Zeitschriftenartikel zum Thema „Bilateral investment treaties with non-European countries“
Um die anderen Arten von Veröffentlichungen zu diesem Thema anzuzeigen, folgen Sie diesem Link: Bilateral investment treaties with non-European countries.
Geben Sie eine Quelle nach APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard und anderen Zitierweisen an
Machen Sie sich mit Top-50 Zeitschriftenartikel für die Forschung zum Thema "Bilateral investment treaties with non-European countries" bekannt.
Neben jedem Werk im Literaturverzeichnis ist die Option "Zur Bibliographie hinzufügen" verfügbar. Nutzen Sie sie, wird Ihre bibliographische Angabe des gewählten Werkes nach der nötigen Zitierweise (APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver usw.) automatisch gestaltet.
Sie können auch den vollen Text der wissenschaftlichen Publikation im PDF-Format herunterladen und eine Online-Annotation der Arbeit lesen, wenn die relevanten Parameter in den Metadaten verfügbar sind.
Sehen Sie die Zeitschriftenartikel für verschiedene Spezialgebieten durch und erstellen Sie Ihre Bibliographie auf korrekte Weise.
1
Nino Bendianishvili, Nino Bendianishvili. „"BILATERAL INVESTMENT AGREEMENTS AS A MEAN OF INTEGRATION INTO THE WORLD SOCIETY AND ITS SWOT ANALYSIS“. Economics 105, Nr. 5-7 (07.08.2023): 156–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.36962/ecs105/5-7/2023-156.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) are a key prerequisite for effective investment. It ensures efficient use of resources and free movement of capital. When both parties from the signatories agree on the rules of the game, then a favorable and optimal environment for settlement of investment disputes is created. By simple definition, a bilateral investment treaty is an international agreement concluded between two countries. It contains bilateral obligations for the promotion and protection of private investments made by investors of one of these states in the territory of the other state. A bilateral investment treaty aims to promote and protect "investments" as defined in the relevant agreement. It is appropriate to consider specific cases separately, as a number of investments have the necessary qualifying characteristics. In most agreements, the parties specify which investors and what types of investments are included in the agreement. More recent bilateral investment treaties also contain articles that emphasize the right of a state to take appropriate and proportionate regulatory action in the public interest, for example to protect health and the environment. It should be noted that the European Commission is working on improving the legal protection of intra-European investments. Such a mechanism should be effective, economical, adapted to the activities of small and medium-sized businesses, benevolent and mandatory. Keywords: Bilateral Investment Treaties, Effective Investment Initiatives, SWOT Analysis of Bilateral Investment Treaties, Global Integration.
2
Rizzo, Alfredo. „LEGAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE COMPETENCE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION ON FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENTS“. Italian Yearbook of International Law Online 23, Nr. 1 (17.11.2014): 131–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/22116133-90230041.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
This article provides a summary of the main legal questions pertaining to the current wording of Articles 206 and 207 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which deal with the inclusion of Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) within the scope of the EU Common Commercial policy (CCP). It firstly investigates the concept of capital movement as enshrined in the treaties and relevant EU legislation. Next, the article examines how the new reference to FDI within the scopes of the CCP affects the competence of the EU to conclude new Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) with third countries. Finally, the article briefly illustrates a recent proposal for a model EU BIT which would make certain areas of investment protection dependent on sustainable development, social and environmental protection and standards of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).
3
SINHA, Amit Kumar. „Non-Precluded Measures Provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties of South Asian Countries“. Asian Journal of International Law 7, Nr. 2 (28.04.2016): 227–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2044251316000023.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractThis paper provides a first-ever detailed study of NPM provisions in all stand-alone BITs which are in force in South Asian countries. It studies 147 BITs of South Asian countries in order to map the NPM provisions in them. It makes an in-depth analysis of the NPM provisions found in these BITs, and then makes an analysis of the consequences of not having NPM provisions in BITs. This follows the dissection of the NPM provisions found, so as to study each and every permissible objective and nexus requirement link in these provisions. This is followed by suggestions and conclusions, where the paper holds that NPM provisions are not sufficiently used in the BITs of these countries and these countries should incorporate this provision more frequently in order to ensure some much-needed regulatory latitude to these countries.
4
Bianco, Giuseppe. „European Unions Investment Agreements and Public Debt“. European Business Law Review 28, Issue 2 (01.04.2017): 119–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/eulr2017010.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The on-going global financial crisis has hit Europe in an especially significant manner. With the legal vacuum surrounding sovereign debt restructurings, Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) and Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) signed by European countries can provide grounds for litigation in future debt crises. The sovereign debt crisis in the heart of the Eurozone has materialized such dangers, and has had an impact on the European Union’s strategy as an actor in international investment. The problems experienced by Argentina before the ICSID have made European countries more aware of the potential hidden in their BITs. This has in turn led to a careful drafting of the CETA and the TTIP, and potentially of all the other major FTAs to follow.
5
El-Kady, Hamed, und Mustaqeem De Gama. „The Reform of the International Investment Regime: An African Perspective“. ICSID Review - Foreign Investment Law Journal 34, Nr. 2 (2019): 482–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/siz025.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract The international legal framework for investment in Africa is complex, consisting of a large number of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and regional investment agreements. This is in addition to a number of non-binding regional investment instruments and models that influence African countries' investment policy directions. Looking at the numbers, African countries have concluded over 860 BITs of which 160 are intra-African treaties. This represents around 28 percent of the BIT universe. For over 50 years African countries have been signing BITs that have core elements developed by third countries. Little attention has been given to the implications of these treaties on African countries’ right and duty to regulate investment in their territories. The result is a web of legally binding and broadly formulated commitments on investment protection. Today, African countries are taking a more active approach in the formulation of their international investment commitments at the national, bilateral and regional levels. Africa is becoming a laboratory for innovative and sustainable development-oriented investment policymaking. While these reform efforts occur in parallel and sometimes overlap with one another, they all converge in their attempt to formulate a new approach to investment policies that aims at safeguarding the right and duty of African countries to regulate and to reflect emerging sustainable development imperatives. The challenge remains in the existing stock of outdated African BITs and in the investor–State dispute system. Tribunals have broadly interpreted BIT commitments in ways that were not foreseen by African countries. The system that was originally developed to foster legal predictability in investment relations between countries has today become a source of legal uncertainty, debate and controversy. So far, African countries have been observing proposals and discussions for the reform of the ISDS system, including through the establishment of a Multilateral Investment Court (MIC) from a distance. They have been allowed to raise concerns, propose ideas and suggestions, but were not included in the original construction of the concepts and structures of any of the proposed solutions.
6
Hossain, Mohammad Belayet, Asmah Laili Yeon und Ahmad Shamsul Abdul Aziz. „SOVEREIGNTY, NATIONAL INTEREST AND SECURITY IN BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATIES OF MALAYSIA“. Journal International Studies 16 (30.12.2020): 39–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.32890/jis2020.16.3.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
At present, the BITs are playing a significant part in regulating foreign direct investment (FDI) in the host countries and like other members of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) Malaysia have also signed BITs to facilitate trade. Malaysia’s FDI laws and BITs mainly protect foreign investors, however, neither of them has any specific provision on the protection of sovereignty, national interest and security. This paper addresses the question, to what extent are sovereignty, national interest and security protected through BITs during entry of FDI into Malaysia? Using non-doctrinal socio-legal research method, the authors critically analyzed 15 BITs to explore whether they protect the sovereignty, national interest and security of Malaysia. The findings show that the existing Malaysian BITs contain provisions to promote and protect foreign investments but lack specific references to protect sovereignty, national interest and security, therefore, the government should consider these important factors when signing future BITs.
7
Potestà, Michele. „Bilateral Investment Treaties and the European Union. Recent Developments in Arbitration and Before the ECJ“. Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 8, Nr. 2 (2009): 225–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157180309x451097.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractThe issue of the relationship between Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) and the EU legal order has recently attracted attention amongst scholars and practitioners in the field of international investment arbitration. Under a first perspective of the problem, the Arbitral Tribunal in Eastern Sugar B.V. v. The Czech Republic was confronted with the question of whether there was any room left for BITs between EU Member States. The Tribunal discussed the legal arguments advanced for and against the applicability of such "intra-EU BITs" between Member States. The issue, which is particularly relevant considering that there are currently more than 190 BITs concluded between EU Member States, will be analysed in the first part of this article. Under a second point of view of the problem, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) handed down two judgments on 3 March 2009 addressing incompatibilities with EC Law resulting from certain BITs entered into by Sweden and Austria with third countries. The second part of this article will deal with the consequences arising out of the Court's rulings with regard to existing and future BITs entered into by Member States with third countries.
8
Carter, Justin. „The Protracted Bargain: Negotiating the Canada–China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement“. Canadian Yearbook of international Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international 47 (2010): 197–260. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0069005800009875.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
SummaryIn 1994, Canada and China began negotiating a bilateral foreign investment promotion and protection agreement (FIPA). After sixteen years and multiple rounds of negotiations, the two states have not been able to solidify a workable treaty. By examining each country’s substantive and procedural preferences in their respective bilateral investment treaty models and in past treaties, this article outlines some of the likely “on-the-table” obstacles in the negotiating process. The analysis indicates that there are areas of considerable convergence between each country’s preferences, although significant areas of divergence exist on some key issues. Further confounding the disagreement that exists between the two countries are “off-the-table” factors such as general bilateral relations. One further aspect that is considered is the idea of coordinating compliance between international trade and human rights norms in the context of the Canada–China FIPA. While bilateral investment treaties are economic agreements, pronounced non-economic elements shape the practical and legal effect that these treaties have on various affected actors. Despite the important implications the Canada–China FIPA has for human rights and environmental policy concerns, it can be inferred that these factors will have little bearing on the actual negotiated outcome of the agreement.
9
Zhang, Sheng. „Human Rights and International Investment Agreements: How to Bridge the Gap?“ Chinese Journal of Comparative Law 7, Nr. 3 (01.12.2019): 457–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cjcl/cxz019.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract Although an increasing number of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) now incorporate the concept of sustainable development, direct reference to human rights is still rare and remains embryonic. A close look at the positions held by some representative groups and countries, including the European Union (EU), the USA, China, India, South Africa, and Mercosur, reveals that the reference to human rights features divergence. The divided positions held by these groups or countries reveal the difficulties of operationalizing human rights obligations into international investment rule making. Even among developed countries or economies, a consistent approach to human rights is yet to be found. Based on these observations, this article proposes a number of pragmatic solutions to bridge the gap between these divided positions. In order to synergize international investment treaty regimes on human rights, internal engagement, including the reform of BIT dispute settlement regimes, and external engagement, including dialogues among stakeholders, should be made.
10
Bischoff, Jan Asmus. „Just a little bit of mixity? The EUs role in the field of international investment protection law“. Common Market Law Review 48, Issue 5 (01.10.2011): 1527–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/cola2011060.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
With the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the Common Commercial Policy (CCP) has been extended to foreign direct investment (FDI). However, the scope of these (exclusive) competences under the CCP is limited and thus does not pertain to all issues governed by contemporary bilateral investment treaties (BITs). Rather, the competences for such BITs are mixed. Therefore, future agreements will have to be concluded by the EU and the its Member States together unless the EU is prepared to exclude the protection of certain investments from its agenda. But mixed agreements on investment protection cause complications concerning their conclusion and implementation. Until a satisfying EU investment regime is set up, investments by nationals of the EU Member States will have to be protected by the Member States' BITs. The Member States of the EU have concluded a large number of bilateral and also multilateral investment agreements governing the protection of investments made. Nevertheless, the existing Member States' BITs are affected by the transfer of exclusive competences for FDI to the EU. Generally, the Member States will have to terminate these agreements. To avoid such severe consequences, the European Commission proposed a Regulation establishing a transitional regime that allows the Member States to maintain their existing BITs concluded with third countries or even to conclude new BITs. Such a transitional regime is essential for the protection of investments by EU nationals. However, the Regulation Proposal adopted by the Commission is badly drafted and can only be considered a first step towards such an instrument.
11
Allee, Todd, und Clint Peinhardt. „Contingent Credibility: The Impact of Investment Treaty Violations on Foreign Direct Investment“. International Organization 65, Nr. 3 (Juli 2011): 401–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020818311000099.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractDuring the past few decades governments have signed nearly 2,700 bilateral investment treaties (BITs) with one another in an attempt to attract greater levels of foreign direct investment (FDI). By signing BITs, which contain strong enforcement provisions, investment-seeking governments are thought to more credibly commit to protecting whatever FDI they receive, which in turn should lead to increased confidence among investors and ultimately greater FDI inflows. Our unique argument is that the ability of BITs to increase FDI is contingent on the subsequent good behavior of the governments who sign them. BITs should increase FDI only if governments actually follow through on their BIT commitments; that is, if they comply with the treaties. BITs allow investors to pursue alleged treaty violations through arbitration venues like the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), a heavily utilized and widely observed arbitral institution that is part of the World Bank. Being taken before ICSID, then, conveys negative information about a host country's behavior to the broader investment community, which could result in a sizeable loss of future FDI into that country. We test these contingent effects of BITs using cross-sectional, time-series analyses on all non-OECD countries during a period spanning 1984–2007. We find that BITs do increase FDI into countries that sign them, but only if those countries are not subsequently challenged before ICSID. On the other hand, governments suffer notable losses of FDI when they are taken before ICSID and suffer even greater losses when they lose an ICSID dispute.
12
Dralle, Tilman. „Sketching the Contours of the Prospective EU-Russia Investment Architecture“. Legal Issues of Economic Integration 41, Issue 4 (01.11.2014): 331–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/leie2014020.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Since the Lisbon treaty entered into force in 2009, the European Union (EU) is vested with the exclusive competence in the field of foreign direct investment (FDI). In principle, this competence encompasses the negotiation and conclusion of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) with third countries including the negotiation of the standards of treatment applicable to foreign investors, which has been the domain of the EU Member States so far. The advent of the new EU competence for FDI has also had an impact on EU-Russia relations. The European Commission identified Russia as a priority country for EU investment negotiations. Eventually, all existing BITs between the Russian Federation and EU Member States will be substituted by a new investment law regime between the EU and Russia. Drawing on the investment treaty practice of the Russian Federation and the slowly emerging contours of the EU's investment policy, this article attempts to give a first impression of how the future EU-Russia investment architecture may look like. For this purpose, the article will take stock of the Russian BIT practice of the past and then analyse discrepancies with regard to the EU position.
13
Gremminger, Nicolas, und Jörg Risse. „The Truth About Investment Arbitration (not only) under TTIP Four Case Studies“. ASA Bulletin 33, Issue 3 (01.09.2015): 465–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/asab2015040.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
In the course of the negotiations between the European Union and the United States about the “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership” (TTIP) the aspects of investment protection and investment arbitration have attracted much press attention. They have become key targets of criticism and massive attacks. Investment arbitration has been depicted as some obscure and undemocratic mechanism that helps rich companies to exploit poor countries. The discussion has become so agitated that oftentimes the underlying facts got out of sight. The goal of the present article therefore is to shed some light on these facts and thereby trace the heated discussion back to an objective, sober-minded level. The authors explain in a step-by-step approach how investment protection in bilateral/multilateral investment treaties works and what standard principles of protection these treaties typically grant to foreign investors (e.g. no direct/indirect expropriation without compensation; no discrimination against foreign investors; the duty to accord fair and equitable treatment to foreign investors). These legal basics are then filled with life by the illustration of four publicly known investment arbitration case studies: Adem Dogan v. Turkmenistan, Philip Morris v. Australia, Vattenfall v. Germany and Walter Bau v. Thailand. The authors conclude that much of the current criticism is unfounded as it ignores factual realities and new developments in international investment arbitration.
14
Li, Liao. „The Legal Challenges and Legal Safeguards for the Belt and Road Initiative“. Global Trade and Customs Journal 14, Issue 5 (01.05.2019): 211–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/gtcj2019020.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The Silk Road Economic Belt and the twenty-first century Maritime Silk Road, better known as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), is a development strategy proposed by China’s President Xi Jinping in 2013 that focuses on connectivity and cooperation between Eurasian countries. The reasons for initiating the Belt and Road include the trends of antiglobalization and global economic decline, the rise of China as a global economic power, and the rise of China as a global investor. In particular, the BRI can provide international public goods. The process of building the Belt and Road will face legal challenges, sovereignty and territorial integrity/maritime disputes, international trade and investment risks, the Sino-European market’s economic status, and overlapping and conflicting bilateral and multilateral treaties. The BRI needs a dispute settlement mechanism to solve the disputes among the Belt and Road countries. Facing legal challenges, we need to insist on the rule-based spirit and basic principles of international law; provide bilateral, multilateral, and treaty safeguard systems; support legal communication and cooperation; and strengthen the BRI’s legal capability.
15
Söderlund, Christer. „Intra-EU BIT Investment Protection and the EC Treaty“. Journal of International Arbitration 24, Issue 5 (01.10.2007): 455–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/joia2007034.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The “old” EU Member States, all being traditionally capital exporting countries, have never seen the need to enter into bilateral investment treaties (BITs) with each other. However, these “old” Member States normally have concluded BITs with the East European states formerly belonging to the Eastern bloc, countries which have now emerged as market economies, incorporating themselves in the community of European states. Most recently, Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and the Czech Republic have become EU Member States as of April 2004. This has resulted in a principally new concept, i.e., intra-EU BITs concluded between EU Member States. In this scenario, it has occurred in a number of instances that a new EU Member State, being targeted by an investment claim under an intra-EU BIT, has raised the jurisdictional defense that the BIT is no longer operative. This defense has been raised on the basis of a number of legal theories, that intra-EU investment matters are governed by EC law (making the intra-EU BIT désuet), that intra-EU BITs are superseded by EC law, and/or that the concept of intra-EU investor state arbitration is inconsistent with the EC legal order. Indeed, two recent arbitral awards in investment cases have had to deal with this issue. This article seeks to account for the legal theories which have been invoked in support of the proposition that intra-EU BITs are no longer effective and, at the same time, provide a discussion to illustrate why this proposition cannot be successfully invoked to invalidate intra-EU BITs.
