[Senate Executive Report 114-8]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


114th Congress     }                                {     Exec. Rept.
                                 SENATE
 2d Session        }                                {        114-8

======================================================================



 
   PROTOCOL AMENDNG MULTILATERAL CONVENTION ON MUTUAL ADMINISTRATIVE 
                       ASSISTANCE IN TAX MATTERS

                                _______
                                

                February 8, 2016.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

          Mr. Corker, from the Committee on Foreign Relations,
                        submitted the following

                                 REPORT

                    [To accompany Treaty Doc. 112-5]

    The Committee on Foreign Relations, to which was referred 
the Protocol Amending the Convention on Mutual Administrative 
Assistance in Tax Matters, done at Paris on May 27, 2010 (the 
``Protocol'') (Treaty Doc. 112-5), having considered the same, 
reports favorably thereon with one declaration, as indicated in 
the resolution of advice and consent, and recommends that the 
Senate give its advice and consent to ratification thereof, as 
set forth in this report and the accompanying resolution of 
advice and consent.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page

  I. Purpose..........................................................1
 II. Background.......................................................2
III. Major Provisions.................................................2
 IV. Entry Into Force.................................................3
  V. Implementing Legislation.........................................3
 VI. Committee Action.................................................3
VII. Committee Comments...............................................3
VIII.Text of Resolution of Advice and Consent to Ratification.........4

 IX. Annex 1.--Technical Explanation..................................5

                               I. Purpose

    The purpose of the Protocol is to bring the Convention on 
Mutual Administrative Assistance on Tax Matters into conformity 
with current international standards regarding the exchange of 
information. The internationally agreed standard, which was 
developed by the Organization for Economic Cooperation 
Development (``OECD'') and non-OECD countries working together 
in the OECD's Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of 
Information, is generally consistent with the current U.S. 
Model Income Tax Convention and the 2008 OECD Model Tax 
Convention.

                             II. Background

    The existing multilateral convention entered into force for 
the United States on January 4, 1995. The Protocol was 
negotiated to bring the existing convention into conformity 
with current OECD standards on transparency and effective 
exchange of information, which is generally consistent with the 
U.S. Model Income Tax Convention. The Protocol was negotiated 
to bring the existing convention into conformity with current 
international standards and thereby promote increased 
cooperation in tax administration and enforcement among parties 
to the agreement.

                         III. Major Provisions

    A detailed article-by-article analysis of the Convention 
may be found in the Technical Explanation Published by the 
Department of the Treasury on February 26, 2014, which is 
included in Annex 1 of this report. The staff of the Joint 
Committee on Taxation prepared an analysis of the Protocol, 
JCX-9-14 (February 26, 2014), which was of great assistance to 
the committee in reviewing the Protocol. A summary of the key 
provisions of the Protocol is set forth below.
    The Protocol is intended to bring the existing Convention 
on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters into 
conformity with current international standards regarding the 
exchange of information. Through amendments to Article 4 of the 
Convention, the Protocol requires treaty countries to exchange 
any information that is ``foreseeably relevant'' to the 
administration or enforcement of the domestic tax laws of the 
requesting treaty country, similar to the standard found in the 
OECD Model and U.S. Model treaties. The scope of information 
exchange is broadened to permit use of exchanged information 
for both criminal and civil proceedings, removing a previous 
requirement that mandated separate authorization for the 
disclosure of exchanged information in a criminal proceeding.
    Amendments to Article 18 of the existing Convention allow 
for requests to be made for the purpose of ascertaining the 
identity of persons where there is a reasonable basis to 
believe that taxes have been avoided (``John Doe'' summonses 
under U.S. law). Revisions to Article 21 of the existing 
Convention clarify the scope of limitations on obligations 
imposed by the Convention. In addition, two new paragraphs are 
added to: (1) require a requested country to use its 
information gathering powers regardless of whether it has need 
for such information under its domestic law; and (2) prohibit a 
requested State from declining requests because information is 
held by a bank, other financial institution, nominee, or 
persons acting in an agency or fiduciary capacity, or because 
the information relates to ownership interests in a person. 
Therefore, bank secrecy laws are not a basis for rejecting 
information requests.
    The Protocol strengthens the confidentiality requirements 
of Article 22 of the Convention and brings them into conformity 
with the current OECD and U.S. Model treaties. The proposed 
Protocol also amends the Convention to permit States that are 
neither members of the Council of Europe nor of the OECD to 
accede to the convention.

                          IV. Entry Into Force

    The proposed Protocol entered into force on January 6, 
2011, for the five countries that signed and ratified it prior 
to that date. For the United States, the proposed Protocol will 
enter into force on the first day of the month following the 
expiration of a three month period after the date of deposit of 
the instrument of ratification.

                      V. Implementing Legislation

    As is the case generally with income tax treaties, the 
Protocol is self-executing and does not require implementing 
legislation for the United States.

                          VI. Committee Action

    The committee held a public hearing on the Convention on 
October 29, 2015. Testimony was received from Robert Stack, 
Deputy Assistant Secretary (International Tax Affairs) at the 
U.S. Department of the Treasury and Thomas Barthold, Chief of 
Staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation. A transcript of the 
hearing is included in Annex 2 of Executive Report 114-1.
    On November 10, 2015, the committee considered the Protocol 
and ordered it favorably reported by voice vote, with a quorum 
present and without objection.
    In the 113th Congress, on April 1, 2014, the committee 
again considered the Protocol and ordered it favorably reported 
by voice vote, with a quorum present and without objection.

                        VII. Committee Comments

    The Committee on Foreign Relations believes that the 
Protocol will stimulate trade and investment, strengthen 
provisions regarding the exchange of tax information, and 
promote closer co-operation between the United States and 
parties to the Protocol. The committee therefore urges the 
Senate to act promptly to give advice and consent to 
ratification of the Protocol, as set forth in this report and 
the accompanying resolution of advice and consent.

                       A. EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION

    The proposed Protocol would replace the existing 
Convention's tax information exchange provisions with updated 
rules that are consistent with current U.S. tax treaty 
practice. The Protocol would allow the tax authorities of each 
country to exchange information relevant to carrying out the 
provisions of the Convention or the domestic tax laws of either 
country, including information that would otherwise be 
protected by the bank secrecy laws of either country. It would 
also enable the United States to obtain information (including 
from financial institutions) from a Party whether or not the 
Party needs the information for its own tax purposes. Article 
VI of the proposed Protocol strengthens the confidentiality 
requirements of Article 22 of the Convention and brings them 
into conformity with the current OECD and U.S. Model treaties.

      B. DECLARATION ON THE SELF-EXECUTING NATURE OF THE PROTOCOL

    The committee has included one declaration in the 
recommended resolution of advice and consent. The declaration 
states that the Protocol is self-executing, as is the case 
generally with income tax treaties. Prior to the 110th 
Congress, the committee generally included such statements in 
the committee's report, but in light of the Supreme Court 
decision in Medellin v. Texas, 128 S. Ct. 1346 (2008), the 
committee determined that a clear statement in the Resolution 
is warranted. A further discussion of the committee's views on 
this matter can be found in Section VIII of Executive Report 
110-12.

     VIII. Text of Resolution of Advice and Consent to Ratification

    Resolved (two-thirds of the Senators present concurring 
therein),

SECTION 1. SENATE ADVICE AND CONSENT SUBJECT TO A DECLARATION

    The Senate advises and consents to the ratification of the 
Protocol Amending the Convention on Mutual Administrative 
Assistance in Tax Matters, done at Paris May 27, 2010 (the 
``Protocol'') (Treaty Doc. 112-5), subject to the declaration 
of section 2.

SECTION 2. DECLARATION

    The advice and consent of the Senate under section 1 is 
subject to the following declaration:
          The Convention is self-executing.

