergo a full peer review process once every four years and those that do not would undergo a two-stage simplified peer review process. This report reflects the outcome of Stage 1 of the simplified peer review of the implementation of the BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard by Botswana.

Under BEPS Action 14, members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The initial peer review process was conducted in two stages. Stage 1 assessed countries against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focused on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' Stage 1 peer review report. Following the conclusion of the initial peer review process in 2022, a continued monitoring process has started whereby all Inclusive Framework member jurisdictions will be subject to continued monitoring: jurisdictions that have "meaningful MAP experience" would undergo a full peer review process once every four years and those that do not would undergo a two-stage simplified peer review process. This report reflects the outcome of Stage 1 of the simplified peer review of the implementation of the BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard by Antigua and Barbuda.

Under BEPS Action 14, members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The initial peer review process was conducted in two stages. Stage 1 assessed countries against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focused on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' Stage 1 peer review report. Following the conclusion of the initial peer review process in 2022, a continued monitoring process has started whereby all Inclusive Framework member jurisdictions will be subject to continued monitoring: jurisdictions that have "meaningful MAP experience" would undergo a full peer review process once every four years and those that do not would undergo a two-stage simplified peer review process. This report reflects the outcome of Stage 1 of the simplified peer review of the implementation of the BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard by Jordan.

Under BEPS Action 14, members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The initial peer review process was conducted in two stages. Stage 1 assessed countries against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focused on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' Stage 1 peer review report. Following the conclusion of the initial peer review process in 2022, a continued monitoring process has started whereby all Inclusive Framework member jurisdictions will be subject to continued monitoring: jurisdictions that have "meaningful MAP experience" would undergo a full peer review process once every four years and those that do not would undergo a two-stage simplified peer review process. This report reflects the outcome of Stage 1 of the simplified peer review of the implementation of the BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard by Sri Lanka.

Under BEPS Action 14, members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The initial peer review process was conducted in two stages. Stage 1 assessed countries against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focused on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' Stage 1 peer review report. Following the conclusion of the initial peer review process in 2022, a continued monitoring process has started whereby all Inclusive Framework member jurisdictions will be subject to continued monitoring: jurisdictions that have "meaningful MAP experience" would undergo a full peer review process once every four years and those that do not would undergo a two-stage simplified peer review process. This report reflects the outcome of Stage 1 of the simplified peer review of the implementation of the BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard by Zambia.

Under BEPS Action 14, members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The initial peer review process was conducted in two stages. Stage 1 assessed countries against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focused on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' Stage 1 peer review report. Following the conclusion of the initial peer review process in 2022, a continued monitoring process has started whereby all Inclusive Framework member jurisdictions will be subject to continued monitoring: jurisdictions that have "meaningful MAP experience" would undergo a full peer review process once every four years and those that do not would undergo a two-stage simplified peer review process. This report reflects the outcome of Stage 1 of the simplified peer review of the implementation of the BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard by Seychelles.

Under BEPS Action 14, members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The initial peer review process was conducted in two stages. Stage 1 assessed countries against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focused on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' Stage 1 peer review report. Following the conclusion of the initial peer review process in 2022, a continued monitoring process has started whereby all Inclusive Framework member jurisdictions will be subject to continued monitoring: jurisdictions that have "meaningful MAP experience" would undergo a full peer review process once every four years and those that do not would undergo a two-stage simplified peer review process. This report reflects the outcome of Stage 1 of the simplified peer review of the implementation of the BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard by Jamaica.

Under BEPS Action 14, members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The initial peer review process was conducted in two stages. Stage 1 assessed countries against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focused on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' Stage 1 peer review report. Following the conclusion of the initial peer review process in 2022, a continued monitoring process has started whereby all Inclusive Framework member jurisdictions will be subject to continued monitoring: jurisdictions that have "meaningful MAP experience" would undergo a full peer review process once every four years and those that do not would undergo a two-stage simplified peer review process. This report reflects the outcome of Stage 1 of the simplified peer review of the implementation of the BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard by the Dominican Republic.

Under BEPS Action 14, members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The initial peer review process was conducted in two stages. Stage 1 assessed countries against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focused on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' Stage 1 peer review report. Following the conclusion of the initial peer review process in 2022, a continued monitoring process has started whereby all Inclusive Framework member jurisdictions will be subject to continued monitoring: jurisdictions that have "meaningful MAP experience" would undergo a full peer review process once every four years and those that do not would undergo a two-stage simplified peer review process. This report reflects the outcome of Stage 1 of the simplified peer review of the implementation of the BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard by Albania.

Under BEPS Action 14, members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The initial peer review process was conducted in two stages. Stage 1 assessed countries against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focused on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' Stage 1 peer review report. Following the conclusion of the initial peer review process in 2022, a continued monitoring process has started whereby all Inclusive Framework member jurisdictions will be subject to continued monitoring: jurisdictions that have "meaningful MAP experience" would undergo a full peer review process once every four years and those that do not would undergo a two-stage simplified peer review process. This report reflects the outcome of Stage 1 of the simplified peer review of the implementation of the BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard by Belize.

Under BEPS Action 14, members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The initial peer review process was conducted in two stages. Stage 1 assessed countries against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focused on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' Stage 1 peer review report. Following the conclusion of the initial peer review process in 2022, a continued monitoring process has started whereby all Inclusive Framework member jurisdictions will be subject to continued monitoring: jurisdictions that have "meaningful MAP experience" would undergo a full peer review process once every four years and those that do not would undergo a two-stage simplified peer review process. This report reflects the outcome of Stage 1 of the simplified peer review of the implementation of the BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard by Pakistan.

Under BEPS Action 14, members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS have committed to implement a minimum standard to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the mutual agreement procedure (MAP). The MAP is included in Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention and commits countries to endeavour to resolve disputes related to the interpretation and application of tax treaties. The BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard has been translated into specific terms of reference and a methodology for the peer review and monitoring process. The initial peer review process was conducted in two stages. Stage 1 assessed countries against the terms of reference of the minimum standard according to an agreed schedule of review. Stage 2 focused on monitoring the follow-up of any recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' Stage 1 peer review report. Following the conclusion of the initial peer review process in 2022, a continued monitoring process has started whereby all Inclusive Framework member jurisdictions will be subject to continued monitoring: jurisdictions that have "meaningful MAP experience" would undergo a full peer review process once every four years and those that do not would undergo a two-stage simplified peer review process. This report reflects the outcome of Stage 1 of the simplified peer review of the implementation of the BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard by Serbia.

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error