ARTICLE 38 — U.S. Income Tax Treaty

Termination

This Convention shall remain in force until terminated by one of the States. Either State may terminate the Convention, through diplomatic channels, by giving notice of termination at least six months before the end of any calendar year after the expiration of a period of five years from the date of its entry into force. In such event the Convention shall cease to have effect for taxable years and periods beginning, or in the case of taxes payable at source, payments made, after the end of the calendar year in which the notice of termination has been given.

IN WITNESS whereof the undersigned, duly authorized thereto, have signed this Convention.

DONE at Washington this eighteenth day of December, 1992, in duplicate, in the English and Netherlands languages, the two texts being equally authentic.

FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

(s) Eugene J. McAllister

FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS:

(s) J. H. Meesman

PROTOCOL

PROTOCOL AMENDING THE TAX CONVENTION WITH

THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS

MESSAGE

FROM

THE PRESIDENT OF UNITED STATES

TRANSMITTING

THE PROTOCOL AMENDING THE CONVENTION BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF

AMERICA AND THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO

TAXES ON INCOME, SIGNED AT WASHINGTON ON OCTOBER 13, 1993

LETTER OF SUBMITTAL (PROTOCOL)

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, October 21, 1993. The PRESIDENT, The White House.

THE PRESIDENT: I have the honor to submit to you, with a view to its transmission to the Senate for advice and consent to ratification, the Protocol Amending the Convention between the United States of America and the Kingdom of the Netherlands for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income, signed at Washington on October 13, 1993.

The Protocol would prevent a particular form of tax treaty abuse known as "the triangular case," otherwise permitted by the Convention. Without the Protocol, a Dutch investor with a permanent establishment in an offshore, low-tax jurisdiction could take advantage of the Convention's protections against double taxation and evade virtually all U.S. and Dutch income taxes.

The United States and the Netherlands signed the Convention at Washington on December 18, 1992. The Convention was transmitted to the Senate for advice and consent to ratification on May 12, 1993. The Treasury Department and the State Department support transmittal of the Protocol to the Senate as soon as possible, so that the Senate can give its advice and consent to ratification of the Convention and the Protocol as a package.

A related exchange of notes is included for the information of the Senate.

The Department of the Treasury is preparing a technical memorandum explaining in detail the provisions of the Protocol. The Department of the Treasury will submit the memorandum separately to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

The Department of the Treasury and the Department of State cooperated in the negotiation of the Protocol. The Protocol has the full approval of both Departments.

Respectfully submitted,

WARREN CHRISTOPHER

Enclosure: As stated.

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL (PROTOCOL)

THE WHITE HOUSE, October 22, 1993.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit herewith for Senate advice and consent to ratification the Protocol Amending the Convention Between the United States of America and the Kingdom of the Netherlands for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Respect to Taxes on Income, signed at Washington on October 13, 1993. A related exchange of notes is enclosed for the information of the Senate. Also transmitted for the information of the Senate is the report of the Department of State with respect to the Protocol.

The Protocol will prohibit a treaty abuse otherwise permitted by the Convention, which was previously transmitted to the Senate. The Protocol will prevent a Dutch investor in the United States from evading virtually all income taxes in both the United States and the Netherlands through a permanent establishment in a third, low-income jurisdiction. The Protocol and the Convention are intended to reduce the distortions of both double taxation and tax evasion. The two agreements will modernize tax relations between the United States and the Netherlands and will facilitate greater bilateral private sector investment.

I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Protocol, together with the Convention, and give its advice and consent to ratification.

WILLIAM J. CLINTON.

