- 70 -
Egyptian tax law allowing a credit for taxes paid. By contrast,
when EGPC was exempted from certain customs, export and stamp
duties, the exemptions were clearly listed in the enabling
legislation, and the exemptions were discussed in the legislative
history.
Further, we note that, in the 50/50 agreements, where a
credit was intended, the parties used appropriate language, which
is not found in the MCA.
Finally, we are satisfied that the post-1975 events did not
constitute a ratification by Amoco Egypt of any purported right
of EGPC to take the credit for Amoco Egypt's taxes, assuming for
purposes of discussion that such ratification would have created
a right which EGPC did not have as a matter of Egyptian law, an
assumption of doubtful validity since the MCA agreements had the
force of law which would make Article IV(f)(6) inviolate in
respect of changes in meaning by the parties.
We recognize that, in 1980, Amoco learned that EGPC was
claiming a credit by virtue of Article IV(f)(6). EGPC's basis
for taking such a credit was never discussed, and the proper
interpretation remained in dispute when the parties entered into
the amended MCA in 1983. Amoco did not agree that EGPC was
entitled to a credit, but did not press the issue at the time,
first, because it planned on deleting the provision from the MCA,
and later, because Amoco thought, based on EGPC's governmental
status (see infra pp. 81-82), it was irrelevant for U.S. foreign
Page: Previous 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011