OECD – COUNTRY-BY-COUNTRY REPORTING. HANDBOOK ON EFFECTIVE TAX RISK ASSESSMENT. Next year will be the first time that tax authorities around the world will receive information on large MNE groups with operations in their country, breaking down a group’s revenue, profits, tax and other attributes by tax jurisdiction. This information has never previously been available to tax authorities and represents a great opportunity for tax authorities to understand the structure of a group’s business in a way that has not been possible before. Country-by-Country Reporting (CbC Reporting) is one of the four minimum standards of the OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Project to which over 100 countries have committed, covering the tax residence jurisdictions of nearly all large MNE groups. And the pace of implementation of CbC Reporting is impressive. As of today, more than 55 jurisdictions have already implemented an obligation for relevant MNEs to file CbC Reports. Jurisdictions have also moved quickly to ensure that CbCRs can be exchanged between tax administrations. To date, 65 jurisdictions have signed the Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement and some jurisdictions have entered into bilateral Competent Authority Agreements to operationalise the exchange of CbCRs with specific jurisdictions. With nine months to go until the first CbC Reports are exchanged, over 1 000 exchange relationships between pairs of jurisdictions have already been created.


OECD – INTERNATIONAL COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE PROGRAMME. PILOT HANDBOOK. WORKING DOCUMENT. Introduction to the ICAP pilot 1. The International Compliance Assurance Programme (ICAP) is a programme for a multilateral cooperative risk assessment and assurance process. It is designed to be a swift and coordinated approach to providing multinational groups (MNE groups) willing to engage actively, openly and in a fully transparent manner with increased tax certainty with respect to certain of their activities and transactions, while identifying areas requiring further attention. ICAP does not provide an MNE group with legal certainty as may be achieved, for example, through an advance pricing agreement, but gives assurance where tax administrations participating in the programme consider a risk to be low. 2. This handbook contains information on a pilot for ICAP, which commences in January 2018 including tax administrations from eight jurisdictions (the participating tax administrations): Australia, Canada, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States.


OECD Economics Department Working Papers N. 1375: LOCAL TAXATION, LAND USE REGULATION, AND LAND USE. A SURVEY OF THE EVIDENCE. This paper surveys the theoretical and empirical research on the relationship between local taxation, land use regulation and land use patterns. The findings can be summarized as follows: 1) In more fiscally decentralized settings, sub-national land use regulation and fiscal policies encourage urban sprawl. In contrast, in more centralized settings, restrictive urban containment policies and a lack of local fiscal incentives for land development tend to generate housing shortages. 2) Certain fiscal instruments affect the type and composition of land development, e.g. the share of residential versus commercial development. Removing local fiscal incentives for certain property types reduces the amount of land allocated for that type and increases its price. 3) In more decentralized settings, local land use policies aimed at containing or modifying urban growth are ineffective since mobile individuals can circumvent local restrictions by sorting into nearby jurisdictions that offer the preferred combination of land consumption and public services. 4) Expanding transportation networks enables households and firms to move to suburban areas, prompting the central city population to shrink and encouraging sprawl, particularly near major highways. 5) In fiscally decentralized settings, sub-urbanization is associated with a growing political power of homeowners. Homeowners tend to get fiscal zoning policies enacted – mainly via minimum lot size restrictions – that selectively attract well-off local taxpayers. Fiscal zoning thus imposes barriers to local development and raises property values, while at the same time facilitating sprawl. Overall, fiscal policy and land use regulation strongly interact, and governments must align those policies carefully to achieve land-use objectives effectively.


IMF/OECD – UPDATE ON TAX CERTAINTY – IMF/OECD Report for the G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors. July 2018. 1. In response to the call from G20 Leaders, the OECD secretariat and IMF staff produced a comprehensive report on tax certainty (OECD/IMF Report on Tax Certainty, the “2017 Report”). This report identified the sources of uncertainty in tax matters and the various tools that taxpayers and governments could use to reduce it from the perspective of businesses and tax administrations in G20 and OECD countries. The G20 has asked for an update of the 2017 Report to be delivered in 2018. 2. The 2017 report highlighted that tax uncertainty creates a risk of discouraging investment. The OECD survey, for example, suggests that businesses find tax certainty in corporate tax and VAT important for investment and location decisions. The major drivers of tax uncertainty for businesses relate to uncertain tax administration practices, inconsistent approaches of different tax authorities in applying international tax standards, and issues associated with dispute resolution mechanisms. To enhance tax certainty, the report identifies a set of concrete and practical approaches and solutions. These include improving the clarity of legislation, increasing predictability and consistency of tax administration practices, effective dispute prevention, and robust dispute resolution mechanisms. While the 2017 report focused on tax certainty in G20 and OECD countries, it was recognized that it is important also for developing countries, even though the tools to enhance tax certainty in those countries would need to be assessed against their weaker enforcement and lower implementation capacities. 3. This update discusses what has happened since the 2017 report. It elaborates first on developments in OECD and G20 countries. Progress is reported on, for example, implementation of the OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Project and developments in dispute resolution, such as mutual agreement procedures (MAP) and arbitration. The update also reports on new initiatives, such as the OECD initiatives to mitigate uncertainty in tax treaties, the IMF initiative to address international taxation issues in its surveillance, developments in the treaty relief and compliance enhancement (TRACE) project, and the Forum on Tax Administration (FTA) initiative to improve risk assessment and audit processes. Finally, some initiatives are discussed that were not explicitly mentioned in the 2017 report, but which do matter for tax certainty, such as exchange of information, country-by-country reporting and OECD International VAT/GST Guidelines. 4. The importance of tax certainty for developing countries is reflected in some of the more granular data obtained from the OECD business survey of 2017. Moreover, a workshop in Tanzania in 2017 highlighted the importance of tax certainty for governments in developing countries. Several initiatives are discussed in this update that aim, among others, to enhance tax certainty in developing countries, such as toolkits by the Platform for Collaboration on Tax, Medium-Term Revenue Strategies, the wide array of IMF technical assistance in revenue mobilization (tax policy design, legal drafting, and tax administration), progress made with the tax administration diagnostic assessment tool (TADAT) and the joint OECD/UNDP program on Tax Inspectors Without Borders (TIWB).


