Jurisdictional arbitrage

Jurisdictional arbitrage is the practice of taking advantage of the discrepancies between competing legal jurisdictions. It takes its name from arbitrage, the practice in finance of purchasing a good at a lower price in one market and selling it at a higher price in another. Just as in financial arbitrage, the attractiveness of jurisdiction arbitrage depends largely on its transaction costs, here the costs of switching legal service providers from one government to another.^[1]

The lower the exit costs for leaving the jurisdiction (unrestricted emigration, cheap travel, liquidity of assets) the more desirable and feasible it is. Conversely, high entry costs into the more favourable jurisdiction are an inhibitor on jurisdictional arbitrage; certain tax havens such as Andorra grant permanent residency rights to immigrants only if they meet certain criteria. Jurisdictional arbitrage is a significant concept in modern free market anarcho-capitalism.

Applications

The practice of individuals seeking asylum involves appealing to a jurisdiction with favorable individual rights for residency, where the individual's native jurisdiction is seen by them to offer insufficient protection. For example, women have fled West African nations which practice tribal female genital mutilation and/or extremist Islam^[2] in favour of European and North American jurisdictions.^[3] In July 2019, one of the wives--Princess Haya--of the ruler of Dubai was in a London courtroom to ask the state to provide and enforce a non-molestation order for her and what is known as a forced marriage protection order for their daughters; otherwise the women would be forced to submit to the Sharia law jurisdiction of Sheikh Mohammed.^[4]

무법자

사법적 재정거래는 또한 테러리스트,^[5] 돈세탁자, 사이버 공격자와 같은 초국가적 범죄자들의 정부 기소 시도를 방해하는 데 이용되었다.^[6] 최근 이 관행에 반대하는 국제적인 동원에 앞서, 에리히 호네커, 이디 아민, 아우구스토 피노체트 등 축출된 국가 지도자들이 본국 관할구역에서 기소되지 않기 위해 해외로 도피하고 은퇴하는 오랜 전통이 있었다.^[7] 한때 칠레의 군사지도자였던 피노체트는 영국으로 피신해 본국 관할구역에서 재기소 처분을 회피하려 했다. 이후 보편적 관할의 원칙에 따라 발타사르 가르손의 스페인 법원에 의해 기소되었다.

이러한 현상에 대응하기 위해 대부분의 국가는 다른 대부분의 국가와 양자 범죄인 인도조약을 체결하였고, 일부 정부는 보편적 관할권 원칙을 채택하여 프로의 관할권 밖에서 자행된 범죄(특히 인권침해 및 전쟁범죄)로 개인을 기소할 수 있도록 하였다.환경보호 – 벨기에와 스페인과 같은 국가들의 법적 구조는 이를 허용한다. 국제 재판소가 유엔의 보호 하에 운영될 때와 마찬가지로.

조세정책

조세 회피를 위한 관할권 재정거래의 이용을 제한하기 위한 정부 담합 시도도 조세 조화 정책이다. 유럽연합에 가입된 유럽 정부들은 제한된 공통적인 법적 구조를 가진 국가들(Four Freedoms)을 수집하여 다른 비개발 국가들(예: 1990년대 초 아일랜드 공화국)에 의한 세금 경쟁을 초래했다.그들의 세율을 이웃의 세율보다 현저히 낮게 매기다 이 전략은 여러 동유럽 국가들에 의해 균일세 형태로 채택되어 프랑스, 영국, 독일과 같은 전통적으로 더 발전된 국가들에 의해 세율의 조화를 요구하게 되었다.^[8]

Labour

In the view of one journalist, Microsoft's satellite office in Vancouver was set up because the US Immigration and Naturalization Service was given to restrict the immigration of programmers.^[9]

The Blueseed project intended to launch a ship 12 nautical miles from the shore (and thus in international waters) with the goal of allowing entrepreneurs without US work visas legally to work for and create companies close to Silicon Valley.^[10]

Advocates

Anarcho-capitalists hope that by subdividing existing governmental jurisdictions into city-states (such as Singapore), competition among jurisdictions for citizens will lead to a diversity of legal climates including more favourable jurisdictions for liberty and self-determination.^[11] Cypherpunks and crypto-anarchists also cite low exit costs and fluidity of movement across jurisdictions as a significant means of advancing individual freedom through the free movement of information and capital.^[12][13] The concept of seasteading is an attempt to increase the possibility of jurisdictional arbitrage by decreasing the cost of switching governments. It is worth noting that there is nothing anarchist about jurisdictional arbitrage, since it is a strategy based on profiting from the differences between regulatory regimes, and therefore incompatible with the abolition of the state.^{[citation needed]}

A notable proponent and practitioner of jurisdictional arbitrage is Canadian businessman and perpetual traveler Calvin Ayre, founder of online gambling consortium Bodog Entertainment Group.^[14] Although online gambling is illegal in the United States, a market which accounts for 95% of Bodog's sales, the company pays no corporate taxes there as its activities are distributed across different jurisdictions to minimise tax burden. "We run a business that can't actually be described as gambling in each country we operate in. But when you add it all together, it’s Internet gambling."^[15]

See also

참조

추가 읽기

• Balloun, O.S. (2010). "The True Obstacle to the Autonomy of Seasteads: American Law Enforcement Jurisdiction over Homesteads on the High Seas" (PDF). The Seasteading Institute. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-11-29. Retrieved 2010-10-27.
• Hosein, I. (2004). "The Sources of Laws: Policy Dynamics in a Digital and Terrorized World" (PDF). The Information Society. 20 (3): 187–199. doi:10.1080/01972240490456854. S2CID 43612133. Retrieved 2008-02-29.
• Ware, R. (2006). "The Use of Jurisdictional Arbitrage to Support the Strategic Interest of the Firm". University of Toledo Law Review. 38 (1): 307.
• Plender, John (2007-01-01). "Continental capitalism à la carte". Financial Times.