|
As the
saying goes, “All is fair in love and war.” But this may
not be necessarily so when it comes to taxation. In
taxation, parties attached to each other may agree on
terms that may not be fair to the other, even if such
arrangement is for the good of both. Perhaps, this is
what you call true love—common good over individual
interest. This is the norm of loving in multinational
enterprises. This is what you call love for transfer
pricing.
Transfer
pricing is becoming an important issue for many
companies, whether Philippine-based, or foreign- based.
And the requirement for a more transparent reporting has
led taxing authorities to institute the necessary
regulations to combat this growing concern. The problems
posed by transfer pricing and the rules governing the
subject are quite complex. This article is simply
intended to give an overview of the basics of transfer
pricing.
Transfer
pricing refers to the pricing of transactions between
related parties or members of an associated enterprise.
It generally relates to cross-border transactions which
may result in the transfer of income or expenses between
or among related entities located in different
jurisdictions. As the transfer price is arbitrary,
depending as it does only on agreements between the
controlled or related parties, it might not reflect the
proper valuation as if it had been between independent
parties (i.e., uncontrolled). Thus, intentionally or
unintentionally, it may result in the reduction of tax
liabilities in certain jurisdictions or an increase in
income in other jurisdictions.
The tax
concerns become more serious, considering the
differences in the tax rules and tax rates prevailing in
the different countries where related entities operate.
Ideally,
all charges should be at an arm’s length standard. That
is, transfer prices between related parties should be
the same as the price that would prevail in a
transaction between independent or unrelated parties.
Under such circumstances, profits will be allocated to
each entity commensurate to its role in the production
and distribution process—the functions they perform, the
assets employed, and the risks borne. This, in turn,
would provide the government with the proper basis on
which the taxes would be based on and not be deprived of
the much-needed taxes it needs to perform its mandate of
promoting the general welfare and well-being of its
citizenry.
In the
Philippines Section 50 of the National Internal Revenue
Code of 1997 provides the legal basis to address
transfer-pricing arrangements. Section 50 provides: In
the case of two or more organizations, trades or
businesses (whether or not incorporated and whether or
not organized in the Philippines) owned or controlled
directly or indirectly by the same interests, the
commissioner is authorized to distribute, apportion or
allocate gross income or deductions between or among
such organization, trade or business, if he determines
that such distribution, apportionment or allocation is
necessary in order to prevent evasion of taxes or
clearly to reflect the income of any such organization,
trade or business.
The
purpose of Section 50 is to ensure that taxpayers
clearly reflect their income attributable to controlled
transactions, and to prevent the avoidance and evasion
of taxes with respect to such transactions. Furthermore,
it places a controlled taxpayer on tax parity with an
uncontrolled taxpayer by determining the true taxable
income of the controlled taxpayer.
In
determining the true taxable income of a controlled
taxpayer, the standard to be applied in every case is
that of a taxpayer dealing at arm’s length with an
uncontrolled taxpayer. The arm’s length determination
requires comparability with the transaction of an
unrelated party. To be comparable means that none of the
differences (if any) between the situations being
compared could materially affect the condition being
examined in the methodology (e.g., price or margin), or
that reasonably accurate adjustments can be made to
eliminate the effects of any such differences.
In sum,
as a symbiotic relationship exists between the
government and the taxpayers, with the reciprocal
obligation of support and protection, it is important to
have a harmonious relationship. And just like in love,
it is important to put the well-being of both parties
ahead of oneself, so that neither party will have a
taxed heart.
The author is an associate of BDB Law. If you have any
comments or questions concerning the article, you can
e-mail the author at
alvin.c.go@bdblaw.com.ph
or call 856-2952. |