The first one, which can be qualified as the “additive” approach, consists of the person making the search drawing up a list of third parties that are believed to carry out potentially comparable transactions. Information is then collected on transactions conducted by these third parties to confirm whether they are in effect acceptable comparables, based on the pre-determined comparability criteria. This approach arguably gives well-focused results – all the transactions retained in the analysis are carried out by well-known players in the taxpayer’s market. As indicated above, in order to ensure a sufficient degree of objectivity it is important that the process followed be transparent, systematic and verifiable. The “additive” approach may be used as the sole approach where the person making the search has knowledge of a few third parties that are engaged in transactions that are comparable to the examined controlled transaction. It is worth noting that the “additive” approach presents similarities with the approach followed when identifying internal comparables. In practice, an “additive” approach may encompass both internal and external comparables.
TPG2017 Chapter III paragraph 3.41
Category: A. Performing a comparability analysis, OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines (2017), TPG2017 Chapter III: Comparability Analysis | Tag: Additive approach, Cherry picking, Comparability analysis, Comparable search, Transparency, Transparent systematic and verifiable
« Prev |
Next » Related Guidelines
- TPG2022 Chapter III paragraph 3.41The first one, which can be qualified as the “additive” approach, consists of the person making the search drawing up a list of third parties that are believed to carry out potentially comparable transactions. Information is then collected on transactions conducted by these...
- TPG2022 Chapter III paragraph 3.45It would not be appropriate to give systematic preference to one approach over the other because, depending on the circumstances of the case, there could be value in either the “additive” or the “deductive” approach, or in a combination of both. The “additive”...
- TPG2022 Chapter III paragraph 3.44One advantage of the “deductive” approach is that it is more reproducible and transparent than the “additive”. It is also easier to verify because the review concentrates on the process and on the relevance of the selection criteria retained. On the other hand,...
- TPG2022 Chapter III paragraph 3.46The process followed to identify potential comparables is one of the most critical aspects of the comparability analysis and it should be transparent, systematic and verifiable. In particular, the choice of selection criteria has a significant influence on the outcome of the analysis...
- TPG2022 Chapter III paragraph 3.54Ensuring the needed level of transparency of comparability adjustments may depend upon the availability of an explanation of any adjustments performed, the reasons for the adjustments being considered appropriate, how they were calculated, how they changed the results for each comparable and how...
- TPG2022 Chapter III paragraph 3.47The need to adjust comparables and the requirement for accuracy and reliability are pointed out in these Guidelines on several occasions, both for the general application of the arm’s length principle and more specifically in the context of each method. To be comparable...
Related Case Law
- Panama vs “Construction S.A.”, December 2021, Administrative Tax Court, Case No TAT- RF-111 (112/2019)“Construction Service S.A.” is active in Design, Repair and Construction of buildings. During the FY 2011-2013 it paid for services – management services and construction services – rendered from related parties. Following an audit the tax authorities issued an assessment where payments for...