16
Strik, Daniella. „Investment Protection of Sovereign Debt and Its Implications on the Future of Investment Law in the EU“. Journal of International Arbitration 29, Issue 2 (01.04.2012): 183–204. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/joia2012011.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Since late 2009, an EU sovereign debt crisis has been lingering. The ability of most of the so-called PIIGS States ( Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain) to fulfil their obligations under bonds issued to private investors is still unclear. In case Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) entered into by these States cover claims in connection with the default on or restructuring of such instruments, this could give rise to unequal positions of creditors, depending on their home State. Not only could this give rise to inequality between non-EU and EU investors, such different positions could also occur between investors in different countries of the EU and even of the Eurozone. This Article reviews the scope (ratione materiae) of existing intra-EU BITs of the PIIGS States with respect to sovereign debt instruments and restructuring of sovereign debt. The author advocates in this Article a need to amend BITs of EU countries to unambiguously allow for lawful sovereign debt restructuring without compensation being due to investors and to consider the desired scope of a possible new EU investment protection instrument on this subject. Moreover, in view of the 'no bail-out clause' in the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU), sovereign debt instruments issued by individual EU Member States should be excluded from the protection under Foreign Trade Agreements to be entered into by the EU and third countries.
17
Duggal, Kabir A. N., und Laurens H. van de Ven. „The 2019 Netherlands Model BIT: riding the new investment treaty waves“. Arbitration International 35, Nr. 3 (01.09.2019): 347–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/arbint/aiz013.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract Investor–state arbitration is undergoing a paradigm shift with several countries and regional blocs rethinking the best way to protect investor rights while retaining sovereign prerogatives. This is where the Netherlands fits into the narrative. Its decision to modernize appears to follow the contemporary developments in investment arbitration, including heightened public scrutiny on the effect of investment treaties on regulatory space and the investor-to-state dispute settlement system, as well as the Post-Treaty of Lisbon European Union framework for investment arbitration. On 16 May 2018, the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs published a draft for a new Model Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) on the Government’s website. This was done with a view to updating the earlier Model BIT which dates. Through public consultation, individuals and interest groups were invited to share their views. The Government amended the 2018 Draft Model BIT after deliberating on the public reactions it had received, and circulated a new draft on 19 October 2018. Subsequently, after parliamentary debate in February 2019, the Dutch Government published an updated Model BIT on 22 March 2019. In this article, we critically examine the 2019 Final Dutch Model BIT and examine it in light of the global rethink on investment law and policy.
18
Jung, Sejung. „Research on Foreign Investment Screening Practices under BITs and FTAs“. Korea International Law Review 66 (31.10.2023): 181–222. http://dx.doi.org/10.25197/kilr.2023.66.181.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Countries with foreign investment screening mechanism have developed practices to avoid international investment disputes. These practices include using security exceptions, exceptions to dispute settlement provisions, and schedules to Annex regarding non-conforming measures in investment agreements. These practices do not specify specific national security requirements and are subject to full self-judgment. Countries with a long history of foreign investment screening, such as the United States, Canada, and Australia, actively use these practices to exclude foreign investment screening from international agreement obligations. These countries interpret the national security exception jurisprudence as applying to foreign investment screening, meaning that foreign investment screening is entirely self-judged.
However, South Korea does not have a consistent approach to foreign investment screening in its Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) and Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). The security exception clause in these agreements is different in each agreement, and the contents of the reservations are not uniform. However, it can be interpreted that Korea has decided to treat foreign investment screening as an exception to international law, since it joined the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which stipulates that the screening regime shall not be subject to the dispute settlement provisions.
Foreign investment screening is likely to become more important as a policy tool in the era of expanding national security. The concept of national security has evolved from being applied only in exceptional emergencies such as war to encompassing more permanent situations such as economic security, high-tech protection, supply chain crisis response, and climate change. State measures to protect national security have also become more permanent. Given these circumstances, it is important to reconsider whether it is appropriate to treat foreign investment screening as an exception to international law. Allowing foreign investment screening as an exception to international law could lead to a crisis in the international legal system due to potential abuse of this exception. However, from the government's perspective, securing policy space for foreign investment screening can be advantageous in effectively addressing the growing threat to national security. Therefore, it is crucial to contemplate the stance and standards that should be established for the foreign investment screening practice in Korea moving forward.
19
Simo, Regis. „The AGOA as stepping stone for USA–Africa free trade agreements“. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy 17, Nr. 3 (17.09.2018): 115–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jitlp-03-2018-0014.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to show how the pattern of trade relations between the USA and African countries is gradually shifting toward reciprocity. It therefore demonstrates that the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) was conceived to be a building block toward future bilateral trade agreements. Design/methodology/approach This paper adopts a historical approach to the USA’s policy toward Africa in general and in trade matters in particular. It critically reviews the chronology of US involvement in the continent. Findings Although it was designed as a preferential trade arrangement, AGOA was intended to evolve into reciprocal trade agreements. This is what the USA started doing even prior to the entry into force of the AGOA, by entering into Trade and Investment Framework Agreements with individual countries or blocs. It also transpires that the deployment comes as a response to the European Union which is already engaged in the redefinition of its own trade relations with Africa since 2004. Originality/value The paper is important in many respects. Not only it is a study of the US practice as preference-granting country, but it is also interested in the typology of trade agreements concluded by the USA in other regions of the world. This is important to indicate and analyze the types of provisions African countries should be expected to face when the time of entering into reciprocal binding trade treaties arrives.
20
Magomedova, Olga. „Performance Requirements: Is there a Real Reason for their Prohibition?“ European Investment Law and Arbitration Review Online 4, Nr. 1 (16.12.2019): 178–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/24689017_00401008.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Recent international economic agreements between the EU and other non-EU states have included prohibitions on performance requirements (PRs). Although the provisions prohibiting such requirements typically specify the types of prohibited practices, the essence of PRs, and the reasons for their prohibition remain unclear. The recent concept of PRs has crept into the international legal framework seemingly without a firm theoretical foundation and without any roots in customary international law. It had initially been used in bilateral treaties as the broad term for designating certain policy tools which States were prepared to relinquish so as to promote a better investment regime. Noting the lack of a generally recognised definition of PRs, this article provides an overview of scholars’ opinions and adjudicators’ reasoning on this subject, highlighting certain significant differences in approach. Guided by various examples from arbitral practice and national legislation of selected countries, this article seeks to distil the inherent features of PRs and to rationalise the internationally-prevailing views on this subject. In summary, the article gives an assessment of the prohibition of PRs and considers the reasons for which States may seek to eliminate these types of measures.
21
林韋仲, 林韋仲. „荷蘭2019年雙邊投資條約範本之法律分析－投資者權利與地主國公共利益的平衡“. 中正財經法學 21, Nr. 21 (Juli 2020): 1–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.53106/207873752020070021001.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
傳統上，國際投資協定被認為是維護投資法律環境與鼓勵外國直接投資的重要法律工具。因此，當今國家締結有為數眾多的雙邊投資條約，或是於自由貿易協定中訂定投資專章。與此同時，各國通過有雙邊投資條約範本，以作為建構其保護與促進外國投資活動之法律網絡的基礎。然而，由於近年來投資者權利與地主國公共利益兩者的衝突不斷增加，國際投資協定因此開始進行改革，以平衡投資者與地主國之間的權利義務關係，而此趨勢亦展現在各國對於雙邊投資條約範本的修正。荷蘭於2019年通過之《投資互惠促進及保護協定範本》為近年來國際間所通過的新雙邊投資條約範本，其目的在取代2004年之《投資鼓勵及互惠保護協定範本》，以作為日後荷蘭與其他非歐盟成員國締結或修改雙邊投資條約的基礎文件。本文擬探討2019年荷蘭雙邊投資條約範本於何種程度上展現出對於國際投資協定過去單方面保護投資者權利的修正，以及其是否有助於地主國規制權的行使以確保公共利益。International investment agreements (IIAs) are traditionally regarded as important instruments for creating a stable investment environment and promoting foreign direct investment (FDI). As a result, States conclude a number of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and include free trade agreements (FTAs) with investment provisions. States also adopt Model BITs as the bases for developing their extensive networks for the protection and promotion of foreign investment. However, with the conflict between the protection of the investor's rights and the public interest of the host State arise, IIAs concluded in recent years not only narrow down the scope of protection the investor used to enjoy, but also seek to ensure the host State's regulatory space for the public interest. This trend has also reflected in the amendment of Model BITs.Investment adopted by the Netherlands in 2019 (the 2019 Dutch Model BIT) aims at replacing the 2004 Model Agreement on Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection of Investment and will become the basic instrument for the Dutch Government to conclude BITs with non-EU countries. This article explores the extent to which the 2019 Dutch Model BIT has reflected the growing trend mentioned above, thereby achieving a better balance between the investor's right and the public interest of the host State.