OECD SECRETARY-GENERAL TAX REPORT TO G20 FINANCE MINISTERS AND CENTRAL BANK GOVERNORS. This report contains two parts. Part I is a report on the activities and achievements of the OECD’s tax agenda, and is made of two subparts: looking back at significant achievements and looking ahead at the further progress needed, in particular through the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS. Part II is a Progress Report to the G20 by the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes. JULY 2018. (…) Since 2008, the G20 has made the fight against international tax fraud and avoidance a priority. Thanks to the support of Leaders and Finance Ministers, major progress has been achieved, which has demonstrated that international cooperation, in a multilateral framework, can support and strengthen national sovereignty. Transparency has been improved and rules have been changed to realign the location of profits with the place where value is created. The time where multinational enterprises (MNEs) could use tax planning based on a lack of transparency, a lack of substance or the exploitation of cross-border loopholes is over.

OECD – Exchange of Information on Request. HANDBOOK FOR PEER REVIEWS 2016-2020

OECD – Exchange of Information on Request. HANDBOOK FOR PEER REVIEWS 2016-2020. The Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes is the multilateral framework within which work in the area of tax transparency and exchange of information is carried out by over 130 jurisdictions which participate in the work of the Global Forum on an equal footing.  The Global Forum is charged with in-depth monitoring and peer review of the implementation of the standards of transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes; being the standard of exchange of information on request (EOIR) and the standard of automatic exchange of information (AEOI). The EOIR standard is primarily reflected in the 2002 OECD Model Agreement on Exchange of Information on Tax Matters and its commentary, and in Article 26 of the OECD Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital and its commentary, as updated in 2012. The Global has received a mandate from the G20 to monitor and review the implementation of the OECD Standard on AEOI and to assist developing countries in identifying their needs for technical assistance and capacity building in order to participate in and benefit from AEOI. All members of the Global Forum, as well as jurisdictions identified by the Global Forum as relevant to its work, are being reviewed under the EOIR standard. A first cycle of EOIR reviews took place from 2010 until 2016. The second round of EOIR reviews is scheduled from 2016 until 2020 against an enhanced EOIR standard, embedded in the 2016 EOIR Terms of Reference. The work on AEOI aims at establishment of the monitoring, support and review processes to best ensure the effective implementation of the AEOI standard for an AEOI review of jurisdictions starting from 2020. The ultimate goal of these reviews is to help jurisdictions to effectively implement the international standards of transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes. All review reports are published once adopted by the Global Forum and they thus represent agreed Global Forum reports. For more information on the work of the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes, and for copies of the published review reports, please refer to www.oecd.org/tax/transparency. About this handbook This handbook is intended to assist the assessment teams and the reviewed jurisdictions that are participating in the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes (the Global Forum) peer reviews and non-member reviews on EOIR under the second round of reviews (2016-20).


The purpose of this chapter is to give an overview of some of the taxation issues for extractive industries in developing countries and the interactions between them, options available, and the likely effect of choosing such options in particular circumstances. This is intended to assist policy makers and administrators in developing countries as well as to provide information to other stakeholders. Background contained in this chapter will provide a broader context for viewing the overall issue of natural resource development and the specific issues addressed in more detail in additional chapters. The work covered by this and each of the additional specific-issue chapters stems from a mandate given by the United Nations Tax Committee to the Subcommittee on Extractives Industries Taxation Issues for Developing Countries to consider, report on and propose guidance on extractive industries taxation issues for developing countries, focusing on the most pressing issues where guidance from the Committee may most usefully assist developing countries. The work will seek to provide policy and administrative guidance at a very practical level. This chapter is intended to broadly identify issues of taxation of the extractive industries; address several of the most significant ones in short form; help build awareness; and, ultimately, along with the additional specific-issue chapters, assist those faced with these issues to make policy and administrative decisions in relation to them.

OECD – BEPS ACTIONS 8 – 10. Financial transactions 3 July- 7 September 2018

OECD – BEPS ACTIONS 8 – 10. Financial transactions. 3 July- 7 September 2018:  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. The first part of the discussion draft provides guidance on the application of the principles contained in Section D.1 of Chapter I of the Transfer Pricing Guidelines to financial transactions. In particular, Section B.1 of the discussion draft elaborates on how the accurate delineation analysis under Chapter I applies to the capital structure of an MNE within an MNE group. The discussion draft clarifies that the guidance included in this section does not prevent countries from implementing approaches to address capital structure and interest deductibility under their domestic legislation. Section B.2 outlines the economically relevant characteristics that inform the analysis of the terms and conditions of financial transactions. The second part of the discussion draft, contained in sections C, D and E, addresses specific issues related to the pricing of financial transactions such as treasury function, intra-group loans, cash pooling, hedging, guarantees and captive insurance. The discussion draft also includes a number of questions to commentators on which inputs from stakeholders will be particularly relevant to WP6 to further its work and prepare another discussion draft after considering the input received. Interested parties are invited to send their comments on this discussion draft, and to respond to the specific questions included in the boxes, by 7 September 2018 by email to TransferPricing@oecd.org in Word format (in order to facilitate their distribution to government officials). Comments in excess of ten pages should attach an executive summary limited to two pages. Comments should be addressed to the Tax Treaties, Transfer Pricing and Financial Transactions Division, OECD/CTPA. Please note that all comments received on this discussion draft 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 proposals 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. Introduction. 1. The purpose of the following sections is to provide guidance for determining whether the conditions of certain financial transactions between associated enterprises are consistent with the arm’s length principle. 2. Section B describes the application of the principles of Section D.1 of Chapter I to financial transactions. Section C provides guidance on determining the arm’s length conditions for treasury activities, including intra-group loans, cash pooling and hedging. Section D examines financial guarantees, and section E outlines the analysis of captive insurance companies.


Technical paper, 28 June 2018. The Global Revenue Statistics Database covers the countries and data from four Revenue Statistics publications, which are each published on an annual basis. These publications are produced to focus on domestic resource mobilisation in each of the four groups of countries. Box 1 provides further information about the individual publications and the regional partners involved in each. The four publications use the same classification system and methodology, as set out in the OECD Interpretative Guide (OECD, 2016). This technical paper provides a brief overview of the methodology used in the underlying regional and OECD databases to produce the four annual publications and the Global Revenue Statistics Database. Data collection, classification and sources The new Global Revenue Statistics Database covers 80 countries from around the world from 1990 to 2015. It draws on the four annual Revenue Statistics publications and includes 16 African countries, seven Asian countries, 25 countries from Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) and 35 OECD countries plus one non-OECD EU member (Lithuania) . Additionally, three unweighted country group averages are provided: the Africa (16) average, the LAC average and the OECD average. The OECD Interpretative Guide: definitions & tax classification All data in the Global Revenue Statistics Database are classified using the OECD classification of taxes set out in the Interpretative Guide. This ensures consistency across the countries included in the publication and provides a high granularity of tax revenue categories. The classification of tax revenues set out in the OECD Interpretative Guide has been in use since the 1970s and is an international reference for policy makers, academics and researchers.

OECD – Revised Guidance on the Application of the Transactional Profit Split Method

Revised Guidance on the Application of the Transactional Profit Split Method. INCLUSIVE FRAMEWORK ON BEPS: ACTIONS 10.  The guidance set out in this report responds to the mandate under Action 10 of the BEPS Action Plan, which required the development of: “… rules to prevent BEPS by engaging in transactions which would not, or would only very rarely, occur between third parties. This will involve adopting transfer pricing rules or special measures to: … (ii) clarify the application of transfer pricing methods, in particular profit splits, in the context of global value chains;…” The OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines have included guidance on the transactional profit split method since their first iteration in 1995. Since the revision to the Guidelines in 2010, the transactional profit split method has been applicable where it is found to be the most appropriate method to the case at hand. This basic premise is unchanged. However, this revised guidance, while not being prescriptive, clarifies and significantly expands the guidance on when a profit split method may be the most appropriate method. It describes presence of one or more of the following indicators as being relevant: Each party makes unique and valuable contributions; The business operations are highly integrated such that the contributions of the parties cannot be reliably evaluated in isolation from each other; The parties share the assumption of economically significant risks, or separately assume closely related risks. The guidance makes clear that while a lack of comparables is, by itself, insufficient to warrant the use of the profit split method, if, conversely, reliable comparables are available it is unlikely that the method will be the most appropriate. The revised text also expands the guidance on how the profit split method should be applied, including determining the relevant profits to be split, and appropriate profit splitting factors. Sixteen examples are included in the revised guidance to illustrate the principles discussed in the text, and demonstrate how the method might be applied in practice. These will be included in Annex II to Chapter II of the Guidelines. June 2018.