INTRODUCTION Contributed by: Paolo Ludovici, Marlinda Gianfrate, Luca Tortorella and Angelica Masciulli, Gatti Pavesi Bianchi Ludovici
worldwide. The APA statistics, derived from 46 jurisdictions, represent additional efforts under Action 14. The global average MAP case closure time is 27.3 months (32 months for transfer pricing cas - es and 23 months for other cases). Trends show a slight decrease in open cases and a significant increase in closed cases. The success rate for agreements concluded is 74%. In the absence of an arbitration clause, competent authorities are required to make efforts to eliminate double taxation, though there is no specific obligation concerning the results. As of 2020, there has been: • a decrease in the number of ongoing disputes due to internal improvements in tax adminis - tration efficiency; • a decrease in cases filed by taxpayers, likely due to a slowdown in tax audits during the pandemic; and • an increase in procedures filed for non-trans - fer pricing cases, although transfer pricing cases remain predominant. While fewer jurisdictions report bilateral and multilateral APAs, the data’s representativeness is still strong. The success rate for agreements is 25%, with an average closure time of 36.8 months. Bilateral APAs show increased effi - ciency and usage but remain time-intensive, making them more suitable for complex, high- value cases. The rise of co-operative compli - ance programmes and the OECD’s enhanced International Compliance Assurance Programme (ICAP) highlight the importance of adhering to the Transfer Pricing Guidelines. However, participation in co-operative compli - ance programmes does not eliminate the risk
of tax disputes in other jurisdictions involved in the same intercompany transactions. Transfer pricing, involving multiple jurisdictions, requires a strategic evaluation of tools to manage the risks of double taxation, as no single mechanism guarantees complete tax certainty. Compliance With Transfer Pricing Rules: Relevance for Single States and Taxpayers Beyond the strategic tools of co-operative com - pliance mentioned above, adherence to trans - fer pricing rules remains a key priority for both states and taxpayers. For example, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the United States has strengthened transfer pricing enforcement, driven by organisational changes and recent success in high-profile cases. Increased enforcement efforts aim to sustain this trend, including greater use of 20% and 40% penalties. The year 2024 was pivotal for transfer pricing following the US Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision, which overturned the Chevron doctrine. Before this ruling, courts typically deferred to federal agencies’ interpre - tations of unclear statutes, granting consider - able weight to Treasury Regulations under Sec - tion 482 of the US Internal Revenue Code. The Loper Bright decision now requires courts to independently interpret statutes without auto - matically deferring to agency regulations. This shift is already influencing tax cases, with courts scrutinising IRS rules more closely. The French government has recently reinforced its approach to transfer pricing dispute resolution and prevention. The 2024 Finance Bill strength - ened the powers of the tax authorities and led to a significant increase in dedicated resources. Moreover, in early 2025 draft guidelines on MAPs and APAs were released for public consultation.
10
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook