International Financial Law Prof Blog

Editor: William Byrnes
Texas A&M University
School of Law

Wednesday, June 28, 2017

The Platform for Collaboration on Tax delivers a toolkit to help developing countries address the lack of comparables for transfer pricing analyses and better understand mineral product pricing practices

The Platform for Collaboration on Tax (PCT) – a joint initiative of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Organisation for Economic Co-operation Platform for Coop Taxand Development (OECD), United Nations (UN) and World Bank Group – has published a toolkit to provide practical guidance to developing countries to better protect their tax bases.

The toolkit responds to a request by the Development Working Group of the G20, and addresses an area of tax called "transfer pricing," which refers to the prices corporations use when they make transactions between members of the same group. How these prices are set has significant relevance for the amount of tax an individual government can collect from a multinational enterprise.

The toolkit, "Addressing Difficulties in Accessing Comparables Data for Transfer Pricing Analyses", specifically addresses the ways developing countries can overcome a lack of data needed to implement transfer pricing rules. This data is needed to determine whether the prices the enterprise uses accord with those which would be expected between independent parties. The guidance will also help countries set rules and practices that are more predictable for business.

Since the pricing of transactions between related parties in the extractive industries is an issue of particular relevance to many developing countries, the toolkit also addresses the information gaps on prices of minerals sold in an intermediate form (such as concentrates).

The toolkit is part of a series of reports by the Platform to help developing countries design or administer strong tax systems. Previous reports have covered tax incentives and external support for building tax capacity in developing countries.

The delivery of the toolkit coincides with the third meeting of the Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS), held in the Netherlands on 21-22 June 2017, and demonstrates the commitment of the Platform partners to work together to tackle a wide range of pressing tax issues.

The toolkit has been updated following comments on a consultation draft which was made public in January 2017. It will soon also be available in French and Spanish.

For more information on the PCT, visit: www.worldbank.org/en/programs/platform-for-tax-collaboration

Queries should be directed to:

June 28, 2017 in BEPS, OECD, World Bank | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, June 27, 2017

New head appointed for OECD transfer pricing unit

Mr. Tomas Balco has been appointed Head of the Transfer Pricing Unit in the Centre for Tax Policy and Administration. He will take up his duties on 4 September 2017.

A Czech and Slovak national, Tomas has been working at Slovak Republic’s Ministry of Finance since 2014, where he served as General Counsel and was Tomas Balco OECD TPheading the International Tax Unit and the transfer pricing team. In this capacity he played a key role in the tax policy area of the Slovak Presidency of the EU Council - SK PRES 2016. Prior to that, Tomas was a professor at Kimep University and visiting professor and lecturer at other Universities in Europe as well as at the African Tax Institute at University of Pretoria and the Director of the Central Asian Tax Research Center in Kazakhstan. He has also held positions with Deloitte and PricewaterhouseCoopers, the International Bureau of Fiscal Documentation, the International Tax Units of the governments of the Czech Republic and Chile, and the European Commission’s DG-TAXUD.

Tomas holds law degrees from Masaryk University in Brno and Vienna University of Economics and Business (WU). He also qualified as a Chartered Certified Accountant and is a Fellow of ACCA.

He has been a participant in the work of the UN Committee of Experts on International Taxation, and as a tax policy and capacity building expert he has also worked with Ministries of Finance and Tax Administrations in Europe, Central Asia and Africa.

June 27, 2017 in BEPS, OECD | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sunday, June 25, 2017

OECD releases BEPS discussion drafts on transactional profit splits

Public comments are invited on the following discussion drafts:

  • Revised Guidance on Profit Splits, which deals with work in relation to Actions 8-10 ("Assure that transfer pricing outcomes are in line with value creation") of the BEPS Action Plan.

Discussion Draft on the Revised Guidance on Profit Splits

Action 10 of the BEPS Action Plan invited clarification of the application of transfer pricing methods, in particular the transactional profit split method, in the context of global value chains. 

Under this mandate, this revised discussion draft replaces the draft released for public comment in July 2016. Building on the existing guidance in the OECD OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines, as well as comments received on the July 2016 draft, this revised draft is intended to clarify the application of the transactional profit split method, in particular, by identifying indicators for its use as the most appropriate transfer pricing method, and providing additional guidance on determining the profits to be split. The revised draft also includes a number of examples illustrating these principles.  While comments are invited on any aspect of the revised draft, the document also identifies a number of issues relating to the application of the profit split method on which feedback is particularly sought.

Deadline for submitting public comments on the discussion drafts

Interested parties are invited to send their comments on these discussion drafts. Comments should be sent by 15 September at the latest by e-mail to TransferPricing@oecd.org in Word format (in order to facilitate their distribution to government officials).

All comments received on these discussion drafts will be made publicly available. Comments submitted in the name of a collective “grouping” or “coalition”, or by any person submitting comments on behalf of another person or group of persons, should identify all enterprises or individuals who are members of that collective group, or the person(s) on whose behalf the commentator(s) are acting.


Public Consultation

The OECD intends to hold a public consultation on the additional guidance on the attribution of profits to permanent establishments and on the revised guidance on the transactional profit split method in November 2017 at the OECD Conference Centre in Paris, France. Registration details for the public consultation will be published on the OECD website in September. Speakers and other participants at the public consultation will be selected from among those providing timely written comments on the respective discussion drafts.

June 25, 2017 in BEPS, OECD | Permalink | Comments (0)

Saturday, June 24, 2017

OECD releases BEPS discussion drafts on attribution of profits to permanent establishments

Public comments are invited on the following discussion drafts:

Release of a discussion draft containing Additional Guidance on
Attribution of Profits to Permanent Establishments

The Report on Action 7 of the BEPS Action Plan (Preventing the Artificial Avoidance of Permanent Establishment Status) mandated the development OECDof additional guidance on how the rules of Article 7 of the OECD Model Tax Convention would apply to PEs resulting from the changes in the Report, in particular for PEs outside the financial sector. The Report indicated that there is also a need to take account of the results of the work on other parts of the BEPS Action Plan dealing with transfer pricing, in particular the work related to intangibles, risk and capital. Importantly, the Report explicitly stated that the changes to Article 5 of the Model Tax Convention do not require substantive modifications to the existing rules and guidance on the attribution of profits to permanent establishments under Article 7 (see paragraph 19-20 of the Report).