                  IX. Annex 1.--Technical Explanation

   DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY TECHNICAL EXPLANATION OF THE PROTOCOL 
  AMENDING THE CONVENTION ON MUTUAL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANCE IN TAX 
                                MATTERS

    This is a Technical Explanation of the Protocol signed on 
May 27, 2010 (the ``Protocol'') to the Convention on Mutual 
Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters (the ``existing 
Convention''), which was signed by the United States in 1989 
and ratified in 1991. The Explanatory Report accompanying the 
existing Convention was drafted by the Council of Europe and 
the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (the 
``OECD''). At the time of signature of the Protocol, 
Azerbaijan, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Italy, 
the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Sweden, the United Kingdom, 
and Ukraine, along with the United States, were parties to the 
existing Convention. Canada, Germany, and Spain had signed the 
existing Convention but had not ratified it. Drafting of the 
Protocol was carried out by the Coordinating Body of the 
Convention, consisting of Parties to the Convention, in joint 
session with an Ad Hoc Committee for Revision of the Convention 
open to the member states of the Council of Europe and of the 
OECD. The United States was actively involved in the process of 
drafting the Protocol and its accompanying Explanatory Report.
    This Technical Explanation is the United States Treasury 
Department's official guide to the Protocol. It reflects the 
United States' understanding of the meaning and application of 
particular provisions of the Protocol. The United States 
accepts the Protocol's accompanying Explanatory Report.
    Neither the Protocol nor the existing Convention affects 
substantive rules of taxation. They are solely concerned with 
mutual assistance in the administration of the tax laws of 
signatory States. The Protocol is currently in force for the 
countries that have signed and ratified it. As of January 16, 
2014, a total of sixty-three countries, including the United 
States, have signed the Protocol. The process of ratification 
has been completed in thirty-four countries.
    The amendments contained in the Protocol bring the existing 
Convention into closer conformity with current internationally 
agreed standards, which are also reflected in the OECD's Model 
Tax Convention on Income and Capital (the ``OECD Model'') and 
the 2006 U.S. Model Income Tax Convention (the ``U.S. Model''). 
The amendments also open the existing Convention to countries 
which are not members of the OECD or of the Council of Europe 
and specify the level of detail to be provided in a request for 
information. Finally, two procedural issues are addressed in 
the Protocol: the entry into force and date of effect of the 
amendments; and the relationship between the Protocol and the 
existing Convention.

                               ARTICLE I

    Article I amends the Preamble of the existing Convention. 
Paragraph 1 deletes the reference in the Preamble of the 
existing Convention providing that States should not carry out 
measures or supply information except in conformity with their 
domestic law and practice. Paragraph 2 adds a recital to the 
Preamble of the existing Convention noting that a new 
cooperative international information exchange environment has 
emerged, and that in this context it is desirable for a 
multilateral instrument for information exchange to be made 
available to the widest number of States to obtain the benefits 
of this new environment.

                               ARTICLE II

    Article II amends Article 4 (General provisions) of the 
existing Convention. New paragraph 1 of Article 4 requires the 
Parties to exchange any information that is foreseeably 
relevant for the administration or enforcement of their 
domestic laws concerning the taxes covered by the existing 
Convention. Article II deletes paragraph 2 of Article 4 of the 
existing Convention, which required prior authorization by a 
jurisdiction supplying information in order for the information 
being supplied to be used as evidence before a criminal court. 
These revisions bring the existing Convention into closer 
conformity with the U.S. and OECD Models.

                              ARTICLE III

    Article III amends Article 18 (Information to be provided 
by the applicant state) of the existing Convention. The 
existing Convention specifies the details that the applicant 
State must provide to the requested State when making a request 
for information. In some situations, the name of the person 
under examination is not known to the applicant State, but 
other information sufficiently identifies the person. Paragraph 
1 of Article III amends paragraph 1.b of Article 18 to provide 
that a requesting State may provide the name, address or any 
other identifying particulars of the person in respect of whom 
the request is made. Paragraph 2 of Article III is a conforming 
change to the Protocol to address deletions to the existing 
Convention made by Article IV of the Protocol (described 
below).
    8The Explanatory Report accompanying the Protocol explains 
that the existing Convention was amended in this regard to 
clarify that the more details the applicant State can provide, 
the better the information it receives is likely to be. 
Paragraph 1.b of Article 18 of the existing Convention as 
modified by the Protocol asks the applicant State to provide 
the requested State with all available information which can 
assist in identifying the person, but the details provided need 
not necessarily include a name and address and the details may 
identify an ascertainable group or category of persons. As 
noted in the Explanatory Report accompanying the Protocol, 
however, this provision does not mean that Parties can engage 
in fishing expeditions.

                               ARTICLE IV

    Article IV deletes Article 19 (Possibility of declining a 
request) of the existing Convention, the body of which appears 
in revised but substantially similar form at subparagraph 2(g) 
of Article 21 (Protection of persons and limits to the 
obligation to provide assistance) of the existing Convention as 
amended by Article V of the Protocol (described below).

                               ARTICLE V

    Article V deletes and replaces Article 21 (Protection of 
persons and limits to the obligation to provide assistance) of 
the existing Convention. Article 21 relates to the protection 
of the rights or safeguards of persons and the limits of a 
State's obligation to provide assistance to another State. The 
changes bring Article 21 of the existing Convention into closer 
conformity with the U.S. and OECD Models.
Paragraph 1 of Article 21
    New paragraph 1 of Article 21 is a restatement of paragraph 
1 of Article 21 of the existing Convention. This paragraph 
provides that nothing in the Convention as amended by the 
Protocol shall affect the rights and safeguards secured to 
persons by the laws or administrative practice of the requested 
State.
Subparagraph 2(a) of Article 21
    New subparagraph 2(a) of Article 21 restates subparagraph 
2(a) of Article 21 of the existing Convention, which provides 
that, except in the case of Article 14 (Time limits), the 
provisions of the Convention as amended by the Protocol shall 
not be construed so as to impose on the requested State the 
obligation to carry out measures at variance with its own laws 
or administrative practices (or the laws or administrative 
practices of the applicant State). This rule is equivalent to 
subparagraph 3(a) of Article 26 (Exchange of Information and 
Administrative Assistance) of the U.S. Model.
Subparagraph 2(b) of Article 21
    Subparagraph 2(b) of Article 21 of the existing Convention 
refers to cases where a State considers that certain measures 
would be contrary to public policy (ordre public) or to its 
essential interests. New subparagraph 2(b) limits the 
exceptions to carrying out measures that would be contrary to 
public policy and removes the reference to ``its essential 
interests.''
Subparagraph 2(c) of Article 21
    New subparagraph 2(c) of Article 21 restates subparagraph 
2(c) of Article 21 of the existing Convention. New subparagraph 
2(c) provides that, except in the case of Article 14 (Time 
limits), the provisions of the Convention as amended by the 
Protocol shall not be construed so as to impose on the 
requested State the obligation to supply information which is 
not obtainable under its own laws or its administrative 
practices (or under the laws of the applicant State or its 
administrative practices). This rule is equivalent to 
subparagraph 3(b) of Article 26 of the U.S. Model. The 
Explanatory Report accompanying the Protocol explains that the 
reciprocity provided for in subparagraphs 2(a) and 2(c) 
establishes a kind of minimum position whereby the requested 
State is not obliged to do more in providing assistance than 
the applicant State can do under its domestic law. Moreover, 
the requested State need supply no more information than is the 
normal practice for that State.
Subparagraph 2(d) of Article 21
    New subparagraph 2(d) of Article 21 largely restates 
subparagraph 2(d) of Article 21 of the existing Convention. New 
subparagraph 2(d) provides that the provisions of the 
Convention as amended by the Protocol shall not be construed so 
as to impose on the requested State the obligation to supply 
information which would disclose any trade, business, 
industrial, commercial or professional secret or trade process, 
or information the disclosure of which would be contrary to 
public policy (ordre public). The prior reference to ``its 
essential interests'' is omitted from new subparagraph 2(d). 
This rule is equivalent to subparagraph 3(c) of Article 26 of 
the U.S. Model.
Subparagraph 2(e) of Article 21
    New subparagraph 2(e) of Article 21 restates subparagraph 
2(e) of Article 21 of the existing Convention. New subparagraph 
2(e) provides that except in the case of Article 14 (Time 
limits), the provisions of the Convention as amended by the 
Protocol shall not be construed so as to impose on the 
requested State the obligation to provide administrative 
assistance if and insofar as it considers the taxation in the 
applicant State to be contrary to generally accepted taxation 
principles, the provisions of a convention for avoidance of 
