David Rosenbloom Comments on Bilateral Investment Treaties in Tax Notes

Tax Notes

Facebook changed its name to Meta Platforms Inc. last week.

No, that’s not shorthand for metadata collection, although it might as well be. It’s shorthand for metaverse, a more elaborate Second Life virtual reality rabbit hole that Facebook intends to suck users into. While their minds are scoured and manipulated through a virtual reality headset, users can pretend they’re better-looking and live in a Malibu beach house and not worry about their deteriorating physical circumstances. The metaverse has already featured in cheesy futurist novels like Neal Stephenson’s Snow Crash. Buy it, read it, and take your son’s computer away.

. . .

“Nearly everything about a bilateral investment treaty is ill suited for the task of efficiently and effectively resolving a tax dispute,” wrote former treaty negotiator H. David Rosenbloom of Caplin & Drysdale, who has appeared as an expert witness in tax arbitration cases under investment treaties. “It is hard to see why a supranational authority such as a special arbitration panel under a bilateral investment treaty is needed in the tax area, or more importantly, what role it should play.” Oh, and arbitration cases take forever. (Rosenbloom, “Through the Looking Glass: Resolving Tax Disputes by Arbitration Under a Bilateral Investment Treaty,” in Essays on International Taxation, ch. 16 (2020).)

For the full article, please visit Tax Notes’ website (subscription required).


Related Practices/Industries

Jump to Page

We use cookies to make your experience of our website better. By continuing to browse this site you consent to the use of cookies. Please visit our Privacy Policy for more information.