Under this mandate, this new discussion draft has been developed which replaces the discussion draft published for comments in July 2016. This new discussion draft sets out high-level general principles outlined in paragraph 1-21 and 36-42 for the attribution of profits to permanent establishments in the circumstances addressed by the Report on BEPS Action 7. Importantly, countries agree that these principles are relevant and applicable in attributing profits to permanent establishments. This discussion draft also includes examples illustrating the attribution of profits to permanent establishments arising under Article 5(5) and from the anti-fragmentation rules in Article 5(4.1) of the OECD Model Tax Convention.

Please note that comments are not sought on the 2016 Discussion Draft or on the changes to the PE definitions that have been agreed under Action 7 and which were published in the 2015 Final Report, "Preventing the Artificial Avoidance of Permanent Establishment Status." Commentators should concentrate solely on the proposed guidance in this discussion draft on the application of Article 7 to determine the attribution of profits to permanent establishments.

Deadline for submitting public comments on the discussion drafts

Interested parties are invited to send their comments on these discussion drafts. Comments should be sent by 15 September at the latest by e-mail to TransferPricing@oecd.org in Word format (in order to facilitate their distribution to government officials).

All comments received on these discussion drafts will be made publicly available. Comments submitted in the name of a collective “grouping” or “coalition”, or by any person submitting comments on behalf of another person or group of persons, should identify all enterprises or individuals who are members of that collective group, or the person(s) on whose behalf the commentator(s) are acting.


Public Consultation

The OECD intends to hold a public consultation on the additional guidance on the attribution of profits to permanent establishments and on the revised guidance on the transactional profit split method in November 2017 at the OECD Conference Centre in Paris, France. Registration details for the public consultation will be published on the OECD website in September. Speakers and other participants at the public consultation will be selected from among those providing timely written comments on the respective discussion drafts.

June 24, 2017 in BEPS, OECD | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, June 23, 2017

Third OECD meeting of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS

Over 200 delegates from 83 countries and jurisdictions as well as 12 international and regional organisations met in Noordvijk, The Netherlands for the Third Meeting of the Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS). The meeting welcomed Viet Nam as its newest and 100th member and discussed and approved its first monitoring report, which will be submitted to G20 Leaders for their summit to be held on 7-8 July 2017 in Hamburg. The report highlights the progress that has been achieved since the Inclusive Framework first met in Kyoto in June 2016. The meeting also approved the release of discussion drafts on Attribution of Profits to Permanent Establishments and Transactional Profit Splits.

Furthermore, as part of continuing efforts to boost transparency by multinational enterprises (MNEs), Belize, the Cayman Islands, Colombia, Haiti, Pakistan, Singapore and the Turks and Caicos Islands signed the Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement for Country-by-Country Reporting (CbC MCAA), bringing the total number of signatories to 64.

Third meeting of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS

The CbC MCAA is an efficient mechanism that allows signatories to bilaterally and automatically exchange Country-by-Country Reports with each other, as contemplated by Action 13 of the BEPS Action Plan. It will help ensure that tax administrations obtain a better understanding of how MNEs structure their operations, while also ensuring that the confidentiality and appropriate use of such information is safeguarded. At present, over 800 bilateral exchange relationships have been put in place for the exchange of Country-by-Country Reports.

At the same time, the United States concluded a further set of bilateral competent authority arrangements for the automatic exchange of Country-by-Country Reports. It now has arrangements in place with Canada, Denmark, Guernsey, Iceland, Ireland, Korea, Latvia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, the Slovak Republic and South Africa, thereby reaffirming the strong commitment of the United States to start the automatic exchange of Country-by-Country Reports in 2018. The United States Competent Authority continues to negotiate with a significant number of jurisdictions and anticipates concluding additional competent authority arrangements in the immediate future.

At the signing ceremony, Singapore also signed the Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement for the Common Reporting Standard‎ (CRS MCAA), re-confirming its commitment to implementing the automatic exchange of financial account information pursuant to the OECD/G20 Common Reporting Standard (CRS) in time to commence exchanges in 2018. Singapore is the 92nd jurisdiction to sign the CRS MCAA.

The meeting also discussed the toolkits under development by the Platform for Collaboration on Tax, including the toolkit on Comparables released today.

Finally, the meeting also included a special session with representatives from TUAC, the BIAC Tax Committee, and civil society.

June 23, 2017 in BEPS, OECD | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, June 22, 2017

EU to Require Tax Planners To Report Tax Plans and Clients for AEoI Across All EU Each 3 Months

The European Commission has today proposed tough new transparency rules for intermediaries - such as tax advisors, accountants, banks and lawyers - who design and promote tax planning schemes for their clients.  Read the text of the proposal and the annex

What tax planning arrangements will have to be reported?

Intermediaries will have to report any cross-border arrangement that contains one or more of the 'hallmarks' listed in the proposal. These hallmarks EU Councilare features or characteristics in a transaction that could potentially enable tax avoidance or abuse. Examples of these hallmarks include arrangements which:

  • involve a cross-border payment to a recipient resident in a no-tax country;
  • involve a jurisdiction with inadequate or weakly enforced anti-money laundering legislation;
  • are set up to avoid reporting income as required under EU transparency rules;
  • circumvent EU information exchange requirements for tax rulings;
  • have a direct correlation between the fee charged by the intermediary and what the taxpayer will save in tax avoidance;
  • ensure that the same asset benefits from depreciation rules in more than one country;
  • enable the same income to benefit from tax relief in more than one jurisdiction;
  • do not respect EU or international transfer pricing guidelines.

The full list of hallmarks is annexed to the proposal. Once it is agreed, intermediaries will need to be familiar with the full set of hallmarks in the legislation to ensure that they meet their reporting obligations fully.

Recent media leaks such as the Panama Papers have exposed how some intermediaries actively assist companies and individuals to escape taxation, usually through complex cross-border schemes. Today's proposal aims to tackle such aggressive tax planning by increasing scrutiny around the previously-unseen activities of tax planners and advisers.

Will the new reporting and information exchange requirements create new burdens for the industry?

The reporting requirements are conceived to avoid creating undue burdens on the industry. For the reports to tax authorities, intermediaries can re-use summaries that they prepare for their clients on the tax planning arrangements. The proposal also respects national rules on professional privileges and secrets. In these cases, the intermediary is no longer obliged to report and intermediaries who are not based in the EU get a waiver from reporting. To prevent loopholes in these two cases, the obligation to report is shifted to the taxpayer.

