Worldwide: Transfer Pricing Times: OECD Releases Discussion Draft On Hard-To-Value Intangibles

In this edition: the OECD releases discussion draft on hard-to-value intangibles, Australia issues risk framework for evaluating intercompany loans, recent transfer pricing developments in India, Italy and China revise national regulations to more closely align with the OECD guidelines and related BEPS recommendations, and U.S. tax reform topics.

OECD Releases Discussion Draft on Hard-to-Value Intangibles

On May 23, 2017, the OECD released a public discussion draft addressing certain aspects of transfer pricing for hard-to-value intangibles ("HTVIs").

When taxpayers employ transfer pricing methodologies for intangibles that are informed by expectations, tax administrations necessarily have an interest in ensuring that the projections that are used fully reflect all relevant information available to the taxpayer (and to ensure that taxpayers haven't misstated expectations to gain tax advantage). The HTVI provisions provided as part of the final BEPS report for Action Items 8-10 included provisions that recognized the potential need for tax administrations to be able to use information about ex post outcomes to inform their judgments about the reasonableness of the information used to establish ex ante pricing.

In that guidance, the OECD states that its approach on HTVIs is intended to be consistent with the arm's-length principle and provide tax administrations with a method by which to determine situations in which transfer prices should weigh foreseeable events. The approach allows tax administrations to use ex post data as presumptive evidence to assess the arm's-length nature of ex ante pricing, but also allows taxpayers the ability to rebut the presumption. If an administration ultimately determines an adjustment is warranted, the adjustment can be assessed by creating and quantifying contingent payments and price adjustments, irrespective of how the taxpayer originally structured the transaction (e.g., as a lump sum).

The final BEPS report on Action Items 8-10 mandated the creation of guidance on the implementation of the approach to HTVI outlined in that report. The recently produced discussion draft is intended to present the principles that should underlie the implementation of the HTVI approach, and to provide clarifying examples on how to implement the approach. The three examples provided all relate to the transfer of intangible property associated with a Phase III pharmaceutical program.

These examples demonstrate:

  • The calculation of adjustments using actual outcomes to inform transfer pricing adjustments under examination, illustrating the potential substitution of ex post outcomes for erroneous projections that didn't qualify for the provided exemptions. These calculations are demonstrated both for circumstances in which commercialization occurs earlier than incorporated in the ex ante projections used by the taxpayer and when revenues are substantially higher than those reflected in those ex ante projections;
  • A circumstance where actuals were different than projections, but an adjustment is not made because the price incorporating ex post information is within 20 percent of the price established by the taxpayer;
  • The potential use of a contingent payment form for making adjustments based on ex post outcomes when a tax administration's evaluation of the available evidence indicates that arm's-length parties would have employed some form of contingent payment; and
  • Potential adjustments to a contingent royalty rate based upon ex post evidence (again, stressing that such adjustments might not be necessary if the royalty calculation considering ex post evidence falls within 20 percent of the royalty established by the taxpayer using its ex ante projections).

From a practical perspective, the implementation guidance is aimed at promoting consistency amongst tax administrations and limiting potential double taxation. Comments on the discussion draft are due by June 30, 2017.

Further information on the discussion draft is available here.

Following Major Chevron Decision Australia Issues Risk Framework for Evaluating Intercompany Loans

On May 16th, 2017, shortly after the release of the Chevron decision, the Australian Tax Office ("ATO") issued a draft Practical Compliance Guideline ("Draft Guideline") outlining the ATO's go-forward approach for assessing intercompany financing arrangements. The Draft Guideline provides a risk framework intended to assist taxpayers with understanding how to assess the risk level associated with their intercompany financing arrangements and to further understand the compliance approach the ATO is likely to adopt when reviewing and enforcing such arrangements. The Draft Guideline sets out six risk zones ranging from "White zone - already reviewed and concluded by the ATO" to "Red zone - very high risk". The Draft Guideline notes that loans which receive a low risk score are likely to be subject to fewer ATO resources than loans higher up the scale.

A scoring system is used to determine the risk rating by evaluating several different aspects of the intercompany arrangement including:

  • The interest rate relative to the global group and or third party borrowings;
  • Leverage ratio of the borrower relative to the global group;
  • Interest coverage ratio relative to the global croup;
  • Collateral pledged;
  • Position within the capital structure (i.e., subordinated or mezzanine)
  • Tax rate of the lending entity;
  • Whether the arrangement is in a different currency than the borrower's operating currency;
  • Arrangement is covered by a taxpayer alert;
  • One party is a hybrid entity;
  • Presence of exotic features on the loan; and
  • Sovereign risk of the borrowing entity's jurisdiction.