double taxation, or any other convention which the requested 
State has concluded with the applicant State. The Explanatory 
Report accompanying the Protocol suggests that consultation 
between the Parties should take place whenever there is some 
doubt as to whether the taxation in the applicant State is of 
such kind as to justify a refusal under the provisions of 
subparagraph 2(e).
Subparagraph 2(f) of Article 21
    New subparagraph 2(f) of Article 21 restates subparagraph 
2(f) of Article 21 of the existing Convention to clarify that 
the obligation to exchange information provided therein does 
not impose the obligation to provide administrative assistance 
in cases where the administrative assistance is requested to 
administer or enforce tax laws of the applicant State that 
discriminate between a national of the requested State and a 
national of the applicant State in the same circumstances. The 
Explanatory Report accompanying the Protocol provides that 
subparagraph 2(f) relates to an exceptional circumstance and is 
intended to ensure that the Convention as amended by the 
Protocol does not result in discrimination between nationals of 
the requested State and identically placed nationals of the 
applicant State. The exception for the application of Article 
14 ensures that the limitation on the exchange of information 
included by subparagraph 2(f) does not apply in a case where 
the requested State is allowed to gather and supply information 
to the applicant State even though the requested State could 
not do so for its own tax purposes because the statute of 
limitations is closed for domestic tax purposes.
Subparagraph 2(g) of Article 21
    New subparagraph 2(g) is based on the wording of Article 19 
(Possibility of declining a request) of the existing 
Convention. It clarifies that a Party need not provide 
administrative assistance if the applicant State has not 
pursued all reasonable measures available under its domestic 
laws or administrative practice prior to making the request, 
except where recourse to such measures would give rise to 
disproportionate difficulty. Paragraph 2(g) is consistent with 
paragraph 9(a) of the Commentary to Article 26 of the OECD 
Model, and is also reflected in many tax information exchange 
agreements concluded by the United States and the OECD Model 
Tax Information Exchange Agreement.
Subparagraph 2(h) of Article 21
    New subparagraph 2(h) allows a Party to the Convention as 
amended by the Protocol to refuse to provide assistance in tax 
recovery in cases where the administrative burden for that 
Party is clearly disproportionate to the benefit to be derived 
by the applicant State.
Paragraph 3 of Article 21
    New paragraph 3 of Article 21 provides that when 
information is requested by a Party in accordance with this 
Article, the requested State is obligated to use its 
information gathering measures to obtain the requested 
information as if the tax in question were the tax of the 
requested State, even if that Party has no direct tax interest 
in the case to which the request relates. The Explanatory 
Report accompanying the Protocol defines ``information 
gathering measures'' as laws and administrative or judicial 
procedures that enable a State to obtain and provide the 
requested information. In the absence of such new paragraph 3, 
some taxpayers have argued that paragraph 2(a) prevents a Party 
from requesting information from a bank or fiduciary that that 
Party does not need for its own tax purposes. This paragraph 
clarifies that paragraph 2 does not impose such a restriction 
and that a Party is not limited to providing only the 
information that it already has in its own files. This new 
paragraph conforms to the analogous provision in the U.S. and 
OECD Models.
Paragraph 4 of Article 21
    New paragraph 4 of Article 21 provides that a requested 
State may not decline to supply information solely because the 
information is held by financial institutions, nominees or 
persons acting in an agency or fiduciary capacity, or because 
it relates to ownership interests in a person. Thus, paragraph 
4 effectively prevents a Party from relying on the provisions 
of the Convention, and in particular the provisions of 
paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 21, to claim that its domestic 
bank secrecy laws (or similar legislation relating to 
disclosure of financial information by financial institutions 
or intermediaries) override its obligation to provide 
information under paragraph 1. This new paragraph conforms to 
the analogous provision of the U.S. and OECD Models.

