The main factor taken into account in the taxation of corporate profits is the existence of a "permanent establishment". It is a stable place of business in which the taxable person carries on all or part of his business. `With regard to Article 10(2)(a), both delegations found that, under Australian tax law, Australian limited partnerships are effectively treated as partnerships and that a reference to a partnership does not refer to a limited partnership. There is therefore a delay in the fact that the reference to a partnership referred to in point (a) of paragraph 2 does not apply to those limited partnerships. 1.226 This Article expressly authorizes the competent authorities to agree on consultations with a view to agreeing on an equal distribution of income among the associated enterprises referred to in Article 9 (associated enterprises). This additional sentence (which is not included in most Australian contracts) is simply clear and is not intended to suggest that such consultation would not be permitted under the mutual agreement procedure without such a specification. 1.53 Pursuant to paragraph 4(c), an enterprise is considered to be a permanent establishment when it has, for more than six months, essential equipment leased or for other uses, unless the equipment is leased under a "lease". Under Australian law, the lessee is largely treated for tax purposes as the owner of the leased property under a "lease agreement" (a lease agreement accompanied by certain options or purchase rights of the lessee). 1.213 Dividends and branch profits from a company established in Australia from France and exempt from Australian tax under measures of foreign sources of income (e.g. B sections 23AH and 23AJ of the ITAA 1936) remain eligible for exemption from Australian tax.
In the absence of double taxation in these cases, the form of credit of the discharge is not relevant. 1.25 Where a term is not explicitly defined in this Convention or specified in the Protocol, it must be established that the concept (unless used in another context) has the same interpretative meaning as it has under the national tax law of the country which the French Agreement applies at the time of its application. In this case, the meaning of the concept under the tax law of the country outweighs the meaning it may have under other national laws. 3.50 The government`s policy flexibility with respect to the taxation of residents in France would be limited to some extent by changes in contractual obligations, but the larger changes would coincide with the government`s tax treaty policy, the costs of these restrictions would have to be offset by the benefits. Ultimately, the tax treaty could be denounced if it were strongly inconsistent with government policy. However, such denunciation is very rare in the practice of international tax treaties and could be rejected by the business community and others who benefit from the treaty. . . .