The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) proposal for taxation of digital economy constitutes one of the most ambitious projects in the field of taxation and may lead to the most significant reform to international tax rules in the 20th century. Based on a two-pillar approach, Pillar Two of the proposal suggests the adoption of Global Anti-Base Erosion (GloBE) provisions that are aimed at introducing a worldwide minimum tax. In this article, a critical analysis is based that the GloBE proposal suggests that it represents a shift in the OECD policy. As compared to base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS), it jeopardizes the tax sovereignty of jurisdictions and it raises fundamental challenges of implementation, both in terms of amendments to domestic law and conflicts with tax treaties.

A major concern on base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) is transfer pricing, which is discussed in BEPS Action Items 8–10 and 13. Actions 8–10 contain revised guidance, which ensures that transfer pricing rules secure outcomes that better align operational profits with the economic activities that generate them, as well as guidance on transactions involving cross-border commodity transactions and on low value-adding intra-group services. Action 13 contains a three-tiered standardized approach to transfer pricing documentation, including a minimum standard on country-by-country reports (CbCRs). However, the approach of Actions 8–10 still focuses on the restoration of the dysfunctional rules built on the arm’s length principle, which is rooted in the principle of separate independent entity. The threshold of Action 13 excludes many large multinational enterprises (MNEs) from the CbCR requirement and deprives developing countries access to the information of MNEs below the threshold. Chapter 6 of the Chinese Corporate Income Tax Law, under the title “Special Tax Adjustments,” provided the legal foundations of transfer pricing and transfer pricing documentation in China. To effectively implement the BEPS package in China and to comprehensively update the existing Circular 2, the State Taxation Administration (STA) released a Discussion Draft of a Circular on Implementation Measures for Special Tax Adjustments in September 2015, ranging from Action 3 (controlled foreign company rules), Action 8–10 (aligning transfer pricing outcomes with value creation) to Action 13 (transfer pricing documentation and country-by-country reporting) in details. Right now, a series of patches, such as the STA Bulletins 45, 42, 64, and 6, have been made to replace a substantial part of Circular 2.

Trust is the greatest and most distinctive achievement of English law, grown and developed over the passage of time, to meet new demands towards providing new solutions to problems, resulting in its widespread and inventive use worldwide. Although the trust system was introduced by the enactment of a specialist Trust Law of the People’s Republic of China in 2001, there is no significant growth in the use of the trust system in civic life. The personal fiduciary relationship between the settlor and trustee is the foundation of a trust. The trustee has an affirmative equitable duty to act solely in the interest of the beneficiaries. Whether people can rely on the trust system and use it universally is highly dependent on a trustee’s fiduciary duty. In the United States, thirty-four states and the District of Columbia have adopted some substantive provisions of the very valuable Uniform Trust Code (UTC). To promote the development and appropriate application of Chinese Trust Law, this article examines the differences between trustee obligations under the American UTC and Chinese Trust Law, and then proposes the amendment suggestion for Chinese Trust Law. This article consists of five parts. In addition to the Introduction, Part I of this article overviews the provisions of a trustee’s fiduciary duties in Chinese Trust Law. Part II discusses and compares the differences and similarities on trustee’s fiduciary duties in Chinese Trust Law and the UTC. Part III explores the comparative consideration of a trustee’s fiduciary duties, and provides the proposals for legal reform. Finally, this article brings forward a brief conclusion.

Over the past two decades, China’s tax law reform has become a highly valued and distinguished area for earnestly advancing Chinese socialist rule of law construction. With the establishment of the principle on strengthening legality of imposing tax, as well as new settings regarding China’s social and economic development, the administration and management of tax collection and protection of taxpayers’ well-being gradually and vigilantly attain responsiveness from top national legislators and scholars. Meanwhile, the efforts exerted by tax administers on fighting tax evasion have been elevated on both international and domestic grounds. For example, a focal area is the evaluation and collection of presumptive tax which is a common routine for administers around the world. Moreover, the current laws and regulations on administering tax collection invite a rigorous process of revision and modification with contemporary conceptions of taxpayers’ well-being. This article argues that, through the example of presumptive tax collection, the administration and management of tax collection should adhere to the basic principles of protecting taxpayers and advancing the goals of de-administrating arduous procedures to conform to new trends of social and economic development. It also proposes that the vigor and dynamics of tax collection efforts should coincide with national goals of reformulating the individual income tax collection mechanisms, solidifying the national conversion of business tax to value-added tax, matching with the new wave of bankruptcy of certain enterprises, and so forth.

Today, international taxation is at an inflection point. The implementation of action plan on base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) and enforcement of the Belt and Road Initiative are reshaping taxation rules and principles. As a crucial aspect of outbound taxation, foreign tax credit is expected to embrace the normative objectives of the new era, which emphasize the importance of subjecting all trans-border business activities to equitable, efficient, and coordinated taxation. Currently, China’s foreign tax credit prescribes in an incompatible pattern; it lacks clear legislative intent, despite marking specific rules with archaic unilateral characters. To reform this regime, legislative principle should reflect the latest consensus on the economic activities’ nexus and ensure that the income derived from trans-border transactions falls under a minimum tax. Regarding specific rules, it is strongly suggested that active and passive incomes be distinguished and the equity holding threshold of obtaining indirect credit be lowered. China’s foreign tax credit reform should take an inclusive perspective, actively participating in the cooperation between countries.