TPG2022 Chapter VI paragraph 6.161

Category: D. Determining arm’s length conditions in cases involving intangibles | Tag: , , , , , , , ,
« | »

It may be relevant in assessing the reliability of a valuation model to consider the purposes for which the valuation was undertaken and to examine the assumptions and valuation parameters in different valuations undertaken by the taxpayer for non-tax purposes. It would be reasonable for a tax administration to request an explanation for any inconsistencies in the assumptions made in a valuation of an intangible undertaken for transfer pricing purposes and valuations undertaken for other purposes. For example, such requests would be appropriate if high discount rates are used in a transfer pricing analysis when the company routinely uses lower discount rates in evaluating possible mergers and acquisitions. Such requests would also be appropriate if it is asserted that particular intangibles have short useful lives but the projections used in other business planning contexts demonstrate that related intangibles produce cash flows in years beyond the “useful life” that has been claimed for transfer pricing purposes. Valuations used by an MNE group in making operational business decisions may be more reliable than those prepared exclusively for purposes of a transfer pricing analysis.






Related Guidelines

  1. TPG2022 Chapter VI paragraph 6.176In some circumstances, particular intangibles may contribute to the generation of cash flow in years after the legal protections have expired or the products to which they specifically relate have ceased to be marketed. This can be the case in situations where one...
  2. TPG2022 Chapter VI paragraph 6.175The projected useful life of particular intangibles is a question to be determined on the basis of all of the relevant facts and circumstances. The useful life of a particular intangible can be affected by the nature and duration of the legal protections...
  3. TPG2022 Chapter VI paragraph 6.174Valuation techniques are often premised on the projection of cash flows derived from the exploitation of the intangible over the useful life of the intangible in question. In such circumstances, the determination of the actual useful life of the intangible will be one...
  4. TPG2022 Chapter VI paragraph 6.164In evaluating financial projections, the source and purpose of the projections can be particularly important. In some cases, taxpayers will regularly prepare financial projections for business planning purposes. It can be that such analyses are used by management of the business in making...
  5. TPG2022 Chapter VI paragraph 6.157Valuation techniques that estimate the discounted value of projected future cash flows derived from the exploitation of the transferred intangible or intangibles can be particularly useful when properly applied. There are many variations of these valuation techniques. In general terms, such techniques measure...
  6. TPG2022 Chapter VI paragraph 6.154Where valuation techniques are utilised in a transfer pricing analysis involving the transfer of intangibles or rights in intangibles, it is necessary to apply such techniques in a manner that is consistent with the arm’s length principle and the principles of these Guidelines....
  1. Report on the Application of Economic Valuation Techniques (2017)The Study on the Application of Economic Valuation Techniques for Determining Transfer Prices of Cross Border Transactions between Members of Multinational Enterprise Groups in the EU provides an overview on how valuation techniques can practically and most efficiently be used for transfer pricing...

Related Case Law

  1. Portugal vs “B Restructuring LDA”, February 2021, CAAD, Case No 255/2020-TB Restructuring LDA was a distributor within the E group. During FY 2014-2016 a number of manufacturing entities within the group terminated distribution agreements with B Restructuring LDA and subsequently entered into new Distribution Agreements, under similar terms, with another company of the...
  2. Bulgaria vs KEY END ES ENERGY, April 2020, Supreme Administrative Court, Case No 4972Key End Es Energy concluded a share purchase and sale agreement of 20.12.2012 with a related party LUKERG BULGARIA GmbH, under which KEY END EU ENERGY transferred to its parent company LUKERG BULGARIA GmbH the ownership of the shares in eight subsidiaries. The...
  3. US vs TBL LICENSING LLC, January 2022, U.S. Tax Court, Case No. 158 T.C. No 1 (Docket No. 21146-15)A restructuring that followed the acquisition of Timberland by VF Enterprises in 2011 resulted in an intra-group transfer of ownership to valuable intangibles to a Swiss corporation, TBL Investment Holdings. The IRS was of the opinion that gains from the transfer was taxable....
  4. France vs SA SACLA, October 2022, Conseil d’État, Case No. 457695 (ECLI:FR:CECHS:2022:457695.20221027)SA SACLA, which trades in protective clothing and footwear as well as small equipment, was subject of a tax audit covering the FY 2007, 2008 and 2009. In a proposed assessment issued in December 2011, the tax authorities increased its taxable income on...
  5. Denmark vs “IP ApS”, March 2023, Tax Tribunal, Case No. SKM2023.135.LSRThe case concerned the valuation of intangible assets transferred from a Danish company to an affiliated foreign company. The Tax Tribunal basically agreed with the valuation of the expert appraisers according to the DCF model, but corrected the assumptions with regard to revenue...