22
Kreicher, Lawrence L., und Robert N. McCauley. „Managing the Dollar Over Its Cycles“. Atlantic Economic Journal 49, Nr. 2 (Juni 2021): 143–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11293-021-09719-0.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractThe United States has ceded to the rest of the world managing the dollar’s value. For a generation, the U.S. authorities have all but withdrawn from the foreign exchange market. Yet the dollar does not float freely as a result of this hands-off U.S. policy. Instead, other authorities manage the dollar exchange rates, albeit separately. These authorities make heavier purchases of dollars in its downswings than in the upswings, damping its decline. Thus, the Fed finds that accommodative monetary policy transmits less to U.S. manufacturing and traded services, and relies on still lower rates to stimulate interest-sensitive housing and auto demand. The current U.S. dollar policy of naming and shaming surplus-running countries accumulating foreign exchange reserves does not seem to work. Three alternatives warrant consideration. First, the U.S. could reinstate its withholding tax on interest income received by non-residents and even add policy criteria to bilateral tax treaties. Second, the U.S. authorities could retaliate by selling dollars against the currencies of dollar-buying jurisdictions running chronic surpluses. However, either the withholding tax or such retaliatory foreign exchange intervention pose huge practical challenges. Third, the U.S. authorities could re-enter the foreign exchange market, making large-scale asset purchases in foreign currency when the dollar rises sharply against its average value. Such a policy would encourage private investment in U.S. traded goods and service production. The challenge is to set ex ante foreign exchange intervention rules to guide market participants’ expectations, even positioning them to do the authorities’ work.
23
Sándor, Lénárd. „The Constitutional Dilemmas of Terminating Intra-EU BITs“. Central European Journal of Comparative Law 3, Nr. 1 (22.02.2022): 177–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.47078/2022.1.177-193.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The adoption of the agreement for the termination of intra-EU bilateral investment treaties in 2020 is a big step forward in the long saga of these investment treaties. This agreement aims to overcome every point of discord between the investment agreements and the EU legal order by terminating both intra-EU bilateral investment treaties and the pending dispute settlement procedures that arose from them. In light of the landmark 2018 Achmea judgement, the agreement asserts that the key role should be given to the Court of Justice of the European Union in this area. This is a great endeavour since almost one-fifth of the investment arbitrations worldwide came from disputes within the European Union. However, it does not seem that the agreement will have the final say since constitutional questions were raised concerning its application. In this spirit, this article briefly outlines the legal and constitutional dilemmas intra-EU bilateral investment treaties pose in the European Union. Then, it outlines the contours and major provisions of the termination agreement, especially with regard to the pending arbitration proceedings. In light of a concrete case brought before the Hungarian Constitutional Court, the article explores the constitutional dilemmas raised by the termination agreement. It highlights three major questions: the international legal aspects, the question pertaining to the European judicial dialogue, and the constitutional principle of non-retroactivity. The article takes into account the major theoretical aspects of each of these dilemmas.
24
Wegner, Gerhard. „Overcoming Economic Nationalism: The “Invisible Hand” Solution of the European Union“. Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch 139, Nr. 2-4 (01.04.2019): 421–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.3790/schm.139.2-4.421.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
After the First World War, a previously well-functioning economic order collapsed in Europe and the Western countries. Economic nationalism of the interwar period also changed the international economic order dramatically and became one issue of the Colloque Walter Lippmann. After the “half- and three quarters Western democracies” (Tooze 2015) of the period prior to World War I had turned into full democracies, they proved incapable of restoring the liberal pre-war economic order domestically and in international trade. Bilateral and multilateral trade negotiations failed, giving rise to a new debate on the prerequisites of an international economic order. I argue that decades later the European Union found a solution to that issue. Of key importance was the gradual constitutionalization of the European Treaties. I show that the trade liberalization prepared by the courts resembles a concept suggested by Jan Tumlir but defies application to non-EU countries. By transforming fundamental economic freedoms laid down in the European Treaties into subjective rights through jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice, the process of trade liberalization occurred in a non-politicized mode. The incompleteness and tardiness of creating a Common Market was the inevitable price for this success story. A withdrawal from this constitutionalization of basic economic freedoms, as proposed recently, for example, cannot be recommended. Their arguments are being examined. The reduction of the European Treaties would lead to a re-politicization of trade policy bearing unforeseeable consequences for free competition.
25
Taha, Jad A. „The External Implied Competence of the European Union and the Impact of Bilateral Treaties on the Taxation of Cross-Border Savings“. Intertax 38, Issue 3 (01.03.2010): 153–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/taxi2010016.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
As part of a ‘tax package’ aimed at combating harmful tax competition, the European Community (now European Union) implemented a legislative instrument to allow for the effective taxation of cross-border interest payments, known today as the ‘Savings Directive’. However, what remained unregulated was the structure of tax levies on cross-border payments made from Member States into territories that are not part of the European Community. As a result, the European Community expressed its need to establish bilateral tax treaties with non-member state third countries and territories associated with the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. This move has produced conflicting schools of thought. On the one hand, the European Community has an interest in maintaining common policies with respect to taxes levied on cross-border payments made within its internal market. On the other hand, its regulation of taxes levied on cross-border payments to third parties has arguably set a precedent for an ‘external implied competence’ on issues that its Directives already regulate within the internal market. This article introduces this interplay scenario and studies the general impact of these treaties on the taxation of cross-border savings.
26
Calamita, N. Jansen. „THE BRITISH BANK NATIONALIZATIONS: AN INTERNATIONAL LAW PERSPECTIVE“. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 58, Nr. 1 (Januar 2009): 119–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589308000936.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractThe British Government's nationalization of the shares of Northern Rock plc and Bradford & Bingley plc in 2008 raises important issues about the standard of protection owed to the banks' non-UK investors and the manner in which compensation should be calculated. The United Kingdom is party to numerous bilateral investment treaties as well as the European Convention on Human Rights, which adopt an international standard of protection for foreign investors and require the payment of ‘market value’ compensation for the property taken. As the analysis in this article shows, the compensation scheme established by the British Government appears to fall short of these obligations.
27
Cristani, Federica. „Concluding International Investment-Related Agreements with Non-EU Countries“. Central European Journal of Comparative Law 3, Nr. 1 (22.02.2022): 41–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.47078/2022.1.41-56.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The 2009 Lisbon Treaty has added an important exclusive competence for the European Union (EU) in the common commercial policy area, namely, foreign direct investment, thus making it a crucial actor in international investment protection. This has a huge impact on shaping international investment policy in Europe and has raised important questions, especially regarding the legal consequences of the EU’s exclusive competence in the negotiation process of international investment agreements (IIAs) with third countries. This article explores the role of the EU and its member states in negotiating and concluding IIAs with third countries. In the first part, the article illustrates when individual member states are authorized to conclude a new bilateral investment treaty with a third country, with a focus on the EU´s Regulation No 1219/2012 and its implementation. In the second part, the article questions what it means for the EU and its member states to conclude investment mixed agreements with third countries, how the negotiation processes are conducted, and what is the impact of the division of competences between the EU and its member states. The final part of the article shows the current issues of ius standi and financial responsibility in investment dispute settlement involving foreign investors, with a focus on the EU´s Regulation No 912/2014 and the negotiation processes of the EU with third countries.
28
Acconci, Pia. „EU Autonomy and International Investment Law: from Conflict to Reconciliation?“ Italian Yearbook of International Law Online 32, Nr. 1 (06.11.2023): 117–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/22116133-03201007.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract The amendments to the EU establishing treaties included in the 2007 Lisbon Treaty have resulted in conflicting norms and jurisdictions, arising from overlaps between international investment treaties and EU law. According to the 2018 Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Achmea case, an arbitration clause in an intra-EU bilateral investment treaty is not compatible with EU law because of the autonomy of EU law and its need for uniform interpretation and application. In its 2021 Judgment in the Komstroy case, the Court expanded this approach in relation to investor-host State arbitration based on the 1994 Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), that is, on a multilateral agreement among the European Union, its Member States and a few non-EU Member States. The Court based this decision not only on the autonomy of EU law and its need for uniform interpretation and application, but also on the venue of arbitration in a Member State. Several arbitral tribunals and scholars have criticized this approach. Criticism increased in 2022 when the arbitral tribunal in the Green Power v. Spain case – established under the Rules of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce according to the Energy Charter Treaty – followed the Komstroy decision of the EU Court of Justice. This article addresses the main aspects of this ongoing debate and looks at what other options might be available. The relevant case law has focused on a conflict-based perspective. It is suggested that other perspectives might be considered.
29
Festa, Andrea. „Intra-EU Direct Investment and Enlargement“. Review of Economic Perspectives 15, Nr. 1 (01.03.2015): 15–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/revecp-2015-0009.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract This paper examines the determinants of the intra-EU direct investment (IDI) into the New Member States (NMS) using a panel dataset of bilateral capital flows for the period 1993-2013. It is found out by using a simple gravity model that EU membership is the most important determinant. Unlike previous studies including non-EU countries, the distance is insignificant, which is caused by proximity of these countries to one another. A separate analysis focused on subgroups of accession countries gives some evidence that even when size of their economy, distance, institutional quality and EU accession are taken into account, Central European countries receive more IDI than the Baltic and the Balkan states. On the contrary to that, the analysis restricted to the Balkan countries which have joined the EU shows the inexistence of a negative Balkans effect in attracting foreign investment. This finding is relevant because previous studies demonstrate a persistent negative Balkans effect for non-EU Balkan countries and suggests a crucial impact of the EU accession in determining the intra-EU capital flows.