Although the new rules do not set a minimum threshold for disclosure, the hallmarks for reporting usually point to high-risk situations that involve elaborate arrangements. Small companies and individuals (unless particularly wealthy) would not normally have the resources to seek out sophisticated tax advice. So, by effect, it can be assumed that the reporting obligation would mostly affect – where there is a shift in the liability – big corporate taxpayers or very wealthy individuals.

Member States which already operate mandatory disclosure rules have not noted a negative impact on the industry as a result of the transparency requirements. In fact, the UK is one of the few Member States to have such legislation for intermediaries, and yet it still has one of the highest number of intermediaries in the EU.

How would the proposed measures work in practice?

Intermediaries will have to report any cross-border tax planning arrangement that they design or promote if it bears any of the features or "hallmarks" defined in the Directive. They must make this report to their tax authorities within five days of giving such an arrangement to their client. Member States must ensure proper penalties are in place for intermediaries that fail to meet these reporting requirements.

The Member State to whom the arrangements are reported must automatically share this information with all other Member States on a quarterly basis through a centralised database. There will be a standard format for the exchange of this information, which will include details on the intermediary, the tax payer(s) involved and features of the tax scheme, amongst other information.

The Commission will have access to certain aspects of the information exchanged between Member States, so that it can monitor the implementation of the rules.

Which intermediaries are covered by the proposal?

The proposal has a very wide scope, covering all intermediaries and all types of direct taxes (income, corporate, capital gains, inheritance, etc.).

Any company or professional that designs or promotes a tax planning arrangement which has a cross-border element and contains any of the hallmarks set out in the proposed Directive will be covered. This includes lawyers, accountants, tax and financial advisors, banks and consultants.

What happens if the intermediary is based in a non-EU country?

EU legislation cannot be extended to cover intermediaries that are not based in the EU. It would be impossible to enforce compliance with the rules or to sanction non-compliance of intermediaries without sufficient presence in the EU. Therefore, if the intermediary is not located in the EU or is bound by professional privilege or secrecy rules (see below), the obligation to report the tax arrangement passes to the EU-based taxpayer instead.

Cross-border tax planning schemes bearing certain characteristics or 'hallmarks' which can result in losses for governments will now have to be automatically reported to the tax authorities before they are used. The Commission has identified key hallmarks, including the use of losses to reduce tax liability, the use of special beneficial tax regimes, or arrangements through countries that do not meet international good governance standards.

The obligation to report a cross-border scheme bearing one or more of these hallmarks will be borne by:

  • the intermediary who supplied the cross-border scheme for implementation and use by a company or an individual;
  • the individual or company receiving the advice, when the intermediary providing the cross-border scheme is not based in the EU, or where the intermediary is bound by professional privilege or secrecy rules;
  • the individual or company implementing the cross-border scheme when it is developed by in-house tax consultants or lawyers. 

Member States will automatically exchange the information that they receive on the tax planning schemes through a centralised database, giving them early warning on new risks of avoidance and enabling them to take measures to block harmful arrangements. The requirement to report a scheme does not necessarily imply that it is harmful, only that it merits scrutiny by the tax authorities. However, Member States will be obliged to implement effective and dissuasive penalties for those companies that do not comply with the transparency measures, creating a powerful new deterrent for those that encourage or facilitate tax abuse.

The new rules are comprehensive, covering all intermediaries, all potentially harmful schemes and all Member States. Details of every tax scheme containing one or more hallmarks will have to be reported to the intermediary's home tax authority within five days of providing such an arrangement to a client.

Background

The Juncker Commission has made great strides in boosting tax transparency and tackling tax evasion and avoidance. New EU rules to block artificial tax arrangements, as well as new transparency requirements for financial accounts, tax rulings and multinationals' activities have already been agreed and are progressively entering into force. Proposals for stronger Anti-Money Laundering legislation, public Country-by-Country reporting requirements and tougher good governance rules for EU funds are currently being negotiated. In addition, a new EU list of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions should be ready before the end of the year.

Today's proposal will further reinforce the EU's tax transparency framework, by shedding new light on the activities of intermediaries and the tax planning arrangements being used. It will also ensure a harmonised EU approach to implementing the recommended mandatory disclosure provisions in the OECD's Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) project, as endorsed by the G20. Last October, Member States expressed their support for a Commission proposal on these measures.

Next Steps

The proposal, which takes the form of an amendment to the Directive for Administration Cooperation (DAC), will be submitted to the European Parliament for consultation and to the Council for adoption. It is foreseen that the new reporting requirements would enter into force on 1 January 2019, with EU Member States obliged to exchange information every 3 months after that.

Background information

Read the Press Release on the proposal
Read the Memo on the proposal
Read the text of the proposal and the annex
Read the impact assessment
Read the outcome of the public consultation on intermediaries
More on Tax Transparency

Q&A on new transparency rules for intermediaries

Factsheet

DG TAXUD webpage on the new rules for tax intermediairies

June 22, 2017 in BEPS | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, June 15, 2017

OECD invites taxpayer input on third batch of dispute resolution peer reviews

Improving the tax treaty dispute resolution process is a top priority of the BEPS Project. The Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) peer review and monitoring process under Action 14 of the BEPS Action Plan was launched in December 2016 with the peer reviews of the two first batches now well underway.

The peer review process is conducted in two stages. Under Stage 1, implementation of the Action 14 minimum standard is evaluated for Inclusive Framework members, according to the schedule of review. Stage 2 focuses on monitoring the follow-up of the recommendations resulting from jurisdictions' Stage 1 report.

The OECD is now gathering input for the Stage 1 peer reviews of the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Korea, Norway, Poland, Singapore and Spain, and invites taxpayers to submit OECDinput on specific issues relating to access to MAP, clarity and availability of MAP guidance and the timely implementation of MAP agreements for each of these jurisdictions using the taxpayer input questionnaire. As taxpayers are the main users of the MAP this input is key for the review process and we encourage taxpayers to complete the questionnaire and return it to fta.map@oecd.org (in Word format) by 7 July 2017 at the latest.

For more information on the BEPS Action 14 peer review and monitoring process, see: www.oecd.org/tax/beps/beps-action-14-peer-review-and-monitoring.htm

June 15, 2017 in BEPS | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, June 8, 2017

Ground-breaking multilateral BEPS convention signed at OECD will close loopholes in thousands of tax treaties worldwide

Ministers and high-level officials from 76 countries and jurisdictions have signed today or formally expressed their intention to sign an innovative multilateral convention that will swiftly implement a series of tax treaty measures to update the existing network of bilateral tax treaties and reduce opportunities for tax avoidance by multinational enterprises. The new convention will also strengthen provisions to resolve treaty disputes, including through mandatory binding arbitration, thereby reducing double taxation and increasing tax certainty.

Today’s signing ceremony marks a an important milestone in the international tax agenda, which is moving closer to the goal of preventing base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) by multinational enterprises. The new convention, which is the first multilateral treaty of its kind, allows jurisdictions to transpose results from the OECD/G20 BEPS Project into their existing networks of bilateral tax treaties. It was developed through inclusive negotiations involving more than 100 countries and jurisdictions, under a mandate delivered by G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors at their February 2015 meeting.

“The signing of this multilateral convention marks a turning point in tax treaty history,” said OECD Secretary-General Angel Gurría. “We are moving towards rapid implementation of the far-reaching reforms agreed under the BEPS Project in more than 1,100 tax treaties worldwide, and radically transforming the way that tax treaties are modified. Beyond saving signatories from the burden of re-negotiating these treaties bilaterally, the new convention will result in more certainty and predictability for businesses and a better functioning international tax system for the benefit of our citizens. Today’s signing also shows that when the international community comes together there is no issue or challenge we cannot effectively tackle.” 

June 8, 2017 in BEPS | Permalink | Comments (0)

Monday, March 13, 2017

Draft Form 8975, Country-by-Country Report, and Schedules A, Tax Jurisdiction and Entity Financial Information for 2017 Filing

Some jurisdictions have adopted country-by-country (CbC) reporting requirements for annual accounting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2016, that would require a Irs_logoconstituent entity resident in the jurisdiction to report CbC information if the constituent entity is part of an MNE group with an ultimate parent entity resident in a jurisdiction that does not have a CbC reporting requirement (including pursuant to parent surrogate filing) for the same annual accounting period (local CbC filing). Consequently, constituent entities of a U.S. MNE group may be subject to local CbC filing for early reporting periods, unless the ultimate parent entity files a Form 8975, or reports CbC information to another jurisdiction that accepts surrogate filing, for such early reporting period. The preamble to the CbC reporting regulations indicated that the Treasury Department and the IRS would provide a procedure for ultimate parent entities of U.S. MNE groups to file Form 8975 for early reporting periods.

Thus, beginning on September 1, 2017, Form 8975 may be filed for an early reporting period with the income tax return or other return as provided in the Instructions to Form 8975 for the taxable year of the ultimate parent entity of the U.S. MNE group with or within which the early reporting period ends.

draft CbCR form 8975 here

draft Schedule A CbCR financial information 

draft instructions to complete Form 8975 and its Schedule A

An ultimate parent entity that files its return electronically must file the Form 8975 through the IRS Modernized e-File system in Extensible Markup Language (XML) format, not as a binary attachment (such as a PDF file). The IRS intends to provide specific electronic filing information on Form 8975 to the software industry in early 2017 so that developers will be able to make Form 8975 available in their software ahead of the September 1, 2017, implementation date. For filers of Form 8975 that are not eligible to use Modernized e-File to file their income tax return, a paper version of Form 8975 will be made available in advance of the September 1, 2017, implementation date.

Professor William Byrnes' Practical Guide to U.S. Transfer Pricing (LexisNexis) is a best-selling 3,000 page treatise updated annually to help multinationals cope with the U.S. transfer pricing rules and procedures, taking into account the international norms established by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). It is also designed for use by tax administrators, both those belonging to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service and those belonging to the tax administrations of other countries, and tax professionals in and out of government, corporate executives, and their non-tax advisors, both American and foreign.  Fifty co-authors contribute subject matter expertise on technical issues faced by tax and risk management counsel.  Free download of chapter 2 here

March 13, 2017 in BEPS | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, February 10, 2017

OECD invites taxpayer input on peer reviews of Dispute Resolution (BEPS Action 14)

OECD_globe_10cm_HD_4cThe Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) peer review and monitoring process under Action 14 of the BEPS Action Plan was launched in December 2016. The OECD is now gathering input
for the Stage 1 peer reviews of Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg and Sweden, and invites taxpayers to submit input on specific issues relating to access to MAP, clarity and availability of MAP guidance and the timely implementation of MAP agreements for each of these jurisdictions using the taxpayer input questionnaire. As taxpayers are the main users of the MAP this input is key for the review process and we encourage taxpayers to complete the questionnaire and return it tofta.map@oecd.org (in Word format) by 27 February 2017 at the latest.

» Read the press release
» 
BEPS Action 14 peer review and monitoring process

February 10, 2017 in BEPS | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, February 9, 2017

OECD releases peer review documents for assessment of BEPS minimum standards (Actions 5 and 13)

OECD releases peer review documents for assessment of BEPS minimum standards (Actions 5 and 13)

Today the OECD released key documents, approved by the Inclusive Framework on BEPS, which will form the basis of thepeer review of Action 13 Country-by-Country Reporting and for the peer review of the Action 5 transparency framework.

The Action 13 standard on Country-by-Country Reporting and the Action 5 standard for the compulsory spontaneous exchange of information on tax rulings (the "transparency framework") are two of the four BEPS minimum standards. Each of the four BEPS minimum standards is subject to peer review in order to ensure timely and accurate implementation and thus safeguard the level playing field. All members of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS commit to implementing the minimum standards and participating in the peer reviews.

The documents released today form the basis on which the peer review processes will be undertaken. The compilations include the Terms of Reference which sets out the criteria for assessing the implementation of the minimum standard, and the Methodology which sets out the procedural mechanism by which jurisdictions will complete the peer review, including the process for collecting the relevant data, the preparation and approval of reports, the outputs of the review and the follow-up process.

More information on the peer review and monitoring process:

February 9, 2017 in BEPS | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, January 26, 2017

The Platform for Collaboration on Tax invites comments on a draft toolkit designed to help developing countries address the lack of comparables for transfer pricing analyses

Responding to a request by the Development Working Group of the G20, the Platform for Collaboration on Tax – a joint initiative of the IMF, OECD, UN and World Bank Group – has OECD developed a draft toolkit designed to assist developing countries in an important area of international tax policy: transfer pricing. The Platform is now seeking public feedback on that toolkit, which specifically addresses the ways developing countries can overcome a lack of data on "comparables," or the market prices for goods and services transferred between members of multinational corporations.

