Since the United States taxes U.S. persons on their worldwide income, double taxation of income can arise because income earned abroad by a U.S. person may be taxed by the country in which the income is earned and also by the United States. The United States seeks to mitigate this double taxation generally by allowing U.S. persons to credit their foreign income taxes against the U.S. tax imposed on their foreign source income. A fundamental premise of the foreign tax credit is that it may not offset the U.S. tax on U.S. source income. Therefore, the foreign tax credit provisions of the Code contain a limitation that ensures that the foreign tax credit offsets only the U.S. tax on foreign source income. The foreign tax credit limitation generally is computed on a worldwide consolidated (overall) basis (as opposed to a "per-country" basis). Pursuant to rules enacted as part of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (the "1986 Act"), the overall limitation is computed separately for certain classifications of income (i.e., passive income, high withholding tax interest, financial services income, shipping income, dividends from each noncontrolled section 902 corporation, DISC dividends, FSC dividends, and taxable income of a FSC attributable to foreign trade income) in order to prevent the crediting of foreign taxes on certain types of traditionally high-taxed foreign source income against the residual U.S. tax on certain items of traditionally lowtaxed foreign source income. Also, a special limitation applies to the credit for foreign taxes imposed on foreign oil and gas extraction income.

Prior to the Tax Reform Act of 1984 (the "1984 Act"), a U.S. person could convert U.S. source income to foreign source income, thereby circumventing the foreign tax credit limitation, by routing the income through a foreign corporation. The 1984 Act added to the foreign tax credit provisions special rules that prevent U.S. persons from converting U.S. source income into foreign source income through the use of an intermediate foreign payee. These rules apply to 50-percent U.S.-owned foreign corporations only. In order to prevent a similar technique from being used to average foreign taxes among the separate limitation categories, the 1986 Act provided lookthrough rules for the characterization of inclusions and income items received from a controlled foreign corporation.

Prior to the 1986 Act, a U.S. taxpayer with substantial economic income for a taxable year potentially could avoid all U.S. tax liability for such year so long as it had sufficient foreign tax credits and no domestic income (whether or not the taxpayer had economic income from domestic operations). In order to mandate at least a nominal tax contribution from all U.S. taxpayers with substantial economic income, the 1986 Act provided that foreign tax credits generally cannot exceed 90 percent of the pre-foreign tax credit tentative minimum tax (determined without regard to the net operating loss deduction).

For foreign tax credit purposes, a U.S. corporation that owns 10 percent or more of the voting stock of a foreign corporation and receives a dividend from the foreign corporation (or is otherwise required to include in its income earnings of the foreign corporation) is deemed to have paid a portion of the foreign income taxes paid by the foreign corporation on its accumulated earnings. The taxes deemed paid by the U.S. corporation are included in its total for

eign taxes paid for the year the dividend is received and go into the relevant pool or pools of separate limitation category taxes to be credited.

B. United States Tax Treaties-In General

The traditional objectives of U.S. tax treaties have been the avoidance of international double taxation and the prevention of tax avoidance and evasion. To a large extent, the treaty provisions designed to carry out these objectives supplement Code provisions having the same objectives; the treaty provisions modify the generally applicable statutory rules with provisions that take into account the particular tax system of the treaty country. Given the diversity of tax systems, it would be very difficult to develop in the Code rules that unilaterally would achieve these objectives for all countries.

Notwithstanding the unilateral relief measures of the United States and its treaty partners, double taxation might arise because of differences in source rules between the United States and the other country. Likewise, if each country considers the same deduction allocable to income that it treats as foreign source income, double taxation can result. Problems sometimes arise in the determination of whether a foreign tax qualifies for the U.S. foreign tax credit. Also, double taxation may arise in situations were a corporation or individual may be treated as a resident of both countries and be taxed on a worldwide basis by both.

In addition, there may be significant problems involving "excess" taxation-situations where either country taxes income received by nonresidents at rates that exceed the rates imposed on residents. This is most likely to occur in the case of income taxed at a flat rate on a gross basis. (Most countries, like the United States, generally tax domestic source income on a gross basis when it is received by nonresidents who are not engaged in business in the country.) In many situations the gross income tax exceeds the tax that would have been paid under the net income tax system applicable to residents.

Another related objective of U.S. tax treaties is the removal of barriers to trade, capital flows, and commercial travel caused by overlapping tax jurisdictions and the burdens of complying with the tax laws of a jurisdiction when a person's contacts with, and income derived from, that jurisdiction are minimal.

The objective of limiting double taxation generally is accomplished in treaties by the agreement of each country to limit, in certain specified situations, its right to tax income earned from its territory by residents of the other country. For the most part, the various rate reductions and exemptions by the source country provided in the treaties are premised on the assumption that the country of residence will tax the income in any event at levels comparable to those imposed by the source country on its residents. The treaties also provide for the elimination of double taxation by requiring the residence country to allow a credit for taxes that the source country retains the right to impose under the treaty. In some cases, the treaties may provide for exemption by the residence country of income taxed by the source country pursuant to the treaty.

Treaties first seek to eliminate double taxation by defining the term "resident" so that an individual or corporation generally will not be subject to primary taxing jurisdiction as a resident by each of the two countries. Treaties also provide that neither country will tax business income derived by residents of the other country unless the business activities in the taxing jurisdiction are substantial enough to constitute a branch or other permanent establishment or fixed base in that jurisdiction. The treaties contain commercial visitation exemptions under which individual residents of one country performing personal services in the other will not be required to pay tax in that other country unless their contacts exceed certain specified minimums, for example, presence for a set number of days or earnings of over a certain amount.

Treaties deal with passive income such as dividends, interest, and royalties from sources within one country derived by residents of the other country by either providing that they are taxed only in the country of residence or by providing that the source country's withholding tax generally imposed on those payments is reduced. As described above, the United States generally imposes a 30-percent withholding tax and agrees to reduce this tax (or in the case of some income, eliminate it entirely) in its tax treaties, in return for reciprocal treatment by its treaty partner.

In its treaties, the United States, as a matter of policy, generally retains the right to tax its citizens and residents on their worldwide income as if the treaty had not come into effect. Such a treaty provision generally is referred to as a so-called "saving clause." Double taxation also may arise, not withstanding the existence of a treaty, because most countries will not exempt passive income from tax at the source.

Double taxation is further mitigated either by granting a credit for income taxes paid to the other country, or, in the case of some U.S. treaty partners, by providing that income is exempt from tax in the country of residence. The United States provides in its treaties that it will allow a credit against U.S. tax for income taxes paid to the treaty partners, subject to the various limitations of U.S. law.

The objective of preventing tax avoidance and evasion generally is accomplished in treaties by the agreement of each country to exchange tax-related information. The treaties generally provide for the exchange of information between the tax authorities of the two countries when such information is necessary for carrying out the provisions of the treaty or of their domestic tax laws. The obligation to exchange information under the treaties typically does not require either country to carry out measures contrary to its laws or administrative practices or to supply information not obtainable under its laws or in the normal course of its administration, or to supply information that would disclose trade secrets or other information the disclosure of which would be contrary to public policy. The provisions generally result in an exchange of routine information, such as the names of U.S. residents receiving investment income. The Internal Revenue Service (and the treaty partner's tax authorities) also can request specific tax information from a treaty partner. This can include information to be used in a criminal investigation or prosecution.

Administrative cooperation between the countries is further enhanced under the treaties by the inclusion of a competent authority mechanism to resolve double taxation problems arising in individual cases and, more generally, to facilitate consultation between tax officials of the two governments.

At times, residents of countries that do not have income tax treaties with the United States attempt to use a treaty between the United States and another country to avoid U.S. tax. To prevent third-country residents from obtaining treaty benefits intended for treaty country residents only, the treaties generally contain an "anti-treaty shopping" provision that is designed to limit treaty benefits to bona fide residents of the two countries.

Treaties generally provide that neither country may subject nationals of the other country (or permanent establishments of enterprises of the other country) to taxation more burdensome than that it imposes on its own nationals (or on its own enterprises). Similarly, in general, neither country may discriminate against enterprises owned by residents of the other country.

IV. EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED TAX TREATY

A detailed, article-by-article explanation of the proposed income tax treaty between the United States and the Netherlands is presented below. Also presented below are explanations of the provisions of the Understanding agreed to by the negotiators, and other matters set forth in diplomatic notes exchanged at the time the proposed treaty was signed.20

Article 1. General Scope

The general scope article describes the persons who may claim the benefits of the proposed treaty.

The proposed treaty generally applies to residents of the United States and to residents of Netherlands, with specific exceptions designated in other articles (e.g., Articles 28 (Non-discrimination) and 30 (Exchange of Information and Administrative Assistance)) and discussed below. As discussed below under Article 24 (Basis of Taxation), however, the proposed treaty, like virtually all U.S. tax treaties, also contains a "saving clause" under which the parties generally remain free to tax their own residents and nationals without regard to the treaty. This follows other U.S. income tax treaties, the U.S. model treaty, and the OECD model treaty. Residence is defined in Article 4.

The proposed treaty provides that it generally does not restrict any benefits accorded by internal law or by any other agreement between the United States and the Netherlands. However, this does not apply to the relation between Dutch internal law and the provisions of Article 25 (Methods of Elimination of Double Taxation). Thus, the proposed treaty will apply only where it benefits taxpayers, except that the double taxation relief (e.g., foreign tax credits, or exemptions from tax on foreign income) afforded to a Dutch resident or national with respect to U.S. income will be limited to that allowed under the proposed treaty, notwithstanding more favorable relief that might be available under internal Dutch law.

As set forth in the Treasury Department's Technical Explanation of the proposed treaty (hereinafter referred to as the "Technical Explanation"), the fact that the proposed treaty would only apply to a taxpayer's benefit does not mean that a taxpayer could inconsistently select among treaty and internal law provisions in order to minimize its overall tax burden. The Technical Explanation sets

20 The diplomatic notes state that the negotiators developed and agreed upon the memorandum of understanding intending to give guidance both to the taxpayers and the tax authorities of the two countries in interpreting various provisions contained in the proposed treaty. A view is expresssed that as experience in administering the treaty is gained, the competent authorities may develop and publish amendments to the understandings and interpretations laid down in the memorandum of understanding. The diplomatic notes are intended to constitute a common and binding understanding, by the U.S. and Dutch Governments, of the treaty and of the contents and the role of the memorandum of understanding.