Strategizing International Tax Best Practices – by Keith Brockman

Posts tagged ‘OECD’

UN: Manual for Treaty Negotiations

As tax treaties become more important in the international tax landscape, for both developed and developing countries, it is important to review practical guidance provided to tax administrations to enforce such treaties.  This is a valuable primer for those involved in tax treaty interpretation and negotiation.  The recently released Manual is provided as a reference link.

The present publication, entitled United Nations Manual for the Negotiation of Bilateral Tax Treaties between Developed and Developing Countries (the Manual), aims at strengthening the technical expertise of developing countries’ tax officials as regards the negotiation of tax treaties.

It provides practical guidance to treaty negotiators in developing countries, in particular those who use the United Nations Model Double Taxation Convention between Developed and Developing Countries (the UN Model).

This Manual constitutes an introductory guide to tax treaty negotiations and, as such, provides general explanations on the way treaty negotiations are conducted and on the issues that are typically addressed during these negotiations. While it seeks to identify important issues that treaty negotiators should be aware of, it does not attempt to provide an exhaustive analysis of these issues. When preparing for treaty negotiations, the user of this Manual will therefore often need to go beyond the explanations provided in these pages and to further research the issues that are identified therein. keeping in mind that the detailed Commentaries on the provisions of the United Nations Model Double Taxation Convention between Developed and Developing Countries and of the OECD Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital constitute the most authoritative source of information on the interpretation of these provisions.

Click to access manual-bilateral-tax-treaties-update-2019.pdf

OECD update: Digital tax, nexus…

The recently concluded G20 Leaders’ Summit continues to endorse the OECD’s digital project, which includes future debates on nexus allocations, profit allocations and minimum tax.

EY’s Global Tax Alert highlights these developments, as well as remind international tax colleagues to continually monitor these important developments.

Click to access 2019G_003186-19Gbl_G20%20Leaders%20endorse%20OECD%20plan%20re%20new%20intl%20tax%20rules.pdf

UAE: Economic substance

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) have enacted new economic substance requirements that entered into force at the end of April 2019.

In response to EU Code of Conduct Group (COCG) initiatives, the governments of Bahamas, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands (BVI), Cayman Islands, Guernsey, Isle of Man, Jersey, Mauritius and Seychelles introduced economic substance rules with effect from 1 January 2019. The rules are based on the guidance and requirements issued by the EU and the OECD, and are designed to ensure that companies operating in a low or no corporate tax jurisdiction have a substantial purpose other than tax reduction and an economic outcome that is aligned with value creation.  To align with the international standards, the UAE has now enacted substance rules.

To meet the economic substance requirement, companies will generally need to satisfy the following three tests:

  1. The company should be directed and managed in the UAE for the specific activity.
  2. The company’s CIGA should be performed in the UAE.
  3. The company should have an adequate level of qualified employees, premises and annual operating expenditures.

Companies with UAE operations, especially without adequate substance, should review the new rules or administrative penalties or reregistration.

EY’s Global Tax Alert provides additional details for reference.

Click to access 2019G_003050-19Gbl_UAE%20enacts%20economic%20substance%20rules.pdf

New Zealand DST: In play

Not awaiting the OECD’s proposals for which a Workplace will be delivered in 2020, implementation following that several years later, New Zealand seeks to propose a 2-3% Digital Services Tax (DST) in the interim.  Public comments will be accepted by July 18th. The Government discussion document and EY’s Global Tax Alert provide details, as referenced herein.

Discussion document highlights:

The Government is committed to ensuring everyone pays their fair share of tax, including digital multinationals. Achieving this will require changes to the current tax rules. There are two options for this:

  • The first option is to apply a separate digital services tax (DST) to certain digital transactions. A DST taxes at a low rate (for example, 2% to 3%) the gross turnover of certain highly digitalised businesses that are attributable to the country.
  • The other option is to change the current international income tax rules, which have been agreed to by countries (usually referred to as “the international tax framework”).

In summary, New Zealand is not patient to wait for OECD rules, wishes to implement a transition tax in the interim and plans to repeal this tax with the OECD solution when it becomes effective.