The toolkit is part of a series of reports by the Platform that are designed to help countries that may have limitations in their capacity to design or administer strong tax systems. Previous reports have included discussions of tax incentives and external support for building tax capacity in developing countries. Helping developing countries build strong and credible transfer pricing regimes is an important part of the Platform's effort to increase the capacity of developing countries to apply the principles of the OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Project, an initiative that assists countries in protecting their tax bases from aggressive or inappropriate tax planning by multinational corporations.

Transfer pricing – the value assigned to transactions between subsidiaries of multinational corporations – is an increasingly critical issue in a globalised world. This draft toolkit (A Toolkit for Addressing Difficulties in Accessing Comparables Data for Transfer Pricing Analyses) examines how tax administrations can evaluate the correctness of the transfer prices set by multinationals when there is insufficient information available to governments on market-based transactions that are comparable to those reported by the multinational corporation ("comparables"). The toolkit offers advice on making the best use of data that exists and options for monitoring the behaviour of multinational corporations in situations in which no data is available.

The discussion draft first seeks to put the search for potential comparables in context, emphasising the importance of accurately defining the transaction to ensure the subsequent search for comparables is as efficient and effective as possible. Next, sources of potential comparables data are considered, and practical tools such as step-by-step screening templates are suggested. To address situations where there is a systemic lack of comparables data, the draft considers potential policy options such as the development of safe harbours. The toolkit will also be available in French and Spanish.

In addition, since the pricing of transactions in the extractive industries is an issue of particular relevance to many low-income countries, the draft toolkit also addresses the information gaps on prices of minerals sold in an intermediate form. The supplementary material on minerals pricing (Addressing the Information Gaps on Prices of Minerals Sold in an Intermediate Form) provides a systematic process that could be used by tax administrations to map the transformation chain for a particular mineral, identify key traded products and establish common industry pricing practices. Detailed case studies demonstrating the process are then provided for copper, gold, thermal coal and iron ore. The supplementary material is also available in French (Combler le manque d’informations sur les prix des minéraux vendus sous une forme intermédiaire) and will shortly be available in Spanish.

The Platform partners now seek comments by 21 February from interested stakeholders on the draft toolkit, including the supplementary material on minerals pricing, with the aim of finalising it in the coming months.

Questions to consider

  1. Does this toolkit effectively help address the challenges identified by developing countries in finding the data needed to carry out a transfer pricing analysis as part of a tax audit?
  2. How can better use of administrative information, in a way that maintains taxpayer confidentiality, be effectively facilitated at a country and regional level?
  3. How could the reliability of potential comparables from other geographic markets be tested?
  4. Are there best practices or other reliable approaches for dealing with a lack of comparables not addressed in the discussion draft?
  5. What other adjustments for geographic market differences could be made, and in what circumstances? How could the reliability of such adjustments be empirically tested?
  6. Do the mineral pricing case studies accurately reflect market trading terms? Are there other adjustments that would be routinely made when these mineral products are sold?

Please do not restrict yourself to these questions; any other views you have on the addressing the lack of comparables for transfer pricing analyses and on information gaps on prices of minerals sold in an intermediate form would be welcome.

Comments and input on the draft will be taken into consideration in finalising the toolkit. Comments should be sent by e-mail no later than 21 February 2017 to GlobalTaxPlatform@worldbank.org, a common comment box for all the Platform organisations.

TP book coverLexis’ Practical Guide to U.S. Transfer Pricing is updated annually to help multinationals cope with the U.S. transfer pricing rules and procedures, taking into account the international norms established by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). It is also designed for use by tax administrators, both those belonging to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service and those belonging to the tax administrations of other countries, and tax professionals in and out of government, corporate executives, and their non-tax advisors, both American and foreign.  Fifty co-authors contribute subject matter expertise on technical issues faced by tax and risk management counsel.  Free download of chapter 2 here

January 26, 2017 in BEPS, OECD | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Kazakhstan, Côte d’Ivoire and Bermuda join the Inclusive Framework on BEPS

Following the first meeting of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS in Japan, on 30 June-1 July, and recent regional meetings, more countries and jurisdictions are joining the framework. Logooecd_enThe Inclusive Framework on BEPS welcomed Kazakhstan, Côte d’Ivoire and Bermuda bringing to 94 the total number of countries and jurisdictions participating on an equal footing in the project.

January 18, 2017 in BEPS | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, January 12, 2017

OECD Updates BEPS Other Financial Payments, Action 4 - 2016 and tax treaty provisions of BEPS Action 6 and entitlement of non-CIV funds

 
The 2015 Report on BEPS Action 4 established a common approach which directly links an entity’s net interest deductions to its level of economic activity, based on taxable EBITDA. OECD_globe_10cm_HD_4cFurther work on two aspects of the common approach was completed in 2016 and this is included in this update.

Comments are invited on draft examples included in a discussion draft on the follow-up work on the interaction between the treaty provisions of the report on BEPS Action 6 and the treaty entitlement of non-CIV funds.

Paragraph 14 of the final version of the BEPS report on Action 6 (Preventing the Granting of Treaty Benefits in Inappropriate Circumstances) indicated that the OECD would continue to examine issues related to the treaty entitlement of non-CIV funds to ensure that the new treaty provisions included in the Report on Action 6 address adequately the treaty entitlement of these funds.

As part of the follow-up work on this issue, on 24 March 2016 the OECD published a consultation document on the treaty entitlement of non-CIV funds which included a number of specific questions related to concerns, identified in the comments received on previous discussion drafts related to the Report on Action 6, as to how the new provisions included in that Report could affect the treaty entitlement of non-CIV funds as well as possible ways of addressing these concerns. The comments received in response to that consultation document were published on the OECD website on 22 April 2016.

This discussion draft has been prepared to provide stakeholders with information on the subsequent developments in the work on the interaction between the treaty provisions of the report on BEPS Action 6 and the treaty entitlement of non-CIV funds, including the conclusions reached at the May 2016 meeting of Working Party 1* and the subsequent work on the development of examples related to the application of the principal purposes test (PPT) rule included in the Report on Action 6 with respect to some common transactions involving non-CIV funds. The discussion draft invites comments on three draft examples under consideration by the Working Party for inclusion in the Commentary on the PPT rule.

The Committee invites interested parties to send their comments on these three examples. The draft examples and the comments received will be discussed by Working Party 1 at its February 2016 meeting.

Comments should be sent by 3 February 2017 at the latest by e-mail to taxtreaties@oecd.org in Word format (in order to facilitate their distribution to government officials). They should be addressed to the Tax Treaties, Transfer Pricing and Financial Transactions Division, OECD/CTPA.