30
Luja, Raymond. „The Foreign Subsidies Regulation: the challenge of notifying non-selective tax expenditure“. Competition Law & Policy Debate 8, Nr. 1 (25.08.2023): 13–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.4337/clpd.2023.01.02.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The European Union’s new Foreign Subsidies Regulation will lead to particular challenges in the tax domain. While the final version of the FSR now contains clear links to State aid, the differences are all the more noticeable. Third country tax measures that benefit group financing or equity financing warrant special attention. Repayment of foreign tax incentives to the European Commission, as a last resort measure, might come at odds with taxing prerogatives as divided under existing bilateral tax treaties. Compliance with notification obligations when engaging in public procurement or planning a merger with or acquisition of an entity active in the EU will be hardly doable. Unlike EU State aid rules (and WTO subsidy rules), notification may also involve non-selective and non-beneficial tax measures received within a group. If these have come into the FSR’s scope by intent and not by omission, then this is to be strongly reconsidered. Sustainability tax incentives aimed at greening investment have not been exempt from scrutiny. Thus, EU subsidiaries of third country parent companies and EU parents of third country subsidiaries should gather more information for the purpose of this regulation than one might expect at first sight.
31
Pérez-Bernabeu, Begoña. „Article: State Aid Through Arbitration Awards: EU Law as a Ground for Non-enforcement“. Intertax 51, Issue 3 (01.03.2023): 219–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/taxi2023006.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The relationship between international investment law (IIL) and EU law is not without problems as evidenced by the Achmea ruling. These tensions have become more evident in the Micula case in which the commission resorted to the state aid rules in order to attack arbitration awards arising from intra-EU Bilateral investment treaties (BITs) (deeming its enforcement as state aid). Despite its two rulings relating to the Micula saga, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has not yet validated (or not) the application of state aid rules to the enforcement of intra-EU awards. Hopefully, the upcoming general court’s judgment shall rule on the merits of the Micula case thereby dispelling doubts. Nevertheless, it is foreseeable that further clarifying judgments will be required concerning the recognition and enforcement of intra-EU awards in non-EU jurisdictions. This article reviews the current situation to show that, while state aid rules could adequately prevent the enforcement of an intra-EU award within EU borders, they lack effectiveness for blocking enforcement beyond its borders. Arbitration award, intra-EU BIT, State aid, Tax benefit repeal, Damages, Award recognition, Award enforcement, Public policy, Micula, Achmea, ICSID Convention, New York Convention.
32
Jacur, Francesca Romanin. „Corporate Social Responsibility in Recent Bilateral and Regional Free Trade Agreements: An Early Assessment“. European Foreign Affairs Review 23, Issue 4 (01.12.2018): 465–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/eerr2018037.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
When looking at international trade and investment, there is a quite remarkable gap between the commercial power companies gain through international bilateral and regional trade agreements (Free Trade Agreements or FTAs) and investment treaties that facilitate their access to foreign markets and the norms of these agreements which address corporate behaviours in order to align them with sustainable development objectives. For instance, there is a strong perception by the public opinion that the recent Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations, harshly criticized for lack of transparency, would favour multinational corporations and other business operators at the expenses of the protection of public interests. Recently negotiated FTAs contain dedicated chapters to social, labour and environmental protection issues, including corporate social responsibility (CSR) norms. The opening of FTAs and their investment chapters to sustainable development concerns is – or should be – a way to rebalance the level playing field in these interstate agreements by envisaging public interest standards applicable to business operators. Disagreements between the Parties regarding these provisions may be solved through implementation mechanisms where non-state actors can actively participate. Notwithstanding this shift towards the inclusion of non-trade and non-state actors consideration, the provisions of bilateral and regional FTAs remain of an intergovernmental nature and do not provide for direct obligations for corporations. Despite the lack of vertical effects and the consequent limited implications on enterprises, the presence of CSR clauses testifies the recognition of the crucial role that these actors play as potential promoters, on the one hand, but also of potential infringers, on the other hand, of human and labour rights and of environmental protection. This contribution first examines the approach and the provisions of selected bilateral and regional FTAs that are relevant for the protection of human and social rights and the environment. It then analyses one of the latest developments in this decade-long normative evolution, which are the CSR clauses included in the more recent FTAs concluded by the European Union. While these clauses, for the time being, are rather programmatic and are coupled with soft implementation mechanisms, some reflections are proposed de lege ferenda on how they could ‘harden’ and become more stringent.
33
Martinelli, Imelda, Vito Jonathan Octavo und Aristoteles G. F. Siregar. „WTO Dispute Settlement Body Ruling on Export Ban of Indonesian Raw Nickel Ore: Private International Law Review“. AURELIA: Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengabdian Masyarakat Indonesia 2, Nr. 2 (04.07.2023): 1254–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.57235/aurelia.v2i2.747.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The decision of the WTO Dispute Settlement Organs regarding the ban on the export of crude nickel by Indonesia has significant implications for international trade law. This ban was opposed by the European Union because it could hamper the development of their electric-powered automotive industry which requires nickel ore as a raw material for electric vehicle batteries. Provisions in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) allow export restrictions in certain situations, such as for the protection of health, safety, sanitation, or the preservation of natural resources. However, import and export bans and other non-tariff measures are not permitted. The WTO provides exceptions to quantitative restrictions that meet certain criteria. In this dispute, Indonesia was declared to have violated GATT provisions by the WTO panel. The impact of this decision is important for Indonesia, because nickel is a non-renewable natural resource and is very much needed in the country's development. Indonesia's defeat in this dispute could have a significant impact on the supply of nickel ore and its domestic use. Developed countries with high consumption already use most of the world's natural resources, while developing countries use only about 10%. WTO decisions can also affect international trade policies and relations between countries. Indonesia's defeat could reduce state revenues, discourage investment, and affect relations with the European Union. In addition, this policy may also affect the electric power automotive industry and the development of electric vehicles in the European Union. Therefore, this decision has broad and important implications in the context of international trade and bilateral relations.
34
ORSHANSKA, Maryana. „INSTITUTIONAL FACTORS OF ATTRACTING FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENTS IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF UKRAINE“. Ukrainian Journal of Applied Economics 6, Nr. 2 (30.06.2021): 156–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.36887/2415-8453-2021-2-20.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The article examines the system of institutional support for the inflow of foreign direct investment, because the lack of a reliable legal and institutional environment causes the slowdown of the modernization of the infrastructure of Ukraine's economy. The production potential of the industry depends directly on the equipment and the latest technologies, the ability to use innovative methods productively. Effective development is not possible without investment funds, which determine not only financial support but also innovative modernization. The use of a range of factors to attract foreign direct investment is a priority policy for the development of a cost-effective economy focused on the European type of development. It is established, firstly, that institutional factors significantly affect the volume of foreign direct investment in countries with economies in transition; secondly, it has been found that the maturity of state institutions depends on numerous macroeconomic indicators of countries' development, including foreign direct investment, which may be accompanied by high transaction costs in a non-transparent institutional environment; thirdly, it is emphasized that one of the methods of creating a favorable institutional environment is a comprehensive analysis of relevant international indicators; then, the system of indices for assessing the institutional environment of the national economy is applied; afterwards, it was confirmed that the development of various state institutions will increase the inflow of foreign investment, which will promote innovation, effective technology transfer, and this, in turn, will ensure economic growth and modernization of Ukraine’s infrastructure. Carrying out the analysis and applying the proposed tools to study the impact and opportunities to increase the volume of foreign direct investment will lead to the modernization of the infrastructural sphere of life in Ukraine and opens a new field for a broader study of this topic. The development of economic life and investment requires extensive analysis and identification of tools to regulate an important area in the modern world. Keywords: infrastructure, foreign direct investment, institutional environment, performance indices of state institutions, bilateral investment agreements
35
Sidorov, A. A. „TRANSATLANTIC INTEGRATION AND DEVELOPED COUNTRIES COMPETITIVENESS PROBLEMS“. MGIMO Review of International Relations, Nr. 3(48) (28.06.2016): 249–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2016-3-48-249-257.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Factors and possible consequences of transatlantic integration are elaborated in the article. An overview of the history of transatlantic cooperation is provided. The author highlights the paramount goal of Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) - strengthening the positions of its parties in the world economy against the backdrop of global competition. Stalemate in Doha round of WTO trade negotiations as well as depressed state of the European economy also contributed to transatlantic integration. Validity of the EU Commission conclusion on TTIP benefits is examined. Results of TTIP econometric modelling are critically assessed. Problems of the EU-US non-tariff liberalization are analyzed. Efficiency of the EU and US labor markets is compared. Low competitiveness of the EU in comparison to the USA and underlying risks for TTIP economic growth and employment are outlined. High unemployment, difficulties of manufacturing (including high-tech industries thereof) recovery, adverse general business situation in the EU are among such risks. Various modes of regulatory cooperation and possibility of their adoption in TTIP are considered. Harmonization, erga omnes mutual recognition of regulations, bilateral mutual recognition of regulations, mutual recognition of conformity testing are distinguished. Possible implications of the modes of regulatory cooperation on TTIP members competitiveness, competition with emerging economies and global standard setting are examined. Conflict of TTIP goals and motivations is revealed. The existence of economic factors of transatlantic integration as well as overestimation of TTIP benefits (primarily for the EU economy) is concluded.
