Public comments on the OECD Discussion Draft on the Implementation Guidance on Hard-to-Value Intangibles send a clear message: Back to the drawing board!
Most comments focus on the following key-issues:
A. The Discussion Draft overemphasizes the extent of the prevailing information asymmetry
B. Without further clarifications and safeguards tax administration could make excessive use of ex post data as presumptive evidence for non-arm’s length transfer pricing
C. Taxpayers face an unreasonable high burden of proof
D. The Discussion Draft lacks clear guidance in respect to the information that taxpayers should be required to prepare to qualify the documentation of the valuation process as being appropriate
Many potentially contentious issues remain open. For taxpayers, the resulting uncertainty is highly troubling and it is to be hoped that OECD takes the comments serious and soon presents a carefully revised draft.
The comment submitted by TP&C was published starting on p. 245
I truly enjoyed reading through the individual comments and took a lot of comfort in learning that most of the practitioners share my discomfort in presenting tax authorities with such a blunt and instrument for transfer pricing adjustments. In order to get a measure of what is at stake, it is also worthwhile to look at the input of the BEPS Monitoring Group which (as so often) calls for curbing the freedom of MNEs to conduct internal transactions by allocating as much discretionary powers to tax authorities as possible for re-classifications and retroactive adjustments.
Oliver Treidler - 10:42:07 | Kommentar hinzufügen