NOTES OF EXCHANGE (PROTOCOL)

Washington D.C., October 13, 1993

His Excellency Adriaan Jacobovits de Szeged Ambassador of the Kingdom of the Netherlands

Excellency,

I have the honour to refer to the Convention signed on 19 December 1992 between the United States of America and the Kingdom of the Netherlands for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income (hereinafter referred to as: the Convention) and to the Protocol signed today amending the Convention (hereinafter referred to as: the Protocol) and to propose on behalf of the Government of the United States of America the following:

In the course of the negotiations leading to the conclusion of the Protocol signed today, the negotiators developed and agreed upon a common understanding and interpretation of the following provisions. These understandings and interpretations are intended to give guidance both to the taxpayers and the tax authorities of our two countries in interpreting various provisions contained in the Convention and the Protocol. It is my Government’s view that as we both gain experience in administering the Convention and the Protocol competent authorities may in the context of a mutual agreement procedure under Article 29 of the Convention develop and publish amendments to the understandings and interpretations laid down in the following.

I. In reference to Article 10 (Dividends) and subparagraph 8 (b) of Article 26 (Limitation on Benefits): For the purpose of Article 10 and subparagraph 8 (b) of Article 26, it is understood that depository receipts or trust certificates of shares will be considered to possess the rights attached to the shares which they replace, including the voting rights thereof.

II. In reference to subparagraphs 2 (a) and (c) of Article 26 (Limitation on Benefits): If a person resident in one of the States is engaged in the active conduct of a trade or business in that State and derives income from the other State without being engaged in the active conduct of a trade or business in the other State, and such person (and any associated person as meant in Article 26, paragraph 2 (e) (iii) through (vii)) does not own shares (other than shares that

generate income as described in subparagraph 2 (a) (ii) of Article 26) in the person from which the income is derived, then such parson shall qualify under paragraph 2 of Article 26 if:

a. the income derived in the other State is derived in connection with the trade or business in the first-mentioned State, or

b. the income derived in the other State is incidental to the trade or business in the firstmentioned State.

III. In reference to paragraph 8 of Article 12 (Interest) and subparagraph 2 (a) of Article 26 (Limitation on Benefits): For the purpose of subparagraph 2 (a) of Article 26 and paragraph 8 of Article 12 it is understood that interest derived from group financing or portfolio investments shall be considered to be part of the business of making or managing investments.

IV. In reference to subparagraphs 2 (e) (vi) and 2 (e) (vii) of Article 26 (Limitation on Benefits) and Article XVI of the Memorandum of Understanding: For the purpose of subparagraphs 2 (e) (vi) and 2 (e) (vii) of Article 26 the following states will be added to the states regarded as “identified states” having effective provisions for the exchange of information with the Netherlands: Portugal, Japan.

V. In reference to subparagraph 3 (a) of Article 26 (Limitation on Benefits): For the purpose of subparagraph 3 (a) of Article 26 it is understood that the activities referred to in that subparagraph must be performed in the State of residence of the person performing such activities.

VI. In reference to subparagraph 8 (d) (iv) of Article 26 (Limitation on Benefits) and Article XXII of the Memorandum of Understanding: For purposes of subparagraph 8 (d) (iv) of Article 26 the principal stock exchanges of Frankfurt, London, Paris, Brussels, Hamburg, Madrid, Milan, Sydney, Tokyo and Toronto will be considered to be “recognized stock exchanges”.

VII. In reference to subparagraph 8 (i) of Article 26 (Limitation on Benefits): It is understood that, in determining whether a person will be considered a "resident of a member state of the European Communities" for purposes of subparagraph 8 (i) of Article 26, such person will be considered to be otherwise entitled to the benefits of the Convention between that person’s state of residence and the United States if that person is entitled to the benefits of such Convention with respect to the items of income derived from the United States under all provisions of such Convention with the exception of any provisions in such Convention relating to the limitation on benefits, except that such person must also satisfy any relevant provision relating to the limitation on benefits of such Convention, if Article 26 does not contain a provision that is of the same or similar nature as the provision in such Convention.

VIII. In reference to paragraph 2 of Article 35 (Exempt Pension Trusts):

For the purpose of paragraph 2 of Article 35, a person is considered to be a related person if more than 80% of the vote or value of any class of the shares is owned by the person deriving the income.

If the foregoing understandings and interpretation of the various provisions meet with the approval of the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands this Note and your Note in reply thereto will constitute a common and binding understanding by our Governments of the Convention and the Protocol.

Accept, your Excellency, the expression of my highest consideration.

For the Secretary of State: (s) Daniel K. Tarullo

Washington D.C., October 13, 1993

The Honorable Warren M. Christopher Secretary of State of the United States of America

Dear Mr. Secretary,

I have the honour to confirm the receipt of your Note of today’s date which reads as follows:

“ Washington D.C., October 13, 1993

Excellency,

I have the honour to refer to the Convention signed on 18 December 1992 between the United States of America and the Kingdom of the Netherlands for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income (hereinafter referred to as: the Convention) and to the Protocol signed today amending the Convention (hereinafter referred to as: the Protocol) and to propose on behalf of the Government of the United States of America the following:

In the course of the negotiation leading to the conclusion of the Protocol signed today, the negotiators developed and agreed upon a common understanding and interpretation of the following provisions. These understandings and interpretations are intended to give guidance both to the taxpayers and the tax authorities of our two countries in interpreting various provisions contained in the Convention and the Protocol. It is my Government's view that as we both gain experience in administering the Convention and the Protocol competent authorities

may in the context of a mutual agreement procedure under Article 29 of the Convention develop and publish amendments to the understandings and interpretations laid down in the following.

a. the income derived in the other State is derived in connection with the trade or business in the first-mentioned State, or b. the income derived in the other State is incidental to the trade or business in the first-mentioned State.

IV. In reference to subparagraphs 2 (e) (vi) and 2 (e) (vii) of Article 26 (Limitation on Benefits) and Article XVI of the Memorandum of Understanding: For the purpose of subparagraphs 2 (e) (vi) and 2 (e) (vii) of Article 26 the following states will be added to the states regarded as "identified states" having effective provisions for the exchange of information with the Netherlands: Portugal, Japan.

VI. In reference to subparagraph 8 (d) (iv) of Article 26 (Limitation on Benefits) and Article XXII of the Memorandum of understanding: For purposes of subparagraph 8 (d) (iv) of Article 26 the principal stock exchanges of Frankfurt, London, Paris, Brussels, Hamburg, Madrid, Milan, Sydney, Tokyo and Toronto will be considered to be “recognized stock exchanges”.

VII. In reference to subparagraph 8 (i) of Article 26 (Limitation on Benefits): It is understood that, in determining whether a person will be considered a “resident of a member state of the European Communities” for purposes of subparagraph 8 (i) of Article 26, such person will be considered to be otherwise entitled to the benefits of the Convention between that person’s state of residence and the United States if that person is entitled to the benefits of such Convention with respect to the items of income derived from the United States under all provision of such Convention with the exception of any provisions in such Convention relating to the limitation on benefits, except that such person must also satisfy any relevant provision relating to the limitation on benefits of such Convention, if Article 26 does not contain a provision that is of the same or similar nature as the provision in such Convention.

VIII. In reference to paragraph 2 of Article 35 (Exempt Pension Trusts): For the purpose of paragraph 2 of Article 35, a person is considered to be a related person if more than 80% of the vote or value of any class of the shares is owned by the person deriving the income.

If the foregoing understandings and interpretation of the various provisions meet with the approval of the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, this Note and your Note in reply thereto will constitute a common and binding understanding by our Governments of the Convention and the Protocol.

Accept, Your Excellency, the expression of my highest consideration.

For the Secretary of State:

(s) Daniel K. Tarullo

His Excellency Adriaan Jacobovits de Szeged Ambassador of the Kingdom of the Netherlands ”

I have the honour to inform you, that my Government agrees to the above.

Accept, Your Excellency, the expression of my highest consideration.

(s) A. P. R. Jacobovits de Szeged Ambassador of the Kingdom of the Netherlands

PROTOCOL AMENDING THE CONVENTION BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION AND THE PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION WITH RESPECT TO

TAXES ON INCOME

The Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, desiring to amend the Convention between the United States of America and the Kingdom of the Netherlands for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income, signed at Washington on December 18, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),

Have agreed as follows: