Browse by: "M"

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 North Macedonia.

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 Costa Rica.

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 Cook Islands.

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.

The multilateral system channels a growing share of official development assistance (ODA), reflecting its increasing significance in an era of overlapping crises and development challenges. However, as the system is pressed to address an expanding array of humanitarian and development issues, its limitations are becoming apparent, prompting a strong push for reforms to enhance its capacity. This fourth edition of the Multilateral Development Finance report sheds light on the aid flows directed to and from the multilateral development system and assesses the impact of ongoing reforms. Highlighting the need to manage the risky trade-offs introduced by recent evolutions, such as the growing reliance on financial innovation, the report proposes solutions to make the system fit for the future. This edition is enriched with online data visualisations showing how members of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) use the multilateral system.

The OECD has developed a database containing information on export restrictions on staple crops from 2007 onwards. This database provides detailed information for country-specific analysis and presents the information in an aggregate way so as to allow comparisons across countries, measures, and commodities. The structure of the database allows for tracking the evolution of these export restrictions over time.

To better address the impacts from climate change, OECD countries are increasingly making climate change adaptation a policy priority. Assessing progress in the implementation of national adaptation policies is a critical step in understanding how adaptation efforts contribute to strengthening climate resilience, and whether they are effective. Experience in policy design and implementation has grown significantly, however measuring progress remains a challenge for countries.

Building on a cross-country survey and country case studies carried out in Chile, Korea, the Slovak Republic and the United Kingdom, this report provides insights into current OECD country practices in measuring climate adaptation. It proposes a framework that can guide countries on what needs to be measured and how, and discusses the role that adaptation indicators and a conducive institutional environment can play in strengthening adaptation measurement.

Despite having advanced social protection systems, OECD countries still face challenges in identifying, enrolling, and providing benefits and services to all those in need. Even when programmes are well-designed and adequately funded, cumbersome enrolment processes and challenges in service and benefit delivery can be an obstacle to the full take-up of social programmes. Advances in digital technologies and data can go a long way towards making social protection more accessible and effective. This report presents a stocktaking of OECD governments’ strategies to identify individuals and groups in need, collect and link (potential) beneficiary data across administrative and survey sources, and apply data analytics and new technologies to improve programme enrolment and the benefit/service delivery experience – all with the objective of reaching people in need of support in OECD countries.

Este manual ha sido elaborado para ayudar a las empresas a integrar las consideraciones ambientales en los procedimientos de debida diligencia de su cadena de suministro de minerales. El Manual se basa en los principales estándares internacionales respaldados por los gobiernos en materia de debida diligencia en cadenas de suministro y conducta empresarial responsable: las Líneas Directrices de la OCDE para Empresas Multinacionales sobre Conducta Empresarial Responsable, la Guía de Debida Diligencia de la OCDE para Cadenas de Suministro Responsables de Minerales en las Áreas de Conflicto o de Alto riesgo y la Guía de la OCDE de Debida Diligencia para una Conducta Empresarial Responsable. Este manual demuestra cómo pueden aplicarse los instrumentos de la OCDE en materia de debida diligencia para abordar los riesgos e impactos ambientales en las cadenas de suministro de minerales, contextualizando las recomendaciones existentes y orientando a los usuarios hacia recursos útiles.

The ASEAN region’s economic expansion has created significant financing needs among corporations and investment opportunities for households. This report aims to support ASEAN policy makers harness opportunities and address barriers in mobilising capital markets for sustainable growth and development in the region. It focuses on the functioning of capital markets and the corporate sector’s use of market-based financing. It also examines current corporate governance regulatory frameworks, emerging artificial intelligence trends in finance, and sustainable finance developments with a focus on corporate sustainable bonds.

Social impact measurement and management is a particularly helpful practice for social economy entities to understand their contribution to society and potentially improve the achievement of their mission. Impact areas that are particularly important for the social economy, such as economic prosperity and employment, social inclusion and well-being and community, are often the hardest to translate into quantitative metrics. Current social impact measurement and management practices are largely shaped by funders and for-profits with limited focus on the social economy. This guide offers a simple, straightforward approach for social economy entities to measure, manage and ultimately maximise their impact, and to prioritise the use of findings for strategic organisational learning and improvement.