Analysis of Inter-Regional Tax Cooperation Rule Alignment in the Greater Bay Area
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/z88hec27Keywords:
Tax cooperation, inter-regional taxation, Greater Bay Area, rule alignment.Abstract
The central government has incorporated the development of the Greater Bay Area into the broader national development strategy. Improving the inter-regional tax cooperation system among the mainland, Hong Kong, and Macao is a crucial component of advancing judicial integration in the Greater Bay Area. This paper analyzes existing cases by interpreting key documents of central and local government, integrating the latest academic research, and examining the current tax cooperation arrangements with taxpayer information sharing mechanisms in the Greater Bay Area. It identifies challenges within the existing system: a final tax dispute resolution mechanism has yet to be established, a coordinated mechanism among the three regions' tax authorities is yet to be formed, and differences persist in tax procedures across the three regions. Finally, drawing on comparative law perspectives, this paper reviews existing inter-regional tax cooperation models in other countries. Considering the Greater Bay Area's unique circumstances, it proposes selectively adapting international experiences to enhance the tax cooperation framework. Key recommendations include establishing a unified tax filing system, promoting coordination among tax authorities in the three regions, and appropriately adopting the Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) arbitration process. By examining the challenges in inter-regional tax rule coordination within the Greater Bay Area, this paper aims to provide new perspectives and solutions for advancing judicial integration in the region.
Downloads
References
[1] Sun Yaping, Li Bin. Research on Cross-Border Tax Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area. Finance and Accounting Newsletter, 2022, (10): 142-147.
[2] Maman Libby, Feldman Yuval, Tyler Tom. Polarization and Voluntary Compliance: The Impact of Ideological Extremity on the Effectiveness of Self-Regulation. Regulation & Governance, 2025, 15.
[3] Alm James, Gerbrands Peter, Kirchler Erich. Using "responsive regulation" to reduce tax base erosion. Regulation & Governance, 2022, (16): 738-759.
[4] Zhu Yansheng. Several Measures to Improve China's Cross-Border Tax Dispute Resolution Mechanism. International Taxation, 2020, (05): 20-25.
[5] Boettner Robert. Enhanced Cooperation and European Tax Law. Common Market Law Review, 2022, (59): 1255-1257.
[6] Liu Fuyong, Wang Lili. A Comparative Study of Mutual Agreement Procedures in Tax Treaties Currently in Force in China. International Taxation, 2020, (11): 41-47.
[7] Guo Dexiang, Li Xiaoyu. Legal Safeguards for Cross-Border Flow of Personal Financial Data in China. Journal of Henan University of Economics, Law and Politics, 2022, 37(06): 80-88.
[8] Butler Jay. International Tax and Corporate Discretion. Harvard International Law Journal, 2025, (66): 76.
[9] Sarkar Shayak. Internal Revenue's External Borders. California Law Review, 2024, (112): 1645-1698.
[10] Zu Yige. Developing VAT treaties: international tax cooperation in times of global recovery. Legal Studies, 2022, (42): 159-177.
[11] Sterk Stewart E. Incentivizing Fair Housing. Boston University Law Review, 2021, (101): 1607-1665.
[12] Titus Afton. The role of the United Nations in ensuring equitable tax policies for developing countries. Journal of International Economic Law, 2025, (27): 624-631.
[13] Sasmal Sunayana, Zhang Dongzhe, Winters L Alan. Exempting Least Developed Countries from Border Carbon Adjustments: Simple Economically but Complex Legally. World Trade Review, 2024, (23): 408-431.
[14] Zeitzmann Sebastian. Enhanced Cooperation and European Tax Law. European Law Review, 2022, (47): 429-430.
[15] Shen Weiwei. A Comparative Study of Data Governance from the Perspective of Network Sovereignty. Journal of Law, 2024, 45 (04): 24-39.
[16] Picciotto Sol. Technocracy in the Era of Twitter: Between intergovernmentalism and supranational technocratic politics in global tax governance. Regulation & Governance, 2022, (16): 634-652.
[17] Cui Wei. Strategic Incentives for Adopting the Global Minimum Tax. Journal of Legal Analysis, 2024, (16): 211-234.
[18] Alschner Wolfgang, Elsig Manfred, Wuthrich Simon. Main Act or Side Show? Model Agreements by International Institutions and Their Reuse in Investment Treaty Texts. Journal of International Economic Law, 2022, (25): 592-610.
[19] Snape John. International Tax Policy: Between Competition and Cooperation. Cambridge Law Journal, 2020, (79): 192-195.
[20] Wang Wenqing, Liu Yujie, Wang Yinuo. Pathways for Improving China's Mutual Agreement Procedure Mechanism Based on OECD Data Comparisons. Taxation and Economics, 2025, (03): 41-48.
[21] Jacquemet Nicolas, Luchini Stephane, Malezieux Antoine. Does voting on tax fund destination imply a direct democracy effect? International Review of Law and Economics, 2021, (67): 14.
[22] Chaisse Julien. Tax, trade, and investment conundrum in Asia-Pacific regionalism. Asia Pacific Law Review, 2023, (31): 535-555.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Education and Educational Research

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.