Click to access 2019G_002780-19Gbl_Indirect_New%20Zealand%20considers%20Digital%20Services%20Tax.pdf

Click to access 2019-dd-digital-economy.pdf

OECD Digital Tax: Consensus Solution?

On 31 May 2019, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) released its document Programme of Work to Develop a Consensus Solution to the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy (the Workplan).

The Workplan describes the planned approach for addressing the tax challenges of the digitalization of the economy that has been agreed upon by the 129 jurisdictions participating in the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS). The Workplan was approved at the 28-29 May plenary meeting of the BEPS Inclusive Framework, which brought together 289 delegates from 99 member countries and jurisdictions and 10 observer organizations.

A final report is envisioned for 2020, including:

Pillar One focuses on the allocation of taxing rights, and seeks to undertake a coherent and concurrent review of the profit allocation and nexus rules;

Pillar Two focuses on the remaining BEPS issues and seeks to develop rules that would provide jurisdictions with a right to “tax back” where other jurisdictions have not exercised their primary taxing rights or the payment is otherwise subject to low levels of effective taxation.

Under Pillar One, the first option (i) Modified Residual Profit-Split method would allocate to market jurisdictions a portion of an MNE group’s non-routine profit that reflects the value created in markets that is not recognised under the existing profit allocation rules, or (ii) the fractional apportionment method involves the determination of the amount of profits subject to the new taxing rights without making any distinction between routine and non-routine profit, or (iii) distribution-based approached that would provide a baseline profit attributable to marketing, distribution, and user-related activities.  The concept of losses is also to be recognized in the relevant model.

 

As stated in the workplace, the real risk is that “A further issue is the recognition that if the Inclusive Framework does not deliver a comprehensive consensus-based solution within the agreed G20 time frame, there is a risk that more jurisdictions will adopt uncoordinated unilateral tax measures.”

Additionally, the current workplace is focused on digital tax, although some concepts may creep into discussions of income tax.

A reference to the Workplan is provided for reference.

 

Click to access programme-of-work-to-develop-a-consensus-solution-to-the-tax-challenges-arising-from-the-digitalisation-of-the-economy.pdf

India PE: Profit proposal

India’s Central Board of Direct Taxes has published a report for comments, due by May 18th.

The Committee has recommended a mixed or balanced approach (“fractional apportionment”) that allocates profits between the jurisdiction where sales take place and the jurisdiction where supply is undertaken.  India’s position is that such approach is acceptable in other tax treaties.  However, the risk of double taxation is present if this approach is not adopted by other countries.  Additionally, the approach differs from the OECD approach, which then introduces more complexity for all multinationals with Indian operations.  

India is known for its long appeals, and different approaches to its fisc.  Accordingly this report should be reviewed, with a possibility to comment, prior to further actions.  This report, and methodologies, will also be closely followed by other countries in this complex and subjective area of PE profit allocations.

EY’s Global Tax Alert provides additional details, for reference.

Click to access 2019G_001978-19Gbl_TP_India%20-%20Proposal%20to%20amend%20PE%20profit%20attrib%20rules.pdf

OECD TP Guidelines

This 2017 edition of the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines incorporates the substantial revisions made in 2016 to reflect the clarifications and revisions agreed in the 2015 BEPS Reports on Actions 8-10 Aligning Transfer pricing Outcomes with Value Creation and on Action 13 Transfer Pricing Documentation and Country-by-Country Reporting. It also includes the revised guidance on safe harbours approved in 2013 which recognises that properly designed safe harbours can help to relieve some compliance burdens and provide taxpayers with greater certainty.

A link to the Guidelines is attached for reference.

http://www.oecd.org/tax/transfer-pricing/oecd-transfer-pricing-guidelines-for-multinational-enterprises-and-tax-administrations-20769717.htm

EU: Profit Split method

The EU Joint Transfer Pricing Forum recently published a paper illustrating when to use the profit split method (PSM) and how to accomplish the split of profits per the OECD Guidelines.  The report is linked as a reference.