Please note that all the comments on the examples will be made publicly available. Comments submitted in the name of a collective “grouping” or “coalition”, or by any person submitting comments on behalf of another person or group of persons, should identify all enterprises or individuals who are members of that collective group, or the person(s) on whose behalf the commentator(s) are acting.

The draft examples included in this discussion draft do not, at this stage, represent the consensus views of the CFA or its subsidiary bodies but are intended to provide stakeholders with substantive proposals for analysis and comment.

* Working Party No. 1 on Tax Conventions and Related Questions is the subsidiary body of the OECD’s Committee on Fiscal Affairs responsible for the tax treaty-related work, including the follow-up work on BEPS Action 6.

January 12, 2017 in BEPS | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, December 28, 2016

Peru joins the Inclusive Framework on BEPS

Following the first meeting of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS in Japan, on 30 June-1 July, and recent regional meetings, more countries and jurisdictions are joining the framework. The Inclusive Framework on BEPS recently welcomed Peru bringing to 91 the total number of countries and jurisdictions participating on an equal footing in the Project.
 
» Download the full list of all countries and jurisdictions participating in the Inclusive Framework on BEPS.

December 28, 2016 in BEPS, OECD | Permalink | Comments (0)

Monday, December 19, 2016

OECD holds regional meeting of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS for the Eastern Europe and Central Asia region

 This regional meeting followed the inaugural meeting of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS which took place in Kyoto, Japan, on 30 June-1 July 2016.  The main objective of this event OECDwas to discuss and seek input on the latest developments in the Inclusive Framework and in the Committee on Fiscal Affairs' (CFA) Working Parties. The meeting also provided an opportunity to:

1) Discuss the implementation of the BEPS Project measures, in particular regarding the peer review process proposed for the minimum standards ; 2) Seek input from participants on toolkits being developed to address specific issues previously identified by the non-OECD/G20 and

2) Seek input from participants on toolkits being developed to address specific issues previously identified by the non-OECD/G20 and low income countries as priority issues; 

3) Prepare the delegates for the next meetings of the Inclusive Framework, including the working party meetings; 

4) Understand country priorities and specific needs in terms of capacity building. Dainoras Bradauskas, Director General of the State Tax Inspectorate of Lithuania, welcomed the participants to the event that gathered 62 participants from 14 countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Georgia, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Turkey and Ukraine). Business representatives from international firms such as Ernst and Young, KPMG, PricewatherhouseCoopers and from Lithuanian corporations and associations such as Cobalt, Lithuania Tax Consultants Association, Rödl & Partner, Sorainen and Valiunas

Business representatives from international firms such as Ernst and Young, KPMG, PricewatherhouseCoopers and from Lithuanian corporations and associations such as Cobalt, Lithuania Tax Consultants Association, Rödl & Partner, Sorainen and Valiunas Ellex also participated during the first morning of the meeting, and actively contributed to the discussion, including through a specific session dedicated to them. In their opening remarks, Ms. Daiva Brasiunaite, Director of Tax Policy Department at the Ministry of Finance of Lithuania, and Miguel Silva Pinto, Executive Secretary of IOTA expressed their appreciation for the interest shown by many countries in the region participating in the meeting, as well as for the important work carried out by the OECD to achieve greater inclusiveness. They highlighted the unprecedented number of countries that joined the Inclusive Framework on BEPS as well as the overall efforts towards transparency, with an increasing volume of exchanges of information among tax administrations, together with an enhanced co-operation among countries.

The agenda focussed on the following topics: 

 The organisation of the Inclusive Framework and the implementation of the measures developed under the BEPS Project; 

 A specific session dedicated to the views of the business community;

 The latest developments within the Forum on Harmful Tax Practices and the Working Party 11 on aggressive tax planning;

 The discussions within the Working Party 6 linked to transfer pricing and the follow-up work underway on the remaining BEPS related standard setting; 

 The work of the Working Party 1 on tax conventions and on the finalisation of the multilateral instrument to implement tax treaty related BEPS measures.

 The country priorities for implementation of BEPS measures and specific needs of the Eastern European and Central Asian countries in terms of capacity building, including the use of the Platform for Collaboration Tax

 The work related to the toolkits to support non-OECD/G20 

Key messages

  • Participating countries recognised that joining the Inclusive Framework on BEPS provides opportunities for implementing sound and consistent domestic and treaty tax legislation, improving tax administration procedures and sharing experiences and best practices with other countries at policy and administration level. 
  • Countries expressed the importance of implementing the BEPS measures consistently and some participants reported their active involvement in the Inclusive Framework and in other OECD initiatives. Several countries also indicated that they are engaged through their EU membership in several initiatives, including in the context of the EU Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive and other measures in seeking a co-ordinated approach to tackle the emerging BEPS issues. 
  • Participants reiterated in several instances the need for flexibility offered in the peer review of the implementation of the BEPS minimum standards, and welcomed the level of optionality offered in the multilateral instrument. They also noted that this instrument would be an efficient tool to implement the BEPS treaty-related measures and reiterated the need to closely follow this work stream. Participants stressed the importance of Country-by-Country reporting, and shared the reforms already underway to implement transfer pricing documentation requirements. They also recognized that the implementation of the BEPS measures will allow them to address current areas of concerns, in particular aggressive tax planning, treaty abuse, avoidance of the permanent establishment status and transfer pricing.  A number of participating countries indicated that the main difficulties in implementing BEPS relate to limitations
  • Participants stressed the importance of Country-by-Country reporting, and shared the reforms already underway to implement transfer pricing documentation requirements. They also recognized that the implementation of the BEPS measures will allow them to address current areas of concerns, in particular aggressive tax planning, treaty abuse, avoidance of the permanent establishment status and transfer pricing.
  • A number of participating countries indicated that the main difficulties in implementing BEPS relate to limitations in personnel and IT resources. They also noted that changes in the legal and administrative systems are a challenge for the swift implementation of the BEPS measures.On capacity building, country delegates highlighted the need for support in the implementation as well as for extended deadlines to comply with the minimum standards. They also stressed the importance of training programmes, in particular on transfer pricing and aggressive tax planning issues. They expressed the need for more training in these areas, including for EU members since they need a lot of human resources to monitor OECD and EU developments.
  • They also welcomed the OECD Tax Inspectors Without Borders initiative in partnership with UNDP as well as opportunities to participate in the technical events under the work programme of IOTA.  Countries also indicated the need to employ their limited capacity to more fundamental areas of priority, such as tackling the shadow economy. They also mentioned the importance of exchange of information, notably in the area of detection of hybrid mismatch arrangements.
  • On capacity building, country delegates highlighted the need for support in the implementation as well as for extended deadlines to comply with the minimum standards. They also stressed the importance of training programmes, in particular on transfer pricing and aggressive tax planning issues. They expressed the need for more training in these areas, including for EU members since they need a lot of human resources to monitor OECD and EU developments.
  • They also welcomed the OECD Tax Inspectors Without Borders initiative in partnership with UNDP as well as opportunities to participate in the technical events under the work programme of IOTA.  Countries also indicated the need to employ their limited capacity to more fundamental areas of priority, such as tackling the shadow economy. They also mentioned the importance of exchange of information, notably in the area of detection of hybrid mismatch arrangements and on CbC reporting, and noted the benefits of participating in the Joint International Taskforce on Shared Intelligence and Collaboration (JITSIC).Participants appreciated the partnership between the OECD and IOTA, noting the significant number of IOTA members that are participating in the Inclusive Framework. They also highlighted the importance of the involvement of regional tax organizations, and of IOTA in particular, in the Inclusive Framework, also considering its Observer status in the Ad Hoc Group on the multilateral instrument to implement tax treaty related BEPS measures. IOTA also announced the planned launch, in 2017, of a forum on the implementation of BEPS to discuss strategies and practical application of working methods and tools developed to effectively tackle BEPS.  The business representatives raised the need for mutual understanding between corporations and tax administrations, and expressed concerns in relation to the appropriate use of the Country-by-Country reports. They noted that the BEPS project targeted multinational business and also expressed concerns
  • Participants appreciated the partnership between the OECD and IOTA, noting the significant number of IOTA members that are participating in the Inclusive Framework. They also highlighted the importance of the involvement of regional tax organizations, and of IOTA in particular, in the Inclusive Framework, also considering its Observer status in the Ad Hoc Group on the multilateral instrument to implement tax treaty related BEPS measures. IOTA also announced the planned launch, in 2017, of a forum on the implementation of BEPS to discuss strategies and practical application of working methods and tools developed to effectively tackle BEPS. The business representatives raised the need for mutual understanding between corporations and tax administrations, and expressed concerns in relation to the appropriate use of the Country-by-Country reports. They noted that the BEPS project targeted multinational business and also expressed concerns
  • The business representatives raised the need for mutual understanding between corporations and tax administrations, and expressed concerns in relation to the appropriate use of the Country-by-Country reports. They noted that the BEPS project targeted multinational business and also expressed concerns on the possible retroactive application of the BEPS measures by tax administrations. The business community welcomed the new OECD tax initiative on tax certainty under the mandate of the G20, since predictability is key for them.
  • Countries expressed the importance of implementing the BEPS measures consistently and some participants reported their active involvement in the Inclusive Framework and in other OECD initiatives. Several countries also indicated that they are engaged through their EU membership in several initiatives, including in the context of the EU Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive and other measures in seeking a co-ordinated approach to tackle the emerging BEPS issues.
  • Participants reiterated in several instances the need for flexibility offered in the peer review of the implementation of the BEPS minimum standards, and welcomed the level of optionality offered in the multilateral instrument. They also noted that this instrument would be an efficient tool to implement the BEPS treaty-related measures and reiterated the need to closely follow this work stream. 
  • A number of participating countries indicated that the main difficulties in implementing BEPS relate to limitations in personnel and IT resources. 

December 19, 2016 in BEPS, OECD | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, December 16, 2016

Macau, Mauritius and Ukraine join the Inclusive Framework on BEPS

Following the first meeting of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS in Japan, on 30 June-1 July, and recent regional meetings, more countries and jurisdictions are joining the framework. The Inclusive Framework on BEPS welcomed Macau (China), Mauritius and Ukraine bringing to 90 the total number of countries and jurisdictions participating on an equal footing in the Project.

December 16, 2016 in BEPS | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, December 9, 2016

OECD and CREDAF hold regional meeting of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS for francophone countries

56 delegates from 13 countries gathered in Tunis for the first regional meeting of the Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) after its launch in Kyoto on 30 June-1 July 2016. This meeting belongs to a new series of events that offer participants from different regions in the world the opportunity to feed their views and provide their input into the Inclusive Framework on BEPS.

This meeting allowed participants to discuss the latest developments on the implementation work on BEPS, in light of the debates taking place in the Committee on Fiscal Affairs' OECDWorking Parties. Participants were also updated on the progress of the work on the toolkits aimed at addressing the specific needs of developing countries in implementing the BEPS measures. These discussions provided the ideal forum to obtain input into the work and on the priorities of the participating countries and their needs in relation to capacity building and training.

December 9, 2016 in BEPS | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, December 8, 2016

Framework on BEPS for the Asia-Pacific region

50 delegates from 16 countries, 4 international organisations, business and civil society gathered in Manila for the first regional meeting of the Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit shifting (BEPS) in the Asia-Pacific region after the launch of the Inclusive Framework in Kyoto on 30 June-1st July 2016. This meeting is one in a new series of events that offer participants from different regions in the world the opportunity to feed in their views and provide their input into the Inclusive Framework on BEPS.

Participants discussed the latest developments on the implementation work on BEPS in light of the work taking place in the Committee on Fiscal Affairs' Working Parties. Participants were also updated on the progress of the work on the toolkits aimed at addressing the specific needs of developing countries in implementing the BEPS and BEPS-related measures. These discussions provided a forum for setting out the priorities of needs of Asian-Pacific countries in relation to capacity building and training.

The event was hosted by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and organised by the OECD in partnership with the Korea Policy Centre (KTC). Participants included senior officials from Ministries of Finance and Tax Administrations from Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Fiji, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Maldives, Myanmar, People's Republic of China, Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam, as well as business representatives (BIAC/Unilever), from civil society (Asian People's Movement on Debt and Development) and IMF.

The meeting was co-chaired by Mr. John Hutagaol, Director of International Taxation in the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia, and Mr. Kwangouck Byun, Director of Tax Treaty Division in the Korean Ministry of Strategy and Finance.

