| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 957.03 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
A globalização e a consequente queda das barreiras geográficas e alfandegