From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{fullanat2|isda|2(d)(i)|2002|2(d)(i)|1992}}
| | #redirect[[Deduction of Withholding for Tax - ISDA Provision]] |
| There’s no great [https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=User%3AAmwelladmin&type=revision&diff=20900&oldid=20899 difference] between the {{2002ma}} and the {{1992ma}}: [[File:2(d)(i).png|thumb|left|450px|The differences between the {{2002ma}} and the {{1992ma}}]] <br>
| |
| Both are excruciating in the conveyance of a fairly simple idea, which, in a {{nutshell}} is this:
| |
| {{nuts|ISDA|Gross-Up}}
| |
| | |
| ===So?===
| |
| Section {{isdaprov|2(d)}} does the following:
| |
| *'''Net obligation''': if a counterparty suffers withholding it generally doesn’t have to gross up – it just remits tax to the revenue and pays net.
| |
| *'''Refund obligation where tax subsequently levied''': if a counterparty pays gross and subsequently is levied the tax, the recipient must refund an equivalent amount to the tax.
| |
| *'''{{isdaprov|Indemnifiable Tax}}''': the one exception is “Indemnifiable Tax” - this is tax arises as a result of the payer’s own status vis-à-vis the withholding jurisdiction. In that case the payer has to gross up.
| |
Revision as of 17:54, 29 March 2018