Treaty shopping, often referred to as “nationality planning” or “treaty abuse,” is not a new phenomenon in international investment law. However, its growing prevalence remains a contentious issue among scholars and practitioners. This article explores the concept of treaty shopping, its defining characteristics, and the ongoing debates surrounding its implications.
1. What is Treaty Shopping?
At its core, treaty shopping involves investors – primarily multinational corporations – strategically restructuring or reorganizing their investments to exploit the benefits provided by International Investment Agreements (IIAs) between states where they do not hold nationality. By doing so, investors seek to gain access to more favorable legal protections and dispute resolution mechanisms. Key objectives include:
- Gaining broader legal protections under favorable IIAs.
- Minimizing risks associated with regulatory changes or disputes in the host state.
- Facilitating international arbitration to address disputes with the host state.
2. Characteristics of Treaty Shopping
2.1. Actors Involved
The primary participants in treaty shopping are investors, as defined under IIAs. These investors may include:
- Individuals: Although possible, treaty shopping by individuals is rare due to stringent nationality requirements in domestic and international law.
- Legal Entities: Multinational corporations and other legal entities are the predominant actors in treaty shopping. Their ability to create complex corporate structures enables them to navigate the intricacies of IIAs effectively.
2.2. Investments as the target
The subject of treaty shopping is the investment itself, defined and protected under IIAs. While IIAs typically rely on nationality to identify protected investors, investments are often defined broadly to include both direct and indirect investments. This broad scope can lead to complex disputes, especially when multinational corporations with intricate structures claim protection for both direct and indirect investments.
2.3. Objectives
The overarching goal of treaty shopping is to maximize legal protection under IIAs by:
- Securing protection not originally available under existing agreements. For instance, an investor from Country A (with no IIA with Country B) may establish nationality in Country C (which has an IIA with Country B) to gain protection.
- Benefiting from more favorable provisions in alternative IIAs.
- Leveraging procedural advantages in specific IIAs to initiate arbitration.
2.4. Methods of Treaty Shopping
Investors employ several methods to engage in treaty shopping:
- Incorporating a “shell” company in a jurisdiction with favorable IIAs. This method is widely used due to the simplicity and low cost of establishing companies in investment-friendly jurisdictions.
- Transferring investment claims to an entity with the desired nationality, known as “transfer of claims” or the “phoenix option.” This is more complex and carries higher risks, but it is increasingly observed in international arbitration cases.
2.5. Timing
Treaty shopping may occur at different stages of an investment lifecycle:
- Pre-dispute: Investors structure their investments before any disputes arise to ensure protection under favorable IIAs throughout the investment lifecycle.
- Post-dispute: Investors restructure their investments after a dispute arises to gain protection and strengthen their arbitration claims.
3. Controversies and Challenges
While treaty shopping offers significant benefits to investors, it also poses challenges for host states, including:
- Abuse of Legal Protections: Treaty shopping can undermine the original intent of IIAs by allowing investors to exploit legal loopholes.
- Economic and Legal Risks: Host states may face increased litigation risks and financial liabilities from investor-state disputes.
- Equity Concerns: The practice may disadvantage domestic investors who cannot access similar protections.
- Complications in Arbitration: The involvement of shell companies or transferred claims can complicate arbitration proceedings, making it difficult to ascertain the legitimacy of claims and the true beneficiaries of legal protections.
Treaty shopping is a double-edged sword in international investment law. On one hand, it provides strategic advantages for investors seeking better protection and dispute resolution mechanisms. On the other hand, it raises critical issues of equity, legal integrity, and economic stability for host states. Addressing these challenges requires a balanced approach, including clearer definitions in IIAs and robust mechanisms to prevent abuse while encouraging legitimate investment activities.
This ongoing debate underscores the need for a nuanced understanding of treaty shopping and its implications in the global investment landscape.
______________________
Contact Our Legal Experts
At TLA, our experienced lawyers specialize in diverse legal fields, including criminal, civil, corporate, and family law. We provide comprehensive legal support and personalized advice.
For Expert Legal Consultation, Contact Us:
1. Lawyer Vu Thi Phuong Thanh – Director of TLA Law Firm, Hanoi Bar Association.
Email: vtpthanh@tlalaw.vn
2. Lawyer Tran My Le – Chairwoman of TLA Law Firm’s Members’ Council, Hanoi Bar Association.
Email: tmle@tlalaw.vn
Address: Floor 7, No. 6 Duong Dinh Nghe Street, Yen Hoa, Cau Giay, Hanoi
Website: https://tlalaw.vn/
Hotline: 0906246464
_LTTTra_