我國於2004年底完成「營利事業所得稅不合營業常規移轉訂價查核準則」之發布作業，其中內容對於預先訂價協議亦有詳細的規範，其目的在減少移轉訂價事後查核所引發的爭議及所造成的行政負擔。鑑於我國預先訂價協議制度，與其他先進國家及中國大陸之制度有很大的不同，因此，本研究透過國內外文獻及先進國家與我國對預先訂價協議處理之比較分析來檢視我國預先訂價協議制度可能遭遇的困難及解決之道，並對與中國大陸簽署雙邊APA之可行性加以探討。 / 本研究發現我國預先訂價協議制度和國外相比較有很大不同，其中包括設定苛刻及高門檻的申請條件、裁量權極大的初審機制、而無供雙向溝通之預備會談機制、亦無專設之小組專門處理APA之申請案、雙邊或多邊APA申請程序付之闕如，以及不能追溯以前年度尚未核定之案件等。這些不同，都將是日後推廣簽訂單邊、雙邊或多邊APA之障礙。 / In the end of the year 2004, our country issued “Regulations Governing Assessment of Profit-seeking Enterprise Income Tax on Non-arm’s Length Transfer Pricing (TP Regulations).” For the purposes of reducing the disputes and administrative burden caused by the post audits relating to transfer pricing issues, there are some provisions grouped into a proper chapter for regulating an APA program in TP Regulations. In view of the big differentials of the APA programs between in Taiwan and in some other progressed countries and in Mainland China, this study is expected to view and test our APA program to see if any difficulties to be encountered and resolved through comparing and analyzing domestic and foreign publications and also studies the possibilities to conclude bilateral APA with Mainland China. / This study lists some big differentials while comparing APA program in Taiwan with that in foreign countries. Such differentials include setting some conditions severe and high threshold for application, initial examination device solely controlled by tax authorities but no prefiling conferences for developing two ways’ communications, neither proper APA teams in a tax authority nor special procedures for dealing with bilateral and multilateral APA, as well as no rollback of transfer pricing method and etc. Those big differentials will limit the future development of unilateral, bilateral, and multilateral APA in Taiwan.

Transfer pricing compliance related issues continue to pose challenges to leaders of multinational entities (MNEs) and tax regulators. MNE leaders strive to mitigate the risks of non-compliance violations and double taxation, while tax regulators seek to minimize profit shifting and revenue losses. This multiple case study explored strategies for managing transfer pricing risks against the backdrop of various risks MNE leaders face for non-compliance violations. The cost contribution agreement theory served as the conceptual framework for this study. Data were collected from organizational documents and semistructured interviews conducted with 6 finance executives representing 2 multinational entities in the midwest and southwest regions of the United States who have implemented successful strategies to manage transfer pricing risks. Data were analyzed using Yin's multiple-step thematic analysis process. Following the thematic data analysis 5 themes emerged, including commitment to tax compliance, tax minimization, advance pricing agreement (APA), comparable uncontrolled price method (CUP), and cost plus method (CPM). MNE leaders favor commitment to tax compliance as an effective strategy as penalties for non-compliance increases risks to business functionality. The findings of this study may help business leaders to follow compliance procedures and adopt risk mitigation strategies, while also informing regulators to update tax regulations to reflect current economic realities. The findings of this study could result in positive social change through an enhanced governmental revenue that stimulates economic growth, improves productivity, and promotes technological innovations.

Vu la nature complexe de la matière fiscale et son lien étroit à un environnement évolutif, le litige entre contribuables et administration devient une réalité inéluctable. Aujourd’hui, la pratique fiscale révèle que la voie juridictionnelle n’est pas toujours la meilleure façon de satisfaire aux besoins des litigants. Sous cet angle, le fisc veut instaurer de nouveaux instruments de règlement du litige, dit modes amiables, pour des nouveaux rapports avec le contribuable. En effet, la DGI examine aujourd’hui les différentes dimensions de ses litiges avec les contribuables, dont le but est d’aboutir à une gestion participative. Pour ce faire, elle cherche à mettre en place une pratique qui fournit de nouvelles manières d’aborder les difficultés. Il s’agit d’une nouvelle approche qui se focalise sur les éléments les plus importants du litige, elle propose un mode de règlement amiable de style coopératif, visant d’abord à identifier les intérêts mutuels pour une solution consensuelle. Cette pratique non juridictionnelle du règlement de litige évolue très rapidement. Elle a suscité un débat passionnant au sein de la théorie du droit public, tant sur le plan du fond que sur le plan de la forme. Les spécialistes ont débattus en effet les différentes possibilités juridiques de l’intégrer dans les procédures et de la mettre en examen pour tester sa comptabilité avec le système fiscal. Au bout du compte, la pratique qui a été admise par la DGI est celle de règlement négocié du litige, aboutissant à une transaction. Cette évolution reflète la montée en puissance de l’autorité de la fonction consultative en matière fiscale. En pratique, cela entraîne l’invention des instruments administratifs ou juridiques propres à l’administration fiscale qui facilitent le mécanisme de règlement du litige. L’incorporation des pratiques amiables reconnaît l’intérêt croissant de faire face au litige, mais quelques améliorations restent encore à réaliser, car le mécanisme a besoin d’un appui législatif et juridique, mais aussi d’une véritable volonté d’éliminer tout litige de la part du contribuable. / Given the complex legal nature of the tax and its close connection to a changing environment in Morocco, the conflict between the tax administration and its users become an inescapable reality. The judicial process was and is the traditional tool to adjust, but the Moroccan tax practice today reveals that this route is not always the best way to meet the needs of litigants. From this angle, the Moroccan tax legislator wants to introduce new tax disputes resolution tools for new relations between the tax authorities and taxpayers. The Moroccan tax administration examines now the different dimensions of his disputes with the different categories of taxpayers. The long term goal is to achieve participatory management of disputes. To this end, the DGI seeks to put in place following the new instruments that provide new ways to see the disputes that may arise between different tax services and their users. The current approach focuses on the most important elements of the conflict between the administration of the taxpayer, and that impact on how to approach and manage. This approach offers alternative methods of settling tax disputes cooperative style first to identify mutual interests for a consensual solution. These non-judicial methods of settling tax disputes evolve very quickly in the Moroccan case. They aroused passionate debate in the theory of public law, both on the substance of the plan on the level of form. Moroccan specialists have indeed discussed the various legal possibilities of integrating them into the overall system of dispute resolution, which have been under investigation to test their compatibility with the tax system. The accepted and mastered by DGI modes are negotiated settlement of tax disputes techniques such as negotiation and transaction. Other collection methods and under different and innovative forms in tax matters are being explored to integrate into the system. This reflects the rise of the authority of the advisory function in tax matters. In practice, this leads to the invention of administrative or legal instruments to the tax authorities that facilitate dispute resolution mechanism. Thus, the incorporation of alternative dispute resolution recognizes the growing interest to deal with tax disputes, but some improvements are still to be made, since the mechanism needs a legislative and legal support in Morocco, but also a real willingness to eliminate tax disputes from Moroccan citizens.