Differences in the specific characteristics of property or services often account, at least in part, for differences in their value in the open market. Therefore, comparisons of these features may be useful in delineating the transaction and in determining the comparability of controlled and uncontrolled transactions. Characteristics that may be important to consider include the following: in the case of transfers of tangible property, the physical features of the property, its quality and reliability, and the availability and volume of supply; in the case of the provision of services, the nature and extent of the services; and in the case of intangible property, the form of transaction (e.g. licensing or sale), the type of property (e.g. patent, trademark, or know-how), the duration and degree of protection, and the anticipated benefits from the use of the property. For further discussion of some of the specific features of intangibles that may prove important in a comparability analysis involving transfers of intangibles or rights in intangibles, see Section D.2.1 of Chapter VI.
TPG2017 Chapter I paragraph 1.107
Category: D. Guidance for applying the arm's length principle, OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines (2017), TPG2017 Chapter I: The Arm's Length Principle | Tag: Characteristics of property/service, Comparability analysis, Expected benefits, Functional analysis, Know-how, Patents, Trademark (trade name)
« Prev |
Next » Related Guidelines
- TPG2022 Chapter I paragraph 1.128Depending on the transfer pricing method, this factor must be given more or less weight. Among the methods described at Chapter II of these Guidelines, the requirement for comparability of property or services is the strictest for the comparable uncontrolled price method. Under...
- TPG2022 Chapter I paragraph 1.129In practice, it has been observed that comparability analyses for methods based on gross or net profit indicators often put more emphasis on functional similarities than on product similarities. Depending on the facts and circumstances of the case, it may be acceptable to...
- TPG2022 Chapter VI paragraph 6.117Set out below is a description of some of the specific features of intangibles that may prove important in a comparability analysis involving transfers of intangibles or rights in intangibles. The following list is not exhaustive and in a specific case consideration of...
- TPG2022 Chapter I paragraph 1.131The existence of a cycle (e.g. economic, business, or product cycle) is one of the economic circumstances that should be identified. See paragraph 3.77 in relation to the use of multiple year data where there are cycles....
- TPG2022 Chapter VI paragraph 6.128In conducting a comparability analysis involving the transfer of intangibles or rights in intangibles, the existence of risks related to the likelihood of obtaining future economic benefits from the transferred intangibles must be considered, including the allocation of risk between the parties which...
- TPG2022 Chapter VI paragraph 6.20Know-how and trade secrets are proprietary information or knowledge that assist or improve a commercial activity, but that are not registered for protection in the manner of a patent or trademark. Know-how and trade secrets generally consist of undisclosed information of an industrial,...
- TPG2022 Chapter VI paragraph 6.133This chapter makes it clear that in matters involving the transfer of intangibles or rights in intangibles it is important not to simply assume that all residual profit, after a limited return to those providing functions, should necessarily be allocated to the owner...
- TPG2022 Chapter I paragraph 1.38Independent enterprises, when evaluating the terms of a potential transaction, will compare the transaction to the other options realistically available to them, and they will only enter into the transaction if they see no alternative that offers a clearly more attractive opportunity to...
- 2018: ATO Taxpayer Alert on Mischaracterisation of activities or payments in connection with intangible assets (TA 2018/2)The ATO is currently reviewing international arrangements that mischaracterise intangible assets[1] and/or activities or conditions connected with intangible assets. The concerns include whether intangible assets have been appropriately recognised for Australian tax purposes and whether Australian royalty withholding tax obligations have been met. Arrangements...
- EU JTPF, March 2017, Report on the Use of Comparables in the EUIn March 2017 the JTPF agreed the Report on the Use of Comparables in the EU. The report establishes best practices and pragmatic solutions by issuing various recommendations for both taxpayers and tax administrations in the EU and aims at increasing in practice...
Related Case Law
- India vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.Maruti Suzuki India manufactures and sells cars and spare parts. A license agreement had been entered with the group parent for use of licensed information and trademark for the manufacture and sale of the products. Hence, Maruti Suzuki paid royalties to the parent for trademark...
- Israel vs Sephira & Offek Ltd and Israel Daniel Amram, August 2021, Jerusalem District Court, Case No 2995-03-17While living in France, Israel Daniel Amram (IDA) devised an idea for the development of a unique and efficient computerized interface that would link insurance companies and physicians and facilitate financial accounting between medical service providers and patients. IDA registered the trademark “SEPHIRA”...
- Denmark vs Maersk Oil and Gas A/S (TotalEnergies EP Danmark A/S), September 2023, Supreme Court, Case No BS-15265/2022-HJR and BS-16812/2022-HJRMaersk Oil and Gas A/S (later TotalEnergies EP Danmark A/S) continued to make operating losses, although the group’s combined oil and gas operations were highly profitable. Following an audit of Maersk Oil, the tax authorities considered that three items did not comply with...
- Denmark vs EAC Invest A/S, October 2021, High Court, Case No SKM2021.705.OLRIn 2019, the Danish parent company of the group, EAC Invest A/S, had been granted a ruling by the tax tribunal that, in the period 2008-2011, due to, inter alia, quite exceptional circumstances involving currency restrictions in Venezuela, the parent company should not...