<p>The purpose of this master’s thesis is to explain and analyze whether today’s existing regulations provide sufficient guidance on how to apply the Profit Split Method (PSM) in practice. Since the enterprises’ profits arising from intra-group transactions increases, the tax base for any government also becomes larger and more important. This issue will likely become even more problematic as the globalization branches out and the majority of the global trade is undertaken between associated enterprises.</p><p>In order to satisfy all parts and serve the dual objective of securing an appropriate tax base in each jurisdiction and avoiding double taxation, one ambition of the OECD is to harmonize the transfer pricing rules and make them become more uniform. An area in which this goal can be accomplish is at an international level such as the OECD; an important developer in the field of transfer pricing. Different transfer pricing methods has been developed which can be applied by both taxpayers and tax authorities to determine a correct transfer price. Six of these methods has gained international acceptance, although to a more or less extent among various countries, and one of these methods is the PSM. In the years between 1979 and 1995, the OECD had a reluctant standpoint of accepting the application of any transfer pricing method based on profits, such as the PSM. This hesitant viewpoint changed in the existing TPG which explicitly stipulates that the PSM could provide a transfer pricing estimation in accordance with the ALP, which should be accepted in exceptional cases.</p><p>There are certain situations where a PSM possibly will provide the most appropriate arm’s length result. Since the principle of economics can create complex business environments of both vertical and horizontal integration, contributions of valuable intangibles on both sides of the cross-border transaction, the PSM might be the only method which can be employed. A relevant issue which need to be enlightened is whether the existing guidance provided by the OECD and USA is sufficient from a practitioners and tax administration point of view, or is more guidance needed to better understand the issues surrounding the concept of the PSM. The fact that OECD insist of using comparables to the highest extent as possible when employing the PSM entails practical problems, since it is rather a rule than an exception that reliable comparables cannot be found when valuable intangibles are involved.</p><p>The Arthur of this master’s thesis has identified three key conclusions which might facilitate how PSM issues can be handled in the future and improve the existing PSM guidance. These conclusions are the need for a uniform PSM interpretation, the need for additional flexibility and acceptance, and the need for additional TPG guidance.</p>
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA/oai:DiVA.org:hj-11107 |
| Date | January 2009 |
| Creators | Quttineh, Yousef |
| Publisher | Jönköping University, JIBS, Commercial Law |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, text |
Page generated in 0.0022 seconds