First regional meeting of the Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit shifting (BEPS) in the Asia-Pacific region

December 8, 2016 in BEPS | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, December 6, 2016

OECD releases mutual agreement procedure (MAP) statistics for 2015

The OECD’s work to advance tax certainty specifically includes work to improve the timeliness of processing and completing mutual agreement procedure (MAP) cases under tax OECDtreaties and to enhance the transparency of the MAP process. As part of this work, the OECD makes available to the public, via its website, annual statistics on the MAP caseloads of all its member countries and of non-OECD economies that agree to provide such statistics. MAP statistics are now available for the 2015 reporting period. 

Improving the effectiveness of dispute resolution mechanisms is an integral component of the work on BEPS and is the aim of Action 14 of the BEPS Action Plan (read the Final 2015 Report on Action 14 of the BEPS Action Plan). One of the principal outcomes of the work on Action 14 is the commitment by OECD and G20 countries to a minimum standard with respect to the resolution of treaty-related disputes. As part of the Action 14 minimum standard, members of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS will report MAP statistics pursuant to an agreed reporting framework ; such reporting will provide a tangible measure of the effects of the implementation of part of the minimum standard. The MAP statistics made available for 2016 and following years will accordingly contain additional information and will include reports from a significant group of non-OECD economies, most of which do not currently report MAP statistics to the OECD.

The MAP statistics now made available correspond to the 2015 reporting period (MAP statistics were provided earlier for reporting periods 2006 through 2014). Considered in the aggregate, MAP inventories in OECD member countries at the end of these reporting periods show a continuous increase from 2006 to 2015, with a slight decrease in 2010. For those countries that reported them, the average cycle times for cases completed, closed or withdrawn decreased in 2015 (20.47 months) as compared to 2014 (23.79 months). The separation of reported MAP cases into cases with other OECD member countries and cases with non-OECD economies continues to show, in general, that more than 90% of OECD member countries’ MAP inventories are cases with other OECD member countries.

For purposes of the 2015 MAP statistics now made available, the reporting framework and the definitions of terms used in reporting – as well as the other results of the proposals in the 2004 Committee on Fiscal Affairs (CFA) report on improving the resolution of cross-border tax disputes – are described in detail in the CFA’s 2007 report Improving the Resolution of Tax Treaty Disputes.


The statistics for each reporting period (generally a calendar year) include:

  • opening inventory of MAP cases on the first day of the reporting period;
  • number of MAP cases initiated during the reporting period;
  • number of MAP cases completed during the reporting period;
  • ending inventory of MAP cases on the last day of the reporting period;
  • cases closed or withdrawn with double taxation during the reporting period; and
  • average cycle time for cases completed, closed or withdrawn during the reporting period.

The data for each reporting period are separated based on the year the relevant MAP cases were initiated. In addition, since 2008, the statistics have been divided into MAP cases with OECD member countries and cases with Partner economies for countries that have provided that information. More information on the MAP reporting framework, including the definitions of terms used in reporting, can be found in the 2007 Report “Improving the Resolution of Tax Treaty Disputes”.

Readers should note that 2015 is the last reporting period for which statistics will be provided in this format. For 2016 and subsequent years, members of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS will use a substantially revised reporting framework which has been developed for use in monitoring the implementation of the BEPS Action 14 minimum standard.  

The tables below show the number of new MAP cases initiated in 2006 through 2015 and the inventory of open MAP cases at the end of each reporting period for OECD member countries and for certain Partner economies that have provided statistics. For detailed country-by-country statistics, please click on the country name for a link to the statistics for that country.

Number of New MAP Cases Initiated by Reporting Period

OECD member countries

   

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

Australia

9

13

8

19

21

10

10

8

10 14

Austria

29

26

36

30

38

35

61

41

49 43

Belgium

31

30

71

213

120

120

151

124

205

428

Canada

76

70

85

103

101

94

87

127

127 130

Chile

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0 0

Czech Republic

5

10

5

6

8

12

13

7

12 11

Denmark

15

18

21

22

20

24

24

22

43 52

Estonia

--

--

--

--

--

0

0

0

1 2

Finland

1

11

8

5

11

13

14

56

49 20

France

104

100

154

169

135

173

181

216

201 173

Germany

212

186

177

177

150

306

277

267

374 363

Greece

1

2

--

--

--

5

3

3*

4 6

Hungary

4

3

1

2

1

0

1

2

4 4

Iceland

1

0

0

0

0

1

2

1

4 1

Ireland

3

3

2

6

7

6

12

12

5 13

Israel

--

--

--

--

4

9

5

3

3 2

Italy

14

20

14

31

22

41

45

52

89 80

Japan

37

49

40

44

34

22

31

36

45 38

Korea

8

9

13

25

13

24

22

23

33 42
Latvia_small

Latvia

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0* 3

Luxembourg

22

31

31

25

35

75

39

45

116 212

Mexico

14

11

5

10

4

5

17

12

4 3

Netherlands

80

57

--

64

51

34

83

75

87 128

New Zealand

4

5

2

6

4

4

3

14

28 7

Norway

15

21

30

21

16

7

10

26

18 33

Poland

11

7

19

14

7

9

5

19

18 6

Portugal

10

7

5

14

17

15

17

6

11 11

Slovak Republic

0

--

1

1

3

4

1

2

2 3

Slovenia

--

--

3

0

2

2

3

6

11 5

Spain

18

67

24

24

24

18

36

25

33 30

Sweden

72

61

104

64

104

111

100

65

91 92

Switzerland

--

45

99

119

65

112

120

131

109 148

Turkey

0

2

1

3

4

0

0

2

2 2

United Kingdom

--

55

44

56

68

54

69

79

117 115

United States

240

257

308

326

252

279

236

403

354 289

TOTAL

1036

1176

1311

1599

1341

1624

1678

1910

2259 2509

* Where a country did not report the number of new MAP cases initiated in the reporting period, this chart uses the number of new MAP cases reported for the preceding reporting period. These numbers are indicated with an asterisk.

Latvia reported MAP statistics to the OECD for the first time for the 2013 reporting period. 

Partner economies

   

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

Argentina

--

--

0

1

0

--

--

-- -- 1

China

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

23 29 25

Costa Rica

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

-- 1 0
Lithuania_small

Lithuania††

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

-- -- 0

South Africa

--

--

4

1

5

5

3

2 4 13

TOTAL

--

--

4

2

5

5

3

25

34 39

China reported MAP statistics to the OECD for the first time for the 2013 reporting period.

Costa Rica reported MAP statistics to the OECD for the first time for the 2014 reporting period.

††Lithuania reported MAP statistics to the OECD for the first time for the 2015 reporting period. 

December 6, 2016 in BEPS, OECD | Permalink | Comments (0)