36
Lv, Ping, und Francesca Spigarelli. „The determinants of location choice“. International Journal of Emerging Markets 11, Nr. 3 (18.07.2016): 333–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ijoem-09-2014-0137.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to analyze the role of institutional distance and host country attractiveness in location determinants of Chinese Foreign investments in EU in the renewable energy sector, taking into account bilateral political and economic relations. Design/methodology/approach – A firm-level Ministry of Commerce (MofCom) database of greenfield and non-greenfield Chinese investments abroad is used. A six fixed-effects logit analysis is performed. Findings – Chinese firms tend to invest in EU countries with reduced rule of law; market affluence is an attraction factor for them, but they do not seem to be human capital asset-seekers. Countries with politically stable environment are most attractive to sales/services subsidiaries; while countries with good control of corruption, low trade barriers and encouraging foreign ownership are most attractive to manufacturing subsidiaries. A large market is the most attractive factor for R & D subsidiaries, and a rich market is the most attractive factor for manufacturing subsidiaries. Manufacturing subsidiaries are more technological asset-seekers. R & D subsidiaries are the most non-human capital asset-seekers. Research limitations/implications – The study extends the state of the art of the literature by developing a theoretical framework, grounded on the influence of host country institutional factors and on endowment of resources on the location choice of Chinese investors. Further variables should be included in the future (industrial specialization of host country, cultural distance, bilateral ties). Practical implications – Policy implications are relevant. They are related both to outward foreign direct investment attraction policies and to Europe-China cooperation dialogue. With reference to attraction policies, as Chinese green firms are technological asset-seekers, more than human capital asset-seekers, EU countries interested in partnering with Chinese investors should develop specific measures targeting encouraging technology spillover. Even R & D subsidiaries should be tempted with technology-oriented measures. With reference to Europe-China cooperation, the paper findings support suggestions for a more active European position on foreign investments in key European energy sectors. Originality/value – The paper is grounded on an improved theoretical model, tested through a unique Mofcom firm-level database. Originality lies in the fact that the authors provide a sectoral insight. The need for sectoral analysis is fundamental as Chinese industrial development and internationalization path vary extensively across industry, due to policy interventions, supportive measures and prioritized initiatives. Zhang et al. (2011, p. 229) found that – specifically – the energy sector is highly sensitive to host country institutional context, therefore Chinese foreign direct investment are more likely to be exposed to regulatory and competitive pressure compared to other industries.
37
Wang, Earl. „Amphibious Diplomacy“. European Review of International Studies 10, Nr. 1 (01.06.2023): 1–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/21967415-10010013.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract The European Union (EU) and Taiwan (officially the Republic of China) are both non-conventional polities in international relations and the study of diplomacy. On the one hand, the EU is a ‘unique economic and political union between 27 European countries’. On the other hand, Taiwan is able to concurrently carry out two distinct forms of foreign relations. First, diplomacy as a sovereign country with states that it maintains formal diplomatic relations. Second, in the relations with states and other polities without diplomatic ties, and under their divergent ‘One China’ policies, Taiwan operates as a paradiplomatic actor or one that is within the intervals of diplomacy and paradiplomacy. Observing such a phenomenon, this article proposes the notion of ‘amphibious diplomacy’ and empirically studies the notion through how, in practice, the EU and Taiwan have been carrying out their negotiation of the Bilateral Investment Agreement (bia) given the constraints of an absence of diplomatic relations and the EU’s ‘One China’ policy. The article incorporates first-hand material from semi-structured interviews with interlocutors whose work allows them to obtain practical knowledge about the EU-Taiwan bia.
38
Navarro-Soto, Fabiola Cruz, Elsa-Sofia Morote, Roberto Macha-Huamán und Enzo Arnold Saavedra-Soplín. „Determinants of Peruvian Export Efficiency: Poisson PML Estimation Approach“. Economies 11, Nr. 6 (15.06.2023): 169. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/economies11060169.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Given their increasing engagement with the global economy, emerging countries such as Peru depend on their export sector. This research evaluates the level of efficiency of Peruvian exports (EF) and the impact of four regional trade agreements (RTAs) (MERCOSUR, the EU, the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), and the Andean Community of Nations (CAN)), twelve bilateral agreements (BAs), the World Trade Organization (WTO), institutional distance (ID), cultural distance (CD), foreign direct investment (FDI), trade freedom (TF), and traditional (TX) and nontraditional exports (NTX) by sector on the export efficiency of Peru. This non-experimental study used a dataset of 38 countries from 1995 to 2019. An extended stochastic frontier gravity (SFGM) ten-variable model with the one-step estimation method was applied to estimate export efficiency. Poisson’s PML estimator was used to investigate the factors that impact export efficiency (EF). The results showed that the export efficiency of Peru was moderate, ranging between 0.462 and 0.458, with a stationary trend, indicating considerable export potential between Peru and its trading partners. The major contributors to this efficiency are ID (voice and accountability, corruption control, nonadherence to the rule of law), NTX (chemicals and metal mechanics), and BA with American countries. On the other hand, CD (indulgence, long-term orientation, individualism, uncertainty, and lack of a culture of achievement), TF, agreements with MERCOSUR and the EU, FDI, and TX weakened the efficiency of exports. Finally, CAN, EFTA, BA with Asian countries, FDI, TX, and WTO did not have a significant effect on the EF. Recommendations to policy makers are presented.
39
Danylenko, Serhiy, Yuliia Nesteriak und Maryna Grynchuk. „Ukrainian Historical Issues in Polish Media in the Context of a Hybrid War: Between Myths and Post-Truth“. Przegląd Strategiczny, Nr. 13 (31.12.2020): 333–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/ps.2020.1.20.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Ukrainian-Polish relations have been rather controversial in terms of historical policy lately, and it has a negative impact on interstate relations. On the one hand, in the foreign policy discourse Poland is considered to be one of the leading advocates of Ukraine in the collective West, along with Lithuania, and on the other hand problems of historical and humanitarian character permanently arise in bilateral relations, which form a negative background, become a subject to manipulation by third countries, and exacerbate relations both at the interpersonal and inter-institutional communication levels. The additional factor that complicates the understanding of historical policy issues is media of both countries, where the old and new myths, elements of post-truth and emotional subjective evaluations of the non-professional level penetrate beyond the historical corporate society. Populist politicians of the left and right ideological flanks try to take advantage of it, but it becomes an obstacle to political understanding, and complicates the investment development of a large subregion of the countries of Central, Southeastern Europe and the Baltic States. Historical policy has become a part of an information security, and some third countries, in our case it’s the Russian Federation, use this factor during the implementation of hybrid war tasks against Ukraine and the countries of the European Union. The article assumes that only the change of political rhetoric, the avoidance of populism regarding historical relations of two neighboring nations, the strengthening of corporate responsibility of national media in matters of historical policy’s coverage are able to neutralize the influence of radical political trends inside the countries, and outside - the influence of other states which are not interested in overcoming the tragic plume of history in Poland and Ukraine. Authors of the article do not aim to study or compare purely historical positions. This is about media tools and their role in the historical policy discourse.
40
Yozgat, Fazil. „A Simple Model about Regional Economic Cooperation – A Multidisciplinary Approach“. European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies 1, Nr. 3 (30.12.2015): 234. http://dx.doi.org/10.26417/ejis.v1i3.p234-247.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
In this study had been investigated regional cooperation Middle East countries. This study includes, literature revive, historical background, comparison research and submitted to simple model. In this model dependent variables is economic and social development, independent variables are, population, education, culture, fiscal capital etc. Regional cooperation, which are includes social, economic and cultural are based for development. Middle East countries should be revised some economic and social cooperation in the world. These matters are important for countries. In responses to global competition their market (EU, Asia, China, North Africa) have started diversifying into new markets and production. Contrary to other economic cooperation MENA countries are differ from social and economic condition. My hypothesis is important this matter.For example, from port of Liverpool to port of Lagos distance between is 4576 mile. Time is 19.1 days. Nigeria gained independent from UK 1960, after that coined south and north. From port of Le Havre to port of Continuo distance between is 4290 mile .Time is 17.9 days. Benin gained independent from France at 1960.Many years had been some difficulties for trade two countries. Therefore regional cooperation is important .In fact, two countries Commerce City distance between is 85 mile.In this work a theoretical study and a model proposal are prepared about the information of an economic – social and political cooperation among 14 Middle- East countries and about the birth of the idea of a new cooperation (unity) while entering 21’st. century.The cooperation like EU, AET and NAFTA, BR?C-S, LAFTA, NAFTA, EEC, MERCESUR, SHANGAY-5, has brought some facilities to the economic life. It is impossible for a country today to live survive a closed economy to other countries in our globalize world.We would argue that the defining issue of economic geography is the need to explain concentrations of population and of economic activity: the distinction between manufacturing belt and farm belt, the existence of cities, the role of industry clusters. (Fujita, 1999, p. 4)Generally we talk about measuring development, in order to decision for future. So we can choose a series of indicators in different social fields, mainly economics, to describe how a particular society has progressed over the time. There are other phrases that have become important in the public debate trying to explain what development really means to a society. Among these we have: Well-being, Welfare state, Developed countries, Reducing poverty, Solution unemployment, Quality of Life, Human development, Social development etc. Classical sectors are chanced today. Today society called “Knowledge society”. Productive for work needs to quality education. Shortly, innovation policies criteria, globalization, WtrO rules, Wipo rule, Pisa scores requires new studies this field. Basically social and economic development has been result. I will explain reason and cause effect those reasons.Job creation is the first priorities in the MENA region. This model will be contributed to solution of unemployment. A free trade agreement (FTA) is a preferential arrangement among countries in which tariff rates among them are reduced to zero. However, different members of the arrangement may set external tariff for non- members at different rates (Krueger, 1997, p. 7) There are kind of agreement for example. Bilateral investment agreement, free trade agreement, regional investment agreement. I will try to my models similar to European Union.In sum up, according to Bell “Society can be viewed as three separate parts that, when integrated, create a harmonious relationship within society. The three parts: polity, market economy (techno-economic), and culture (human tradition) (Bell, 1976, p. 14) in addition to regional trade has impact of multiple effect some fields.
