Evaluasi Implementasi Analisis Kesebandingan atas Sengketa Transfer Pricing PT OCI

Rafael Tambunan, Yulianti Abbas
{"title":"Evaluasi Implementasi Analisis Kesebandingan atas Sengketa Transfer Pricing PT OCI","authors":"Rafael Tambunan, Yulianti Abbas","doi":"10.33395/owner.v7i4.1735","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Transfer pricing is one of the most popular drivers of tax disputes between taxpayers and tax authorities around the world. To lessen the probability of disputes, the OECD proposes procedures for comparability analysis. These procedures help taxpayers and tax authorities to determine the arm's length values of related-party transaction, which is the main cause of many transfer pricing disputes. This study uses a case study method, focusing on PT OCI, to evaluate a firm’s comparative analysis practice and its conformity to OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines. Data collection through interviews and documentation. The results of this study indicate that PT OCI had conducted a comparability analysis of transfer pricing transactions in conformity with the OECD guidelines, while the tax authorities have not carried out a comparability analysis in carrying out transfer pricing audits. However, specifically for trademark utilization transactions, PT OCI must accept the results of inspection corrections. Fulfillment of the arm’s length principle for transactions utilizing intangible assets must comply with two additional provisions, namely related to the existence of transactions and economic benefits from the utilization of intangible assets. With the results of the benefit test, it was concluded that the trademark used by PT OCI did not contribute to increasing the success of PT OCI's sales so that transactions for the use of intangible assets did not meet the arm’s length principles.","PeriodicalId":497834,"journal":{"name":"Owner : riset dan jurnal akuntansi","volume":"239 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Owner : riset dan jurnal akuntansi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33395/owner.v7i4.1735","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Transfer pricing is one of the most popular drivers of tax disputes between taxpayers and tax authorities around the world. To lessen the probability of disputes, the OECD proposes procedures for comparability analysis. These procedures help taxpayers and tax authorities to determine the arm's length values of related-party transaction, which is the main cause of many transfer pricing disputes. This study uses a case study method, focusing on PT OCI, to evaluate a firm’s comparative analysis practice and its conformity to OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines. Data collection through interviews and documentation. The results of this study indicate that PT OCI had conducted a comparability analysis of transfer pricing transactions in conformity with the OECD guidelines, while the tax authorities have not carried out a comparability analysis in carrying out transfer pricing audits. However, specifically for trademark utilization transactions, PT OCI must accept the results of inspection corrections. Fulfillment of the arm’s length principle for transactions utilizing intangible assets must comply with two additional provisions, namely related to the existence of transactions and economic benefits from the utilization of intangible assets. With the results of the benefit test, it was concluded that the trademark used by PT OCI did not contribute to increasing the success of PT OCI's sales so that transactions for the use of intangible assets did not meet the arm’s length principles.
对合并分析的执行评估,以讨论PT OCI的转让问题
转让定价是全球纳税人与税务机关之间最常见的税收纠纷驱动因素之一。为了减少争端的可能性,经合组织提出了可比性分析程序。这些程序有助于纳税人和税务机关确定关联交易的公平价值,这是许多转让定价纠纷的主要原因。本研究采用个案研究方法,以PT OCI为重点,评估某企业的比较分析实践及其与OECD转移定价指南的一致性。通过访谈和文件收集数据。本研究的结果表明,PT OCI按照经合组织的指导方针对转让定价交易进行了可比性分析,而税务机关在进行转让定价审计时没有进行可比性分析。但是,具体到商标使用交易,商标局必须接受审查更正的结果。利用无形资产的交易要履行公平交易原则,还必须满足两个附加条件,即与交易的存在有关和与利用无形资产产生的经济利益有关。根据利益测试的结果,我们得出结论,PT OCI所使用的商标并不能提高PT OCI的销售成功率,因此使用无形资产的交易不符合公平原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信