- 74 -
ETD's May 2, 1992, determination, discussed above, supra p. 46,
and the agreement of the Minister of Petroleum, and of EGPC, to
abide by the ETD determination. Regarding its own interpretation
of the tax provision, the Refute Committee held that it means
that GPC could deduct royalties and foreign partner taxes to
arrive at taxable income. In taking this position, the Refute
Committee made no reference to the earlier decision of the
Arbitral Tribunal, see supra p. 71, a further indication that the
Arbitral Tribunal did not reach the credit versus deduction
issue.
We further reject respondent's attempt to discredit the ETD
determination by suggesting that it was motivated by national
interest considerations relating to Egypt's ability to continue
to exploit its oil resources. We do not doubt that such
considerations entered the picture, given the fact that similar
concerns have historically been brought to bear on the U.S.
Treasury Department and the Congress in connection with
substantive positions regarding the taxation of revenues derived
by U.S. taxpayers from international oil sources. See, e.g.,
Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Government
Operations of the House of Representatives, 95th Cong., 1st
Sess., pp. 315, 442, 452-453 (1977). In any event, we perceive
no reason for us to delve into the motives of a foreign
government in connection with its tax determinations to any
greater extent than we would do so in connection with such
Page: Previous 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011