Abstract

This article considers how supranational courts and tribunals approach state measures that are meant to address artificial tax arrangements. It undertakes this analysis based on decisions chosen from three different legal regimes notably Cairn v. India (international investment law), Commission v. Ireland/Apple (EU law), and Yukos v. Russia (European Court of Human Rights). In each of these cases, the state (or the European Commission) addresses alleged tax avoidance by what taxpayers believe are retroactive actions. The article offers three main contentions. First, it takes the ...