Stephen Shay (Boston College; Google Scholar) presents The UTPR and Double Tax Treaties: Does the UTPR Violate OECD Model Capital Ownership Non-discrimination? at Toronto today as part of its James Hausman Tax Law and Policy Workshop Series hosted by Ben Alarie:

This paper considers whether a tax imposed under the Inclusive Framework’s Pillar 2 undertaxed profits rule (UTPR) on a constituent entity (CE) of a multinational group within the scope of Pillar 2 would be inconsistent with the capital ownership paragraph of the OECD Model Convention nondiscrimination article. The better answer is that the UTPR would not violate capital ownership non-discrimination

Conclusion
Pillar 2 does not sit comfortably alongside bilateral tax treaties. There is interpretative room to apply them in harmony with each other and that yields the better result from a legal and policy perspective. The better answer is that the UTPR does not discriminate in a manner that is within the intended scope of OECD Article 24(5).

Pillar 2 is an imperfect yet successful example of modern global coordination among a broad group of countries. It is innovative and advances the overall welfare of developed and developing countries, though the former are no doubt favored. 

It is innovative and advances the overall welfare of developed and developing countries, though the former are no doubt favored. It is an experiment worth preserving and building on cooperatively by the UN and OECD to shape to the needs of the 21st century.

Editor's Note:  If you would like to receive a daily email with links to tax posts on TaxProf Blog, email me here.