The Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes is the multilateral framework within which work in the area of tax transparency and exchange of information is carried out by 120 jurisdictions, which participate in the Global Forum on an equal footing. The Global Forum is charged with in-depth monitoring and peer review of the implementation of the international standards of transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes. These standards are primarily reflected in the 2002 OECD Model Agreement on Exchange of Information on Tax Matters and its commentary, and in Article 26 of the OECD Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital and its commentary as updated in 2004. The standards have also been incorporated into the UN Model Tax Convention.
The standards provide for international exchange on request of foreseeably relevant information for the administration or enforcement of the domestic tax laws of a requesting party. Fishing expeditions are not authorised but all foreseeably relevant information must be provided, including bank information and information held by fiduciaries, regardless of the existence of a domestic tax interest or the application of a dual criminality standard.
All members of the Global Forum, as well as jurisdictions identified by the Global Forum as relevant to its work, are being reviewed. This process is undertaken in two phases. Phase 1 reviews assess the quality of a jurisdiction’s legal and regulatory framework for the exchange of information, while Phase 2 reviews look at the practical implementation of that framework. Some Global Forum members are undergoing combined – Phase 1 and Phase 2 – reviews. The Global Forum has also put in place a process for supplementary reports to follow-up on recommendations, as well as for the ongoing monitoring of jurisdictions following the conclusion of a review. The ultimate goal is to help jurisdictions to effectively implement the international standards of transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes.
All review reports are published once approved by the Global Forum and they thus represent agreed Global Forum reports.
For more information on the work of the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes, and for copies of the published review reports, please refer to www.oecd.org/tax/transparency and www.eoi-tax.org.
The report provides a framework for policy discussions around financing water resources management that are taking place at local, basin, national, or transboundary levels. The report goes beyond the traditional focus on financing water supply and sanitation to examine the full range of water management tasks that governments have to fulfill; when appropriate, a distinction is made on distinctive water issues.
The report identifies four principles (Polluter Pays, Beneficiary Pays, Equity, Policy Coherence), which have to be combined. In addition, it identifies five empirical issues, which have to be addressed on a case-by-case basis. Finally, it sketches a staged approach that governments might wish to consider, to assess the financial status of their water policies and to design robust financial strategies for water management. Case studies provide illustrations of selected instruments and how they can be used to finance water resources management.
Identifying and assessing animal disease risks, as well as understanding their financial implications, are central to decisions made by farmers. The report examines the economic drivers of farmer decisions and government economic instruments, such as compensation related to livestock epidemics. It further discusses a spectrum of psychological and social drivers of farmer behaviour and emphasises the importance of government's more extensive role in the areas of information, communication and education related to disease management. Finally, farmer collective action in various areas of disease management is considered, such as capacity building, risk insurance, surveillance, and responses to disease outbreaks. The case studies of livestock disease management in Australia, Chile and Korea complement this analysis.