                               ARTICLE VI

    Article VI deletes and replaces paragraphs 1 and 2 of 
Article 22 (Secrecy) of the existing Convention. The purpose of 
these amendments is to bring the confidentiality rules of the 
existing Convention regarding exchanged information and the 
limitations regarding the use of such information into 
conformity with the U.S. and OECD Models.
Paragraph 1 of Article 22
    New paragraph 1 of Article 22 provides that any information 
obtained by a Party under this Convention shall be treated as 
secret in the same manner as information obtained under the 
domestic laws of that Party, and, to the extent needed to 
ensure the necessary level of protection of personal data, in 
accordance with the safeguards which may be specified by the 
supplying Party (requested State) as required under its 
domestic law. The Explanatory Report accompanying the Protocol 
provides that respect for the confidentiality of information is 
a corollary of the powers of tax authorities and is necessary 
to protect the legitimate rights of taxpayers. Mutual 
assistance between tax administrations is therefore possible 
only if each administration is assured that the other 
administration will treat with proper confidence the 
information which it obtains in the course of their 
cooperation.
    The Explanatory Report accompanying the Protocol also 
explains that this provision is intended to ensure that a Party 
receiving information shall treat the information as secret in 
compliance not only with its own domestic law, but also with 
safeguards that may be required to ensure data protection under 
the domestic law of the supplying Party. However, specification 
of the safeguards may not be necessary if the supplying Party 
is satisfied that the Party receiving information ensures the 
necessary level of data protection with respect to the data 
being supplied. In any case, these safeguards should not go 
beyond what is needed to ensure data protection.
    The United States strictly observes its domestic 
confidentiality laws, which ensure high levels of protection of 
personal data. When acting as a requested State, the United 
States will supply information only to the extent the applicant 
State observes the secrecy obligations under Article 22 of the 
revised Convention and, to the extent needed to ensure the 
necessary level of protection of personal data, U.S. domestic 
confidentiality laws.
Paragraph 2 of Article 22
    New paragraph 2 of Article 22 provides that information 
received may be disclosed only to persons, including courts and 
administrative or supervisory bodies, concerned with the 
assessment, collection, or recovery of, the enforcement or 
prosecution in respect of, or the determination of appeals in 
relation to, the taxes imposed by a Party. The information may 
be used only by these persons and only in connection with the 
specified functions. Information may also be disclosed to 
legislative bodies, such as, in the case of the United States, 
the tax-writing committees of Congress and the Government 
Accountability Office, engaged in the oversight of the 
preceding activities. Information received by these bodies must 
be for use in the performance of their role in overseeing the 
administration of the tax law of the Party in question. 
Information received may be disclosed in public court 
proceedings or in judicial decisions relating to the taxes 
imposed by a Party. Paragraph 2 of Article 22 generally 
conforms to the provisions of paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the 
U.S. and OECD Models.

                              ARTICLE VII

    Article VII deletes and replaces paragraph 2 of Article 27 
(Other international agreements or arrangements) of the 
existing Convention. The purpose of the amendment is to clarify 
that Parties that are Member States of the European Union can 
apply, in their mutual relations, the possibilities of 
assistance provided by the Convention in so far as they allow a 
wider cooperation than the possibilities offered by the 
applicable European Union rules. This paragraph only applies 
between Member States of the European Union and in no way 
prejudices the application of the Convention between member 
States of the European Union and other Parties to the 
Convention.

                              ARTICLE VIII

    Article VIII amends Article 28 (Signature and entry into 
force of the Convention) of the existing Convention by adding 
four new paragraphs. The primary purpose of the new paragraphs 
is to allow any country to request to be invited to sign and 
ratify the Convention as amended by the Protocol, thereby 
becoming a Party thereto. Article VIII also makes a related 
amendment to Article 30 (Reservations).
Paragraph 4 of Article 28
    New paragraph 4 of Article 28 provides that any member 
State of the Council of Europe or any member country of the 
OECD that becomes a Party to the Convention after the Protocol 
enters into force shall be considered a Party to the Convention 
as amended by the Protocol, unless they express a different 
intention in a written communication to one of the Depositaries 
(the Council of Europe and the OECD).
Paragraph 5 of Article 28
    New paragraph 5 of Article 28 provides that after the 
Protocol has entered into force, any State that is not a member 
of the Council of Europe or the OECD may request to be invited 
to become a Party to the Convention as amended by the Protocol. 
Such requests shall be directed to one of the Depositaries. The 
decision to invite States that have made such a request shall 
be taken by consensus by the Parties to the Convention as 
amended by the Protocol through the Coordinating Body.
    New paragraph 5 provides that with respect to any State 
that, in accordance with this paragraph, ratifies the 
Convention as amended by the Protocol, the Protocol shall enter 
into force on the first day of the month following the 
expiration of a three month period after the date that that 
State has deposited its instrument of ratification with one of 
the Depositaries.
Paragraph 6 of Article 28
    New paragraph 6 of Article 28 provides rules for the 
effective dates of the provisions of the Protocol. The 
amendments shall have effect for administrative assistance 
related to taxable periods beginning on or after January 1 of 
the year following the year in which the Convention as amended 
by the Protocol entered into force in respect of a Party, or 
where there is no taxable period, for administrative assistance 
related to charges to tax arising on or after January 1 of the 
year following the year in which the Convention as amended by 
the Protocol entered into force in respect of a Party. Any two 
or more Parties may mutually agree that the Convention as 
amended by the Protocol may have effect for administrative 
assistance related to earlier taxable periods or charges to 
tax.
Paragraph 7 of Article 28
    New paragraph 7 of Article 28 provides that notwithstanding 
new paragraph 6 of that Article, for criminal tax matters, the 
Convention as amended by the Protocol shall have effect for any 
earlier taxable period or charge to tax, from the date of entry 
into force in respect of a Party.
Subparagraph 1(f) of Article 30
    New subparagraph 1(f) of Article 30 (Reservations) provides 
that, in relation to new paragraph 7 of Article 28, a Party may 
nevertheless lodge a reservation according to which the 
provisions of the amended Convention will have effect for 
administrative assistance related to criminal tax matters only 
as related to taxable periods beginning from the third year 
prior to the year in which the Convention as amended by the 
Protocol entered into force in respect of that Party.
    Article 30 of the existing Convention provides that States 
may make reservations with respect to several specified aspects 
of the Convention. The United States made several reservations 
to the existing Convention, which were contained in its 
instrument of ratification deposited on February 13, 1991, with 
the Depositories to the Convention. The Protocol to the 
existing Convention does not affect the United States' 
reservations to the existing Convention.

                               ARTICLE IX

    Article IX provides rules for the entry into force of the 
Protocol. The Protocol shall enter into force on the first day 
of the month following the expiration of a period of three 
months after the date of ratification by five parties to the 
existing Convention. A Party which ratifies the Protocol after 
the Protocol has entered into force will be bound by the 
Protocol beginning on the first day of the month following the 
expiration of a period of three months after the date of 
deposit of its instrument of ratification.

                               ARTICLE X

    Article X of the Protocol describes the functions of the 
two Depositaries of the Convention: the Council of Europe and 
the OECD. Article X provides that when an act, notification, or 
communication has been accomplished with a Depositary, that 
Depositary shall notify the other Depositary, the member States 
of the Council of Europe, the member countries of the OECD, and 
any Party to the Convention as amended by this Protocol of: any 
signature, the deposit of any instrument of ratification, 
acceptance or approval, any date of entry into force of the 
Protocol, and any other act, notification, or communication 
relating to the Protocol.

                                  [all]