It is important to note that the Draft Guideline and the above criteria are not an interpretation of the transfer pricing rules in Australia. Instead, these criteria are meant to assist taxpayers with understanding which features the ATO deems risky. In fact, it could be argued that the above categories alone do not provide an indication of the existence of bona fide arm's-length debt. For example, the lender's tax rate gives no indication of an arm's-length result nor does the amount of collateral pledged given that unsecured debt is commonplace in arm's-length capital markets.

Taxpayers wishing to avoid scrutiny and possible litigation with the ATO may choose to restructure their intercompany arrangements in order to qualify as low-risk under this Draft Guideline. Alternatively, taxpayers which are deemed riskier under this framework may choose not to restructure if they believe their dealings meet the arm's-length standard and are appropriately documented.

Further information on the ATO's Draft Guideline is available here.

Recent India Transfer Pricing Developments - Release of APA Annual Report

On May 1, 2017, India's Central Board of Direct Taxes ("CBDT"), which is an administrative body of India's Income Tax Department, published its first annual report on the Advance Pricing Agreements ("APA") program in India.

The report includes:

  • Information on the history, structure, and operation of the APA program in India;
  • Statistical data on APAs filed, executed, pending, and withdrawn; and
  • Further detail on the APAs executed, such as industry of the applicant, transaction types, transfer pricing methods used, and counterparties to the APAs.

Effective July 1, 2012, the APA program in India gave legal backing for the CBDT to enter into APAs with taxpayers for a maximum period of five years, including roll-back period of up to four years in certain cases. The report discloses that over the last five years, more than 800 APA applications have been filed in India, including both unilateral and bilateral applications. Unilateral APA applications made up 85 percent of the total, which the CBDT attributes in large part to the U.S. Competent Authority's position, reversed in 2016, to not engage in bilateral APAs with India.

As of March 31, 2017, when the latest data were made available for the report, India had signed 141 unilateral APAs and 11 bilateral APAs (6 with the U.K. and 5 with Japan). As the program has matured over its five-year history, the number of APAs signed has increased significantly, from a total of nine between 2013 and 2015, to 143 between 2015-2017. This is largely due to the time it takes for an APA application to proceed to final agreement; the CBDT report cites an average of 29 months for a unilateral APA, with some taking up to 48 months. This is similar the recent average reported by the U.S. Competent Authority of 34 months.

Not surprisingly for India, the largest industry sector participating in the APA program is information technology (29% of signed unilateral APAs), followed by banking and finance (21%), industrial/commercial goods manufacture (11%), and pharmaceuticals (7%) – with the remainder distributed among 13 other industry classifications. Software services and information technology services were the most common intercompany transaction types to be included in an APA. Finally, with respect to the transfer pricing methods being applied, the Transactional Net Margin Method was by far the most commonly employed, followed by "Other Methods", and then by the Comparable Uncontrolled Price method.

Further information on India's first APA annual report is available here.

Both Italy and China Revise National Regulations to More Closely Align with the OECD Guidelines and Related BEPS Recommendations

Italy

On April 24, 2017, the Italian government approved Decree No. 50. This measure, effective immediately, includes revisions to the Italian transfer pricing rules that tailor the rules to more closely align with the OECD Guidelines.

Specifically, the new rules:

  • Replace the Italian concept of "normal value" with specific reference to the OECD concept of the arm's-length principle;
  • Expand the range of options that can result in a downward adjustment of the Italian taxable income base beyond those arising from MAPs (e.g., at the conclusion of tax audits performed under international cooperation procedures; through a specific application), thereby simplifying corresponding adjustments and reducing the risk of double taxation; and
  • More closely align the definition of eligible intangibles under the Italian patent box regime with the definition outlined in the OECD's Final Report on BEPS Action 5 by excluding trademarks in applications filed on or after December 31, 2016 (although no change was made to the current inclusion of know-how, which is limited under BEPS Action 5).

China

On March 17, 2017, China's State Administration of Taxation ("SAT") published Bulletin Gonggao [2017] No. 6 ("Bulletin No. 6"), which brings Chinese transfer pricing rules more in line with the OECD's BEPS reforms.

