Jurisdictional arbitrage in the context of "Tax haven"

Play Trivia Questions online!

or

Skip to study material about Jurisdictional arbitrage in the context of "Tax haven"

Ad spacer

⭐ Core Definition: Jurisdictional arbitrage

Jurisdictional arbitrage is the practice of taking advantage of 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.

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.

↓ Menu

>>>PUT SHARE BUTTONS HERE<<<
In this Dossier

Jurisdictional arbitrage in the context of Universal jurisdiction

Universal jurisdiction is a legal principle that allows states or international organizations to claim criminal jurisdiction over an accused person, regardless of where the alleged crime was committed and irrespective of the accused's nationality, country of residence, or any other connection to the prosecuting entity. Crimes prosecuted under universal jurisdiction are considered crimes against all, too serious to tolerate jurisdictional arbitrage. The concept of universal jurisdiction is therefore closely linked to the idea that some international norms are erga omnes, or owed to the entire world community, as well as to the concept of jus cogens—that certain international law obligations are binding on all states.

According to Amnesty International, a proponent of universal jurisdiction, certain crimes pose such a serious threat to the international community as a whole that states have a logical and moral duty to prosecute individuals responsible; therefore, no place should be a safe house for those who have committed genocide, crimes against humanity, extrajudicial executions, war crimes, torture, or forced disappearances.

↑ Return to Menu