Are alternative dispute resolution mechanisms (DRMs) a solution to streamline tax dispute processes and improve legal protection? This article assesses the benefits of certain solutions related to tax disputes in the current Finnish tax system as part of the implementation of legal protection and operational efficiency, and reflects on alternative methods for resolving tax disputes, referring to the model used in Portugal. The article shows, among other things, that Finland has succeeded in establishing an effective pre-court process that safeguards legal protection, although it also involves critical dimensions that have an impact on the actual success of the process. The article also makes critical observations on the current shortcomings of the Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP). The article also highlights critical observations on why alternative dispute resolution may not be the right way to resolve tax disputes. The findings presented in the article are useful for countries that seek to improve the efficiency of tax dispute processes and the effectiveness of legal protection.
Arbitration: The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management