In this thesis the definition of intangible property contained in the Transfer Pricing Guidelines is analysed with the aim of exploring whether it is satisfactory or not. Furthermore, the need to have a definition of intangible property for transfer pricing purposes at all is explored. To properly allocate income and expenditure relating to intangible property one needs to first establish who is the owner of the property. In the light of this the economic ownership is explored as well. Two countries, the United States and the United Kingdom, are chosen for a comparative analysis to see how their national legislation is designed and what advantages or disadvantages they might have. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has defined intangible property by giving examples of assets that shall be considered as intangible. As regards the ownership issue the guidance is scarce and questions such as what constitutes economic ownership and who will have a right in the future return of an intangible asset still remain. The United States and the United Kingdom, both members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, have defined intangible property and handled the issue of ownership in two different ways. Ways that do not always coincide with the Transfer Pricing Guidelines. The conclusions of this thesis are mainly that the current definition of intangible property contained in the Transfer Pricing Guidelines is not satisfactory and that it needs to been changed. The author recommends that more focus is put on the third party's willingness to pay for the property in question. Although the definition is found to be unsatisfactory the author's conclusion is that a uniform definition of intangible property is necessary to achieve harmonisation and certainty. Furthermore the concept of economic ownership needs to be clarified.

Humankapital har ökat i betydelse då allt fler företag har blivit så kallade kunskapsföretag, vilka inriktar sig på att skapa värde genom att endast erbjuda personalens kunskap, kompetens och erfarenhet. Humankapitalet menar forskare, är en tillgång för företaget och borde därför också redovisas som en sådan, precis som företagets andra tillgångar. Dock får inte humankapital i dagens läge tas upp som en tillgång i den finansiella rapporten. Det redovisas därför ofta frivilligt av företagen i hållbarhetsredovisningar. Kunskapsföretagen borde enligt forskare vara de som redovisar absolut mest information om sitt humankapital, då det är företags viktigaste tillgång. Forskare menar också att företagens storlek är en faktor som påverkar hur mycket humankapital som redovisas. Är detta verkligheten? Syftet med denna uppsats är att undersöka om det finns några skillnader i hur kunskapsföretag och industriföretag redovisar sitt humankapital i sin årsredovisning samt om företagets storlek påverkar mängden humankapital som återfinns i företagens årsredovisningar. Metoden som används var en kvalitativ dokumentundersökning. I empiri och analys kapitlet finns företagssammanfattningar och vad Scoreboarden gav för resultat. Resultatet redovisas utefter Scoreboardens olika kategorier: anställda, anställdas utbildning, anställdas välmående och motivation, övrig kvalitativ information, styrelse och ledning. Resultatet analyseras också utefter kategori för att underlätta överskådligheten och analysen. Vi delar sedan upp Scoreboarden i två övergripande kategorier: ”Anställda” och ”Ledande befattningshavare”. En analys görs av dessa övergripande kategorier. ”Anställda” består av kategorierna: anställda, anställdas utbildning, anställdas välmående och motivation samt övrig kvalitativ information. ”Ledande befattningshavare” består av: styrelse och ledning. Sist analyseras skillnaden mellan företagens totala redovisning av humankapital. Slutsatser som kan dras utifrån undersökningen är att det finns en skillnad mellan kunskapsföretag och industriföretag om vi bryter ner informationen. Kunskapsföretagen redovisar mer information om ”Anställda”, medan industriföretagen redovisar mer om ”Ledande befattningshavare”. Studeras den totala bilden är skillnaderna mindre. Dock finner vi att industriföretagens redovisning av humankapital påverkas av företagets storlek, medan kunskapsföretaget inte uppvisar en sådan trend. / Human capital has become increasingly important as more companies have become so called knowledge-based enterprises, which focuses on creating value by offering their staff knowledge, skills and experience. The human capital is, according to scientists, an asset to the company and should therefore be recognized as such, just like the company's other assets. However, human capital cannot be recognized as an asset in the financial report. Firms therefore often report this information voluntarily in sustainability reports. According to researchers, the knowledge companies should be the one that presents the most information regarding its human capital, since it is such a company's most important asset. Researchers also believe that corporate size is a factor that affects how much human capital is reported. Is this reality? The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether there are any differences in how knowledge- and industry enterprises reports its human capital in its annual report, and if the company's size affects the amount of human capital that can be found in corporate annual reports. The method used was a qualitative document examination. In the empirical evidence and analysis chapter, the reader can find company summaries and the results the scoreboard gave us. The results are reported according to the Scoreboards different categories: employees, employee training, employee well-being and motivation, other qualitative information, the board and management. The results are also analyzed by category to facilitate transparency and the analysis. We then divided the scoreboard into two overall categories: "Employees" and "Senior Management". An analysis is made of these overall categories. "Employee" is composed of the categories: employees, employee training, employee well-being and motivation and other qualitative information. "Senior management" consists of: Board and management. Finally, the difference between a company's overall human capital reporting is analyzed. The conclusions that can be drawn from the survey are that there is a difference between knowledge- and industry enterprises when they are broken down by categories. Knowledge Enterprises presents more information about "Employees", while industrial companies report more about "Senior Management". Looking at the total picture, the differences are minor; however, we find that the industrial firms' reporting of human capital is influenced by firm size, while the knowledge company does not exhibit such a trend.