Specifically, per Bulletin No. 6:

  • DEMPE (development, enhancement, maintenance, protection, exploitation) functions for determining the value of intangibles are referenced. The SAT also includes a sixth element – "promotion."
  • Intercompany service fees are allowed if the service(s) bring indirect or direct economic benefit to the service recipient(s) and if independent parties would pay for or perform such service(s).
  • The same five transfer pricing methods that are identified by the OECD are identified and endorsed. The Value contribution allocation method, a unique and controversial method previously proposed by the SAT, is no longer mentioned. The cost method, the market method, and the income method are listed as other allowable methods.

Other notable amendments to China's transfer pricing rules per Bulletin No. 6 include:

  • The SAT will review related party transactions, transfer pricing documentation, and profit to identify companies that are at risk for a transfer pricing adjustment. These companies will receive a "Notice of Taxation Matters" and can choose to voluntarily adjust their transfer pricing based on the SAT's recommendation. However, the SAT reserves the right to initiate a full audit in the future.
  • Location-specific advantages, such as cost savings and a market premium should be considered if the proposed comparables and the tested party are in different economic environments.
  • The SAT can choose among arithmetic means, weighted averages and interquartile ranges when performing transfer pricing examinations. Furthermore, when using interquartile ranges to compare profitability levels, if a taxpayer's profit level falls below the median, the SAT can adjust it to the median.
  • The SAT will prioritize the use of publicly available information, but is also allowed to use non-public information when conducting the comparability analysis.

Further information on the full text of Decree No. 50 is available here.

Further information on the full text of Bulletin No. 6 is available here.

U.S. Tax Reform Topics: Eliminating Interest Deductibility in Exchange for Full Expensing

As the legislative debate in Congress on tax reform heats up, we at the Transfer Pricing Times have been working to provide our readers with content that tracks how tax reform may or may not impact the transfer pricing landscape. While it is impossible to predict what the outcome of the debate in Congress will be, our hope is to help our readers make sense of the proposals being discussed. For this piece, we tackle the debate on the deductibility of interest expense and the treatment of capital investments, a key facet of Speaker Paul Ryan's "Better Way" proposal also referred to as the "Blueprint".

A central tenant of the U.S., and most other major industrialized tax codes, is the idea that interest payments on debt financing are deductible from taxable income regardless of whether the lender is a third-party or related entity. This practice has become so engrained in modern corporate taxation that many practitioners would not have thought to question it. Enter the Blueprint, which proposes eliminating the deductibility of interest payments resulting in equal tax treatment for debt and equity financing. Such a change would force companies to reassess their capital structures, as the debt "tax shield" (meaning, the ability to use debt financing to lower taxable income) would cease to exist. This proposal would also deny companies the ability to use interest payments on intercompany debt financing to shift profits from the U.S. to lower tax jurisdictions; a key focus of the previous administration as demonstrated by the finalization of the 385 Regulations in October of last year. The proposal does leave open the possibility for exceptions to be granted for firms in the financial services industry which rely more heavily on interest income and expense in day-to-day operations.

The elimination of interest deductions is expected to significantly increase the U.S. tax base, but would likely face significant resistance from corporate stakeholders across the board without an offsetting tax break. The Blueprint provides this supposed offset by fundamentally altering another central tenant of modern corporate taxation: the depreciation of capital investments. Under current tax rules, the cost of a capital investment is spread over its useful life (i.e., depreciated), reducing taxable income over future periods. The Blueprint fundamentally alters this concept by allowing for deducting the entirety of a capital investment in the period in which the investment is made. Because the entire deduction can be taken upfront, the value of the deduction increases significantly on a net present value basis.

Supporters of the Blueprint argue that these policy shifts will largely offset one another in terms of taxable income, and realign businesses' incentives in a way that creates economic value for the U.S. Supporters argue the elimination of interest deductibility will lead to a healthier economy, as firms will be no longer have tax-driven reasons to increase debt levels beyond what would otherwise be considered optimal. Supporters also expect that the immediate expensing of capital investments will give firms incentive to make capital investments in the U.S. It remains to be seen whether these expectations would come to fruition.

Like many proposals in the Blueprint, economists' views on this specific proposal show a great deal of variation. Some research, for instance, suggests that the tax treatment of debt may have no impact on overall debt levels in the economy. Furthermore, forecasts of how these proposals will affect capital investment and taxable income in the medium and long term are also mixed.

Further information on the Blueprint is available here.

Further information on President Trump's tax plan is available here.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions