The OECD/G20d BEPS Project has published: Harmful Tax Practices – 2018 Peer Review Reports on the Exchange of Information on Tax Rulings, referenced herein. This is the third annual peer review of the transparency framework. It covers individual reports for 112 jurisdictions, including 20 jurisdictions reviewed for the first time.
The transparency framework requires spontaneous exchange of information on five categories of taxpayer-specific rulings: (i) rulings related to certain preferential regimes, (ii) unilateral advance pricing arrangements (APAs) or other cross-border unilateral rulings in respect of transfer pricing, (iii) rulings providing for a downward adjustment of taxable adjustment of taxable profits (iv) PE rulings and (v) related party conduit rulings.
The requirement to exchange information on the rulings in the above categories includes certain past rulings as well as future rulings, pursuant to pre-defined periods which are outlined in each jurisdiction’s report and that varies according to the time when a certain jurisdiction has joined the Inclusive Framework or has been identified as a Jurisdiction of Relevance. The exchanges occur pursuant to international exchange of information agreements, which provide the legal conditions under which exchanges take place, including the need to ensure taxpayer confidentiality.
The Governments of France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK (G5) held a meeting on 28 April, 2014 to discuss progress on their mutual objectives to promote tax transparency and cooperation, fight tax fraud and evasion, counter harmful tax practices and respond to aggressive tax planning practices. The following link provides detailed actions that were discussed:
Summary of discussions:
Agreement to sign the Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI) agreements in alignment with the new, single, global OECD standard, joining 39 other jurisdictions that will effect exchange of information in 2017 with respect to 2015 data.
Reiteration of support to the OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) project.
Re: taxation of digital economies, the countries where companies conduct economic activities must be able to receive their “fair share” of tax. To align this initiative, the G5 Ministers agreed on the interest of a flexible interpretation of the territoriality rules, including a Digital Tax Presence concept.
Transfer pricing rules must be adapted to ensure that profit and value creation are aligned, citing economic justification.
Tax avoidance re: hybrid mismatch arrangements should be addressed.
Country-by-Country (CbC) reporting is important, as it should provide all relevant tax administrations with the information necessary to complete a high level risk assessment.
OECD BEPS developments must be reflected at the EU level, encouraging review of the EU law and its impact on aggressive tax planning practices.
The conclusions set forth are significant for the following reasons: Proposal by the G5, EU focused, collaborative discussions and agreement re: “fair share” of tax alignment, economic justification profit / value drivers, and a presumption that CbC reporting will provide information to complete a relevant risk assessment.
These initiatives should be monitored in alignment with the OECD BEPS proposals set forth for 2014 and 2015.