The report is a complement to, and supports, the OECD Revised Guidelines on the application of the Transactional Profit Split Method issued in June 2018.

As this method is not simple, and is also a focus on transfer pricing issues in the US, this paper is valuable into the application and concepts of PSM.

 

Click to access report_on_the_application_of_the_profit_split_method_within_the_eu_en.pdf

US developments/OECD toolkit

Recent international tax developments include the following:

  • OECD is progressing on a Digital Strategy, with planned consensus in 2020 (hopefully separate countries will have added patience for a coordinated approach)
  • US Previously Taxed Income (PTI) regulations are due this summer/fall
  • Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) final regulations were issued, effective March 2019 and expanding the definition of “responsible person”
  • India and the US reached agreement to exchange Country-by-Country (CbC) reports, thus alleviating any need to provide separate India CbC reports for US taxpayers
  • OECD released a Beneficial Ownership Toolkit (reference attached) to assist developing countries in identification of ultimate beneficial owners

EY’s Global Tax Alert is also attached for reference.

Click to access beneficial-ownership-toolkit.pdf

Click to access 2019G_000806-19Gbl_Report%20on%20recent%20US%20international%20tax%20developments%20-%2022%20March%202019.pdf

OECD: Treaty abuse peer review report

The OECD recently published its peer review report on treaty shopping re: prevention of treaty abuse under the inclusive framework on BEPS Action 6.  A link to the document is included for reference.

Article 6 targeted treaty abuse; Action 15 introduced the multilateral instrument (MLI) to implement BEPS actions.  The MLI is the mechanism whereby countries are implementing the treaty-shopping minimum standard.

The first Peer Review shows the effectiveness of implementing the minimum standard for treaty abuse.  The intent of Action 6 is to stop treaty shopping in its entirety.

The treaty shopping minimum standard requires countries to include two components in their tax agreements; an express statement on non-taxation and one of three ways to address treaty-shopping.  The provisions require bilateral agreement.  The 2017 OECD Model Tax Convention includes the following express statement: “Intending to conclude a Convention for the elimination of double taxation with respect to taxes on income and on capital without creating opportunities for non-taxation or reduced taxation through tax evasion or avoidance…”

The three methods of addressing treaty shopping include;

  1. Principal Purpose Test (PPT) alone, or
  2. PPT with a simplified or detailed version of the Limitation on Benefits (LOB) rule, or
  3. Detailed LOB rule with a mechanism to deal with conduit arrangements.

As the MLI’s are agreed, it is important to understand the three methods above, and the express statement which includes reference to the elimination of double taxation, a concept which is sometimes ignored in the pursuit of perceived treaty / tax abuse.

 

https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/taxation/prevention-of-treaty-abuse-peer-review-report-on-treaty-shopping_9789264312388-en#page1

MLI: A New Year

As time for implementation of the Multilateral Instrument (“MLI”) draws near, it may be time to refresh the history and current status of this instrument.

Reference links are provided for The Multilateral Convention, Guidance for the Development of Synthesised Texts published by the OECD in November 2018,  and Status of the Parties to a MLI as of December 21, 2018.  An extract from the

An extract from the Synthesized Texts is provided as context:

This Guidance has been prepared to provide suggestions to Parties to the MLI for the development of documents they could produce to help users of the MLI to understand its effects on tax agreements it covers and modifies (the “Covered Tax Agreements”). The objective is to present in a single document and for each covered tax agreement: the text of a Covered Tax Agreement, including the text of relevant amending instruments; the elements of the MLI that have an effect on the Covered Tax Agreement as a result of the interaction of the MLI positions of its Contracting Jurisdictions; and information on the dates on which the provisions of the MLI have effect in each Contracting Jurisdiction for the Covered Tax Agreement. Such documents would be referred to as “synthesised texts”.

To ensure clarity and transparency for the application of the MLI, Parties that intend to develop documents setting out the impact of the MLI on their Covered Tax Agreements should be as consistent as possible. This Guidance sets out a suggested approach for the development of synthesised texts. The Guidance also suggests sample language that could be included in the synthesised texts. At this stage, the sample language includes: a sample general disclaimer on the synthesised texts; a sample disclaimer on the entry into effect of the provisions of the MLI; for each MLI Article, “sample boxes” of the provisions of the MLI that could modify the covered tax agreements; and sample footnote texts on the entry into effect of the provisions of the MLI.

As the New Year draws near from a personal perspective, it is also a New Year for birth of the MLI and its impact on worldwide tax treaties.

 

Click to access multilateral-convention-to-implement-tax-treaty-related-measures-to-prevent-BEPS.pdf

Click to access beps-mli-signatories-and-parties.pdf

Click to access beps-mli-guidance-for-the-development-of-synthesised-texts.pdf

OECD update: CbC reporting

OECD has updated guidelines for several aspects of Country-by-Country (CbC) reporting, including:

  • Dividends included in pre-tax book income
  • Definition of revenues and taxes paid
  • Aggregate data in one jurisdiction/eliminations
  • Accumulated earnings/loss
  • Treatment of major shareholdings / ownership by multiple groups
  • Short accounting periods
  • Parent surrogate filing

As the 2017 CbC report is almost due for US calendar-year taxpayers, it is imperative to review the OECD guidelines to ensure year-to-year consistency, with relevant statements attached for transparency.

A link to the guidelines is attached for reference.

Click to access guidance-on-the-implementation-of-country-by-country-reporting-beps-action-13.pdf

OECD peer reports: Valuable insights

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) on 30 August released a fourth round of stage 1 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Action 14 peer reports on improving tax dispute resolution mechanisms. The reports assess each country’s efforts to implement the Action 14 minimum standard.

Valuable insights from these reports can be gained, especially if a taxpayer is under audit where some of these questions/uncertainties may arise.  The peer reports are performed on a desk audit basis, with other parties comments considered by OECD.

Some insights are APA rollbacks, granting of MAP in all/certain transfer pricing cases, etc.  Reference links are provided.

Reports covering Australia, Ireland, Israel, Japan, Malta, Mexico, New Zealand and Portugalwere published.

http://www.oecd.org/tax/beps/oecd-releases-fourth-round-of-beps-action-14-peer-review-reports-on-improving-tax-dispute-resolution-mechanisms.htm

 

OECD: Financial instruments draft

Under the mandate of the Report on Actions 8-10 of the BEPS Action Plan (“Aligning Transfer Pricing Outcomes with Value Creation”), Working Party No. 6 (“WP6”) has produced a non-consensus discussion draft on financial transactions.

Comments are due by September 7, 2018.  The treasury function, guarantees, intra-group loans, cash pooling transactions and captive insurance are the broad agendas discussed.

The guidance is not intended to prevent countries from implementing approaches to address capital structure and interest deductibility under domestic legislation, nor does it seek to mandate accurate delineation under Chapter I as the only approach for determining whether purported debt should be respected as debt.

As this guidance is critical for establishing if an instrument is true debt, as well as transfer pricing implications for financial relationships, this discussion draft is critical to review and provide relevant comments.

The OECD’s discussion draft is referenced herein for review.

 

Click to access BEPS-actions-8-10-transfer-pricing-financial-transactions-discussion-draft-2018.pdf

OECD: New guidance on profit-split and hard-to-value intangibles

The OECD published the final report on revised guidance to apply the transactional profit split method, as part of BEPS Action 10.  This guidance provides the final text, based on comments received.

Additionally, OECD published final guidance for tax administrations for determining the proper approach to apply for hard-to-value intangibles.  This text is included as an annex to Chapter VI of the Transfer Pricing Guidelines.  This approach should promote consistency and, hopefully, minimize double taxation.

The text of these reports are provided for reference, as they are a must read for transfer pricing professionals.

Click to access revised-guidance-on-the-application-of-the-transactional-profit-split-method-beps-action-10.pdf

Click to access guidance-for-tax-administrations-on-the-application-of-the-approach-to-hard-to-value-intangibles-BEPS-action-8.pdf

%d bloggers like this: