Treaty Anti-Abuse Governance Director

The mandate

The board seeks independent challenge on whether treaty positions remain supportable under principal-purpose, beneficial-ownership, limitation and domestic anti-abuse rules as facts and motives evolve. The recurring question is not whether a structure once received advice; it is whether current conduct, governance and commercial rationale still justify the claimed treatment when viewed as a whole.

The eleven-month cadence comprises a weekly evidence clinic, monthly sponsor review and one scheduled committee meeting. Initial work will test the position inventory and reconsideration triggers; later sessions will review selected arrangements and new decisions; the final phase will assess whether internal governance can identify anti-abuse risk before filings or payments rely on the position.

The adviser has no line authority, filing role, legal-opinion mandate or transaction veto. The Director may press for contemporaneous evidence, test alternative characterisations, recommend independent advice and state that a position is not ready for risk acceptance. Management proposes and implements; authorised governance decides.

Prior structuring work, current counterparty engagements, provider relationships, investments and board roles affecting selected matters require disclosure. Recusal is mandatory where safeguards cannot address actual or perceived impairment. Renewal requires a different standing question and will not follow simply because monitored arrangements continue.

What you will own

• Review material treaty positions for entitlement, beneficial ownership, commercial rationale, principal purpose, substance and domestic anti-abuse interaction.
• Challenge whether contemporaneous decision records and operating conduct support the stated non-tax objectives and allocation of rights.
• Shape a reconsideration protocol for ownership change, refinancing, personnel movement, contract change, cash pattern and authority development.
• Press management to separate technical possibility, evidential strength, cash consequence, reputational concern and accepted risk appetite.
• Test selected positions against credible alternative characterisations and identify the fact that would change the recommendation.
• Recommend thresholds for external opinion, protective withholding, disclosure, correction or escalation without directing the response.
• Facilitate two board rehearsals where a later fact alters the purpose or beneficial-ownership analysis.
• Deliver a closing independent assessment of governance maturity, unsupported positions and ongoing monitoring questions.

Candidate qualifications

• At least 18 years in international direct tax and treaty analysis, including Director-level anti-abuse or board-governance experience.
• A treaty position you recommended changing after purpose, substance or beneficial-ownership facts evolved.
• Deep command of principal-purpose tests, beneficial ownership, treaty entitlement, limitation provisions and domestic anti-avoidance interaction.
• Evidence of distinguishing contemporaneous commercial rationale from retrospective explanation created for defence.
• Experience advising directors on uncertain treaty access without assuming formal legal, filing or transaction authority.
• A conflict record suitable for arrangements involving prior advisers, counterparties and confidential decision motives.
• Availability for two days a week and the full Amsterdam governance schedule.

Working terms and boundaries

• The retainer covers two days a week for eleven months, weekly clinics and one board or committee meeting each month.
• The adviser has no line authority and cannot issue legal opinions, approve transactions, sign filings, direct withholding or accept risk.
• Detailed restructuring, document drafting, filing and controversy defence remain outside scope unless separately commissioned.
• Conflicts are reassessed before each selected arrangement, with recusal and access restrictions recorded by the sponsor.
• The term ends with a governance opinion and knowledge transfer; renewal requires a newly approved standing question.

Application

Applications for this mandate are received in one way only: through the India Board Terminal's application process. It is automated end to end. Your Executive Passport travels to the mandate holder in its confidential form, your answers to the three questions below are read before anything else in your file, and every stage that follows is recorded on your applications page.

There is no address to write to and no intermediary to call. The mandate holder reads what the Terminal delivers and nothing else, which is what keeps the process the same for every applicant and keeps your name out of it until you release it. Applications close on 11 October 2026. Mandate reference TAX-ADV-2026-AMS-47.