In the knowledge economy, the 'creative industries' are recognised as a new paradigm. They are industries which use creativity as an intangible asset to generate wealth. The creative industries are described as 'evolving' and their outcomes frequently categorised as 'intangibles'. The thesis outlines what I term a creative industries approach to the engagement of visual artists with industry. The artist-in-industry program, a component of New Possibilities for Paper, was established with an explicit brief to generate creative products and contained an implicit agenda to breed intellectual capital. It was conceived as a means of crossfertilising hitherto siloed sectors -- an arts environment with entrenched attitudes towards the subsidy, proprietorship and authority of creativity and the traditionally conservative paper industry. Establishing creative industries characteristics and indicators to describe and measure creative industries operation in this program required careful consideration, with the characteristics and indicators selected able to recognise trends or changes. The analysis of the seven partnerships confirmed that the artistin-industry program is a creative industries approach upon which future programs between visual artists and the paper industry could be constructed. The research found that the creative industries processes in most need of being addressed, if visual artists are to maximise their benefits, included an understanding and utilisation of intellectual property, knowledge of commercialisation processes and a positive attitude towards commercialisation. For paper companies that invest in R&D, there is recognition that potential tangible and intangible benefits can result from engaging in such partnerships. Additionally, a partnership in which the artist's role (or service) is focused on the industry's customers and contributes to employee knowledge was seen as being of greatest value to the paper industry.

This thesis analyses the Australian approach to taxation of goodwill and related intangibles. It asks the questions: 'Is the current Australian approach to taxation of goodwill coherent?'; and 'Could a different approach minimise any distortions?' The thesis identifies the increasing importance of goodwill and other intangible property in a modern information-based economy. It identifies benchmarks for a 'good' tax system ??? such as efficiency, simplicity, and equity. It emphasises the criteria of simplicity and efficiency but includes other criteria and specifically considers the issue of alignment of accounting and legal concepts. It concludes that the current misalignment makes it difficult for the tax system to deal with goodwill coherently. The thesis criticises the treatment of goodwill under various Australian taxes, including stamp duty; Goods and Services Tax; taxation of capital gains; and income tax. It specifically considers the treatment of intangible sources of goodwill and their relationship with goodwill itself. The discussion of income tax pays particular attention to the role of goodwill and other intangibles in international transfer pricing. The thesis draws conclusions about the treatment of goodwill in Australia and whether the Australian approach meets the benchmarks established at the outset. The thesis demonstrates that the current Australian approach leads, inter alia, to tax avoidance. The current approach also offends a number of other criteria of a 'good' system. The thesis considers the UK tax treatment of intangibles held by resident companies and considers this model for Australia. It also considers the abandoned 'Tax Value Method' previously proposed for Australia. From this and other material, it suggests possible new directions and an alternative approach to taxing goodwill in Australia. These include a consistent and coherent definition of goodwill for tax that is compatible with law and accounting. The thesis also urges the development of a consistent approach to taxing goodwill at both the state and federal levels; and suggests greater reliance on the existence of goodwill as a means to establish jurisdiction to impose tax in international tax situations.

Univ., Diss.--Würzburg, 2006.

WHU - Beisheim School of Management, Diss.--Vallendar, 2006.

Large multinational companies are regularly suspected of using transfer pricing of intangibles to shift profits from high- to low-tax jurisdictions. We study the optimal transfer prices while endogenizing the location choice of intangibles and considering spillovers. In line with the initial intuition, we find that multinationals locate their intangibles in low-tax jurisdictions and deploy royalty flows to minimize tax payments. However, if multinationals face a trade-off between tax minimization and efficient spillover internalization, the so-called "home bias" might occur. Then, for a large spillover, the intangible is optimally located in the high-tax domestic country. This leads to less severe investment distortions because the spillover is internalized. In addition, the model predicts that curtailing profit shifting possibilities can either harm or facilitate multinationals' overall investments. This depends heavily on unobservable factors such as the underlying accounting system. Therefore, our analysis highlights challenges for the anti-avoidance legislation of governments. / Series: WU International Taxation Research Paper Series

In the new economy, intangible assets have become the main creators of value to many firms. However, the valuation of these assets in the accounting framework raises several issues with respect to identification, measurement and control. In this paper the valuation, measurement and recognition of intangible assets and their impact on the financial statements are presented, analyzing the asymmetry in the allocation of resources in the equity market, the growth of investments in intangible assets and the market value of the digital economy. In a group of uruguayan companies arriving at a set of initial findings for the cases. We understand the need to review and amend the rules for the treatment of intangibles, seeking to integrate more sophisticated in IT. We also understand that the rules should provide more detailed guidance on disclosure for intangible and costs-benefits for companies (from the perspective of the capital market and investors). / En la nueva economía, los activos intangibles se han convertido en los principales creadores de valor para un gran número de empresas. Sin embargo, la valoración de estos activos en el marco contable plantea varios problemas con respecto a su identificación, medición y control. En el presente trabajo, se exponen los criterios de valuación de activos intangibles y sus consecuencias en los estados financieros, para lo cual se ha analizado la asimetría en la asignación de recursos en el mercado de capitales, el crecimiento de las inversiones en intangibles y el valor de mercado de las empresas en la economía digital. Se explora en un grupo de empresas uruguayas las cuestiones discutidas, a partir de lo cual se arriba a un conjunto de conclusiones iniciales para los casos de estudio. Entendemos que es necesario revisar y modificar las normas para el tratamiento de intangibles, de modo que se integre aspectos más sofisticados en cuanto a TI. Asimismo, entendemos que las normas deben proporcionar una orientación más detallada sobre revelación de información para intangibles y de su relación costo-beneficio para las empresas (desde la perspectiva del mercado de capitales y de los inversores).

In the knowledge-based economy, the wealth creation is associated with the development and maintenance of competitive advantages based on intangible elements. Faced with this growing strategic importance of intangibles, it seems necessary that companies disclosure information on those elements. However, although companies disclosure information increasingly on a voluntary basis, they are still many which merely comply with legal requirements, omitting highly relevant information on their intangible resources. The objective of this paper is to have data on what level of interest in providing this information by Spanish companies. Therefore, a review of the most important literature about intangibles disclosure in Spanish companies is shown. / En la actual economía del conocimiento, la creación de riqueza está asociada con el desarrollo de ventajas competitivas basadas en elementos intangibles. Ante esta creciente importancia estratégica de los intangibles, parece necesario que las empresas presenten información sobre tales elementos. Sin embargo, aunque cada vez más las compañías presentan información adicional de forma voluntaria, aún siguen siendo muchas las que se limitan a cumplir las exigencias legales, omitiendo información de gran relevancia relativa a sus recursos intangibles. Nuestro objetivo es conocer el nivel de interés por parte de las empresas españolas en suministrar este tipo de información. Para ello, en este trabajo se revisa los principales estudios existentes sobre divulgación voluntaria de información relativa a elementos intangibles por parte de las empresas españolas.

La presente tesis de Magíster de la Universidad de Chile, presenta la aplicación de un modelo de valorización de activos intangibles, en particular los relacionados con el capital intelectual, entendido como el conjunto de aportaciones no materiales que en la era de la información constituyen el principal activo de las empresas del tercer milenio (Brooking, 1997). Este trabajo busca complementar las evaluaciones contables – financieras en el área de operaciones de la empresa CIAL Alimentos S.A., correspondientes a los periodos 2006, 2007 y 2008, utilizando una novedosa metodología, pionera para el área de recursos humanos a nivel nacional, mediante la instauración de un indicador que permita evaluar el crecimiento del valor de la empresa mediante el alineamiento y la gestión sobre sus recursos intangibles. El holding nacional CIAL Alimentos S.A, es la empresa más importante del país en el rubro de fabricación y comercialización de productos cárnicos, con un 40% de participación de mercado y una dotación de 1.700 personas. Destacan sus marcas San Jorge, La Preferida, Zwan y JK. Su misión explicita la búsqueda del liderazgo en la operación industrial y sus compromisos se enfocan a conseguir un clima laboral positivo. Su área de operaciones posee la mayor dotación de la empresa con 800 personas, ella se interrelaciona con proveedores, con todas las áreas internas, además de clientes finales, siendo un área que impacta fuertemente en los resultados de la organización. Ha sufrido múltiples cambios en el capital humano en los últimos tres años, destacando la alta rotación ejecutiva; el cargo de gerente de operaciones no ha conseguido superar la barrera del año de permanencia y sus empleados fueron protagonistas de la huelga ocurrida el año 2008. Luego de una evaluación metodológica, fue elegido el Navegador Skandia, modelo de origen sueco que complementa y enriquece el tradicional enfoque económico-financiero, adicionándole la medición del capital clientes, el de procesos, el humano y el de renovación y desarrollo, permitiendo valorizar monetariamente al capital intelectual. Se incluyeron los balances de la empresa y estados de resultado y los indicadores clave de funcionamiento del área de operaciones. Los resultados obtenidos indican que el área de operaciones tuvo el año 2006 un valor monetario de capital intelectual de $199.186.000 y un índice de eficiencia de 78%; el año 2007 un valor de $296.692.000 y una eficiencia de 80%, el año 2008 el valor monetario de $255.694.000 con un 82% de eficiencia en el uso de los recursos. Dichos resultados vinculan el aumento de inversión en capital humano con el incremento de dicho indicador, pero otorgan a la eficiencia del uso de esos recursos (entendido como la adecuada gestión sobre indicadores de personas, procesos, clientes y desarrollo) la verdadera preponderancia que acrecienta o disminuye el valor real de la inversión realizada. En conclusión, este trabajo abre la posibilidad de aplicar el modelo a toda la organización, permitiendo una verdadera gestión y alineamiento con la estrategia de la empresa. Abre camino para diseñar un plan de trabajo del área de gestión personas que aborde temas críticos que potencian el valor del capital intelectual de la empresa, tales como liderazgo y clima laboral y entrega herramientas para que los directivos observen el resultado de sus acciones en el valor total que posee la organización.