41
Yozgat, Fazil. „A Simple Model about Regional Economic Cooperation – A Multidisciplinary Approach“. European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies 3, Nr. 1 (30.12.2015): 234. http://dx.doi.org/10.26417/ejis.v3i1.p234-247.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
In this study had been investigated regional cooperation Middle East countries. This study includes, literature revive, historical background, comparison research and submitted to simple model. In this model dependent variables is economic and social development, independent variables are, population, education, culture, fiscal capital etc. Regional cooperation, which are includes social, economic and cultural are based for development. Middle East countries should be revised some economic and social cooperation in the world. These matters are important for countries. In responses to global competition their market (EU, Asia, China, North Africa) have started diversifying into new markets and production. Contrary to other economic cooperation MENA countries are differ from social and economic condition. My hypothesis is important this matter.For example, from port of Liverpool to port of Lagos distance between is 4576 mile. Time is 19.1 days. Nigeria gained independent from UK 1960, after that coined south and north. From port of Le Havre to port of Continuo distance between is 4290 mile .Time is 17.9 days. Benin gained independent from France at 1960.Many years had been some difficulties for trade two countries. Therefore regional cooperation is important .In fact, two countries Commerce City distance between is 85 mile.In this work a theoretical study and a model proposal are prepared about the information of an economic – social and political cooperation among 14 Middle- East countries and about the birth of the idea of a new cooperation (unity) while entering 21’st. century.The cooperation like EU, AET and NAFTA, BR?C-S, LAFTA, NAFTA, EEC, MERCESUR, SHANGAY-5, has brought some facilities to the economic life. It is impossible for a country today to live survive a closed economy to other countries in our globalize world.We would argue that the defining issue of economic geography is the need to explain concentrations of population and of economic activity: the distinction between manufacturing belt and farm belt, the existence of cities, the role of industry clusters. (Fujita, 1999, p. 4)Generally we talk about measuring development, in order to decision for future. So we can choose a series of indicators in different social fields, mainly economics, to describe how a particular society has progressed over the time. There are other phrases that have become important in the public debate trying to explain what development really means to a society. Among these we have: Well-being, Welfare state, Developed countries, Reducing poverty, Solution unemployment, Quality of Life, Human development, Social development etc. Classical sectors are chanced today. Today society called “Knowledge society”. Productive for work needs to quality education. Shortly, innovation policies criteria, globalization, WtrO rules, Wipo rule, Pisa scores requires new studies this field. Basically social and economic development has been result. I will explain reason and cause effect those reasons.Job creation is the first priorities in the MENA region. This model will be contributed to solution of unemployment. A free trade agreement (FTA) is a preferential arrangement among countries in which tariff rates among them are reduced to zero. However, different members of the arrangement may set external tariff for non- members at different rates (Krueger, 1997, p. 7) There are kind of agreement for example. Bilateral investment agreement, free trade agreement, regional investment agreement. I will try to my models similar to European Union.In sum up, according to Bell “Society can be viewed as three separate parts that, when integrated, create a harmonious relationship within society. The three parts: polity, market economy (techno-economic), and culture (human tradition) (Bell, 1976, p. 14) in addition to regional trade has impact of multiple effect some fields.
42
„Notion of Direct Investment in Non-ICSID Investment Treaty Arbitration“. Law and World 7, Nr. 2 (20.04.2021): 33–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.36475/7.2.4.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
In recent times, the importance of foreign investments becomes vital in the world’s economy. The mutual cooperation between developed and developing countries by signing the bilateral and multilateral treaties with its own dispute settlement mechanisms is growing significantly. Due to the fact mentioned above, the frame- work gives the possibilities for both - investors and host states to protect their rights in the international forum. The present research is related to the importance of the notion of “Investment” in International Investment Arbitration, its implications, and the current trends on the definition itself. This issue is very important, as it is a threshold jurisdictional question for the International Investment Tribunal’s jurisdiction. The paper discusses the Bilateral Investment Treaties, their legal nature, and the expediency of their conclusion. The issue of Notion of direct investment in bilateral investment treaties will also be detailed in the paper, moreover, there will be an overview of different types of BIT definitions on the example of different countries’ BIT practice. A very comprehensive discussion will be followed on the best practices established by the International Investment Tribunals regarding the definition of “investment”. In the end, the author will analyze whether or not there is a common/universal notion of investment in Investor-State disputes.
43
Atai, Ardeshir. „Iranian Bilateral Investment Treaties: Substantive Principles and Standards“. Journal of World Investment & Trade, 2013, 397–433. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/22119000-01403001.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
There are more than 3000 bilateral investment treaties (BITs) in force. BITs are designed to facilitate foreign direct investment (FDI) and developing countries negotiate them as a strategy to attract FDI. BITs contain common denominators of free admission, fair treatment, non-expropriation and dispute resolution procedure which are the core components of an investment friendly regime. This article makes a proposition that even if a location does not have an ideal FDI legal system in conformity with the Perry-Kessaris Paradigm, it may still be attractive for foreign investment if there are BITs containing the substantive investment protection standards. The author refers to Iran as a case study which has signed more than 50 BITs with capital exporting and neighbouring countries to promote capital flows. Iran is a resource-rich country and its economy depends on foreign exchange revenues from petroleum exports. Therefore to attract FDI flows in the energy sector it should develop a legal framework that is investor friendly. BITs contain the blueprint for reforming FDI legal system to develop an investment friendly regime. This article for the first time provides a comprehensive review of Iranian BITs.
44
Haji Yeon, Asmah Laili, Mohammad Belayet Hossain und Ahmad Shamsul Abdul Aziz. „SOVEREIGNTY, NATIONAL INTEREST AND SECURITY IN BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATIES OF MALAYSIA“. Journal of International Studies 16 (30.12.2020). http://dx.doi.org/10.32890/jis.16.2020.6021.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The bilateral investment treaties (BITs) have continued to play a significant role in regulating foreign direct investments (FDI) in many countries. Member countries of the World Trade Organization (WTO), including Malaysia, have signed BITs to facilitate trade among nations. Malaysia’s FDI laws and BITs were established to protect foreign investors, however, neither legislation had provided specific provisions on the protection of sovereignty, national interest and security. This study was conducted to address the question; to what extent are sovereignty, national interest and security protected through BITs upon the introduction of FDI into Malaysia? This study employed a non-doctrinal socio-legal research methodology, whereby the authors analyzed 15 BITs between Malaysia and other countries to explore the provisions that pertains to the protection of sovereignty, national interest and security in Malaysia. The findings conclude that the existing Malaysian BITs contain provisions to promote and protect foreign investments, however, lacked the necessary provisions on the protection of sovereignty, national interest and security. Therefore, the government should reconsider these important factors when signing future BITs.
45
Gáspár-Szilágyi, Szilárd. „When the Dragon comes Home to Roost: Chinese Investments in the EU, National Security, and Investor–State Arbitration“. Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 09.01.2024. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idad028.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract The gradual rise of China as an economic, normative, and lending power has resulted in more protectionist measures in areas of the world that traditionally championed economic liberalization. Currently, 21 out of 27 European Union (EU) Member States have national laws or measures in place for the screening or review of foreign investments. However, such restrictive national measures can result in investment treaty-based arbitration under the existing bilateral investment treaties concluded by 26 EU Member States with China, as evidenced by the recent arbitration initiated by Huawei against Sweden. Therefore, this article assesses whether EU Member States are likely to see a spike in investor–State arbitral claims initiated by Chinese investors as a result of the former’s investment screening measures. To achieve this aim, the article first looks at the bilateral investment treaties (BIT)-level variables that can influence the initiation of arbitration against EU Member States, such as the presence and type of investor–State arbitration (ISA) clauses, the types of investments being made, the coverage of the pre- and/or post-establishment phases, or the inclusion of ‘non-precluded measures’ clauses. This is then followed by a look at other variables, such as the decreasing number of Chinese foreign direct investment into EU countries, the treatment of Chinese investors in recent high-profile cases, and the importance of security alliances. The article concludes that those EU States are at a higher risk of being respondents in arbitrations initiated by Chinese investors whose BITs with China include modern ISA clauses, cover the pre-establishment phase, and lack non-precluded measures clauses. However, EU States should wait for the outcome of the Huawei v Sweden arbitration before deciding whether the amendment or termination of the existing BITs with China is needed.
46
Gammie, M. „Non-Discrimination and the Taxation of Cross-Border Dividends“. World Tax Journal 2, Nr. 2 (20.05.2010). http://dx.doi.org/10.59403/dw8mnv.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
At a domestic level, dividend tax systems are usually designed to relieve the economic double taxation of corporate profits and are related to the personal taxation of savings income. Increasingly over the last 40 years, however, international considerations have intruded upon domestic tax policy. Source country taxation of corporate profits and residence country personal taxation of dividends have limited domestic tax policy options and decoupled corporate and personal tax systems. This article examines the issues for dividend tax policy in an international setting and the role of bilateral tax treaties in addressing those issues. The article explains how, within the European Union, the freedoms guaranteed by the EU Treaties have dictated Member States’ tax policy options. It concludes that general non-discrimination principles, in contrast to specific treaty provisions, have a limited role to play in resolving the competing claims of source and residence countries to tax the return on corporate activity.
47
MATÚŠOVÁ, Silvia, und Peter NOVÁČEK. „New generation of investment agreements in the regime of the European Union“. Juridical Tribune 12, Nr. 1 (05.04.2022). http://dx.doi.org/10.24818//tbj/2022/12/1.02.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union as of 6 March 2018 in Case C-284/16 changed the system and coordination of investment relations of the Member States of the European Union. The judgment set a fundamental precedent that changed the system of international investment law and placed the investment arbitration, conducted due to bilateral investment agreements between the EU and the Member States. The aim of the scientific study is to point to the new generation of the EU investment agreements which, in accordance with their importance, will influence the development of international investment relations between EU Member States and non-member countries of the world. The study was elaborated on the analysis of the rules of legal logic, systematics, accuracy and the generalization of conclusions. The analysis and interpretation of obtained results have proved that the traditional system of international investment agreements is being changed. A new model is emerging in the regime of investment agreement of the European Union.
48
Spiliopoulos, Odysseas, und Dimitrios Petropoulos. „The Regime of International Investment in the Light of New EU Economic Agreements“. Business & Entrepreneurship Journal, 26.09.2022, 29–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.47260/bej/1123.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract By the term "regime" of international investment, we mean the fundamental principles and rules that constitute the regulatory framework for the investment of nationals or companies of one State in the territory of another. This regime comprises two components, the first of which relates to the establishment of foreign investment / investors in the host State and the second, and most important, covers their subsequent treatment by its public authorities. Such principles and rules are laid down in the new EU economic agreements, some of which constitute comprehensive Free Trade Agreements containing a chapter on foreign investment establishment liberalization (EU-Japan, EU-South Korea, EU-Australia, EU-New Zealand), others which also have comprehensive scope, contain a chapter on both investment liberalization and investment protection (EU-Canada CETA, EU-Mexico) while others are stand-alone investment agreements as they exclusively rule the protection of the investments of one party's nationals or companies in the territory of the other (EU-Singapore IPA, EU-Vietnam IPA, EU-Japan IPA). These EU agreements contain reformed investment protection rules that are not present in the existing Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs). A key common feature of the above agreements, especially in the field of protection/treatment of foreign investment/investors, is the establishment of rules seeking to clarify some critical concepts in order to reduce the margins of discretion of both parties and their investors in the interpretation and application of rules adopted. In this context, the texts clarify, first of all, the notion of investment and investor to make clear who are entitled to invoke the provisions of the agreements to claim protection against the practices of the authorities of the host Party. It is clear that the so-called ‘shell’ or ’mailbox’ companies are not protected. The agreements also define more clearly and precisely on the one hand the concept of fundamental standards of treatment (non-discrimination, fair and equitable treatment, physical security, protection against expropriation, possibility to transfer and repatriate funds relating to an investment) and on the other hand the cases in which the authorities of the Contracting Parties are in breach of these standards. The aim is to avoid unfounded complaints against measures which do not, however, constitute a breach by the authorities of the obligations arising from the provisions of the agreements. The pursuit of creating a secure legal environment for foreign investors and their investments ultimately involves the creation of a permanent, objective, independent and impartial dispute resolution system. JEL classification numbers: K33, F02, F21. Keywords: European Union, International Agreements, Investment liberalization, Investment Protection.
49
Chubka, Olha. „ANALYSIS OF STATISTICAL INDICATORS OF THE VOLUME AND STRUCTURE OF MILITARY BONDS UNDER MARTIAL LAW“. Eastern Europe: economy, business and management, Nr. 1(38) (2023). http://dx.doi.org/10.32782/easterneurope.38-12.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Key points of the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine ”On the Issue of Domestic State Loan Bonds “Military Bonds”, which was issued due to the outbreak of hostilities on the territory of Ukraine and the need to fill the state budget in times of war, are presented. The list and types of military bonds sold at auctions since March 2022 are provided. The measures taken by the NBU and financial institutions to maximize the simplification of the procedures for purchasing military bonds for the period of war are presented. The advantages of abolishing the obligation to confirm the sources of income of investors when purchasing military bonds are listed. The list of banks, in particular primary dealers and licensed brokers that carry out operations with military bonds is provided. The structure of investors in military bonds is analyzed in terms of legal entities, individuals and non-residents in 2022. The structure of the placement of military bonds by type of currency (Ukrainian hryvnia, US dollar, euro) in 2022 is presented. The structure of placement of military bonds in the primary and secondary markets in 2022 is analyzed. The composition of the sources of financing of the state budget (financing of the National Bank of Ukraine, grants from the United States and the European Union, domestic government bonds (including military bonds), bilateral loans from the European Union, the International Monetary Fund, the United Kingdom, the European Investment Bank and other countries) is presented. It is proved that the main buyer of military bonds in wartime is the National Bank of Ukraine, and the purchase of military bonds is carried out at the expense of hryvnia issuance through the conclusion of an agreement with the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine. The role and share of military bonds in the sources of financing of the state budget is determined. The author analyzes the dynamics of funds raised to the State Budget from the sale of military bonds based on the results of auctions in 2022. The main advantages of investing in military bonds for investors are presented: the opportunity to financially assist the State under martial law; the State's guarantee for 100% of the purchased bonds; excess of bond yields over deposit yields; absence of personal income tax on bonds; possibility of their early sale on the secondary market; possibility of obtaining a loan secured by bonds; possibility of hedging currency risk.
50
Rymar, Olha. „DEBT POLICY OF UKRAINE UNDER THE CONDITIONS OF MARITAL STATE“. Market Infrastructure, Nr. 67 (2022). http://dx.doi.org/10.32843/infrastruct67-35.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The article examines the current state of Ukraine's debt policy during the war. It was found that public debt is an integral part of the financial system not only of countries with a transitory economy, but also of highly developed ones. The reasons for the rapid growth of the national debt of Ukraine from 2014–2015 to the present are analyzed. The main sources of financing of the state budget of Ukraine are presented, which in turn were formed from external foreign cash flows and corresponding internal borrowings: military bonds, loans from international financial organizations, as well as bilateral loans and grants. It was established that Ukraine received about $4.2 billion in aid from four international organizations – the IMF, the European Union, the World Bank and the European Investment Bank, and these were loans received on preferential terms. At the same time, Ukraine received considerable loans from the governments of such foreign countries: Canada, Great Britain, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden, Italy, and others. The most profitable assistance is a grant, because this money does not have to be returned. According to the analysis, America takes a leading position in this type of aid. It was also analyzed that at the moment the economic situation in Ukraine is difficult, but not yet critical, as there is $22 billion in state reserves. The main strategic directions and step-by-step actions of the Government of Ukraine in the context of optimizing the management of the public debt of Ukraine are highlighted, namely: the approval of the medium-term Strategy for the management of the public debt for 2021–2024, which is the basic document regarding the debt policy of Ukraine. In addition, according to the forecasts of leading economic experts, in order to improve the debt and budget policy, the state cannot issue national currency through the banking system (printing press) on a permanent basis, receiving financial assistance from international partners, and ultimately reducing non-priority state budget expenses, remains important. The strategy defines 4 main goals of public debt management for the next three years: increase in the share of state debt in the national currency; extension of the average term to repayment and provision of a uniform repayment schedule of the state debt; attraction of long-term preferential financing; continued development of strong relationships with investors and further improvement of the public debt management policy. The strategy also contains an analysis of forecast debt indicators and conclusions on debt sustainability, as well as an action plan for 2021–2024 and indicators of achieving goals — in particular, reducing the ratio of the amount of public debt to GDP by the end of 2024 to 47%. However, the strategy in an updated format, closer to global practices, was approved in 2019 and has proven its effectiveness as a tool for increasing the transparency of decision-making and improving communication with both investors and international partners. Thus, as a result of its implementation, it has already been possible to achieve important goals: an increase in the share of the state debt in the national currency (from 33.4% in 2018 to 38.2% in 2020), an improvement in the structure of the state debt in terms of repayment terms, and an increase in international ratings of Ukraine. Ukraine also received recognition at the international level: the international publication GlobalMarkets awarded Ukraine in the nomination "The best public debt management office in Central and Eastern Europe".