A is a domestic manufacturer of timing mechanisms for mass- market clocks. A sells this product to its foreign subsidiary B. A earns a 5% gross profit mark up with respect to its manufacturing operation. X, Y, and Z are independent domestic manufacturers of timing mechanisms for mass- market watches. X, Y, and Z sell to independent foreign purchasers. X, Y, and Z earn gross profit mark ups with respect to their manufacturing operations that range from 3% to 5%. A accounts for supervisory, general, and administrative costs as operating expenses, and thus these costs are not reflected in cost of goods sold. The gross profit mark ups of X, Y, and Z, however, reflect supervisory, general, and administrative costs as part of costs of goods sold. Therefore, the gross profit mark ups of X, Y, and Z must be adjusted to provide accounting consistency.
TPG2017 Chapter II paragraph 2.59
Category: D. Cost plus method, OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines (2017), Part II Traditional transaction method, TPG2017 Chapter II: Transfer Pricing Methods | Tag: Accounting consistency, Comparability adjustments, Cost plus method, Example - cost plus method accounting for general cost, Transfer pricing methods
« Prev |
Next » Related Guidelines
- TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.60Company C in country D is a 100% subsidiary of company E, located in country F. In comparison with country F, wages are very low in country D. At the expense and risk of company E, television sets are assembled by company C....
- TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.112A similar approach may be required when there are differences in functions performed by the parties being compared. Assume that the facts are the same as in the example at paragraph 2.44 except that it is the comparable independent enterprises that perform the...
- TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.58No general rule can be set out that deals with all cases. The various methods for determining costs should be consistent as between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions and consistent over time in relation to particular enterprises. For example, in determining the appropriate...
- TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.59A is a domestic manufacturer of timing mechanisms for mass- market clocks. A sells this product to its foreign subsidiary B. A earns a 5% gross profit mark up with respect to its manufacturing operation. X, Y, and Z are independent domestic manufacturers...
- TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.53While precise accounting standards and terms may vary, in general the costs and expenses of an enterprise are understood to be divisible into three broad categories. First, there are the direct costs of producing a product or service, such as the cost of...
- TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.46The cost plus mark-up of the supplier in the controlled transaction should ideally be established by reference to the cost plus mark-up that the same supplier earns in comparable uncontrolled transactions (“internal comparable”). In addition, the cost plus mark-up that would have been...
- TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.49The cost plus method presents some difficulties in proper application, particularly in the determination of costs. Although it is true that an enterprise must cover its costs over a period of time to remain in business, those costs may not be the determinant...
- TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.52Another important aspect of comparability is accounting consistency. Where the accounting practices differ in the controlled transaction and the uncontrolled transaction, appropriate adjustments should be made to the data used to ensure that the same type of costs are used in each case...
- South African Revenue Service releases comprehensive Interpretation Note on intra-group loansThe South African Revenue Service (SARS) has published a comprehensive Interpretation Note on intra-group loans. The note provides taxpayers with guidance on the application of the arm’s length principle in the context of the pricing of intra-group loans. The pricing of intra-group loans...
- 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
- Poland vs C. spółka z o.o. , June 2022, Administrative Court, Case No I SA/Go 103/22C. spółka z o.o. is part of a larger group and mainly (95%) sells products (metal containers) and related services to related parties. According to its transfer pricing documentation the “cost-plus” method had been used to determine the prices of products sold to...
- Germany vs “Lender GmbH”, June 2021, Bundesfinanzhof, Case No IR 4/17At issue in this case was the choice of transfer pricing method for determining the arm’s length price of a intra-group loan. Lender GmbH is held by a Dutch holding company. The holding company is also the sole shareholder of Lender GmbH’s sister...
- Latvia vs „RĪGAS DZIRNAVNIEKS”, December 2021, Court of Appeals, Case No A420275316, SKA-103/2021At issue in the case of „RĪGAS DZIRNAVNIEKS” was if the interest rates charged on loans between related parties were at arm’s length. Judgement of the Court of Appeals The Court remanded the case to the Regional Court for a new hearing. Excerpts...
- Aruba vs PriceSmart Inc., September 2019, Council for Tax Affairs of Aruba, Case No 2010/45712PriceSmart Inc (PSMT) operates a retail chain including approximately 25 department stores in the Caribbean and Central America. PSMT’s local branch had recognised losses in their profit tax returns for the years 2001 to 2006. In 2009, the tax authorities audited the tax...