On the classical taxation technique, the amount of tax to be paid is determined unilaterally by the tax administration. However in many modern tax systems, the determination of the tax payable can be determined as a result of tax administration and taxpayer negotiations under certain conditions. The determination of the tax to be paid with the agreement of the administration and the tax payer shows that the paradigm on the classical taxation techniques tends to change. Some taxation procedures have become negotiable rather than the one-sided transaction of the tax administration. The main subject of the study is the negotiation-based practices of taxpayers and tax administration to determine the amount of tax payable in today’s modern tax systems. There is no similar reserach in the literature about the alternative resolution methods of tax disputes. With this aspect, it is the first study conducted in the literature. In addition, another important aspect of the study is that it is supported by empirical data. In this context empirical data of alternative resolution practices have been provided from Turkey and several countries and have been made suitable for comparable analysis. With this study It is aimed to present a projection to the literature on alternative solutions of tax disputes. In this context, bilateral taxation procedures will be examined in varios countries such as Turkey, France, United Kingdom and Unite State (US). The tax compromise application in Turkey tax system and offer in compromise procedure in US tax system are bilateral taxation procedures. The bilateral taxation procedures are also implementing ın the continental Europe such as alternative dispute resolution in United Kingdom and arbiter in France. So it is important and necessary to examine this phenomenon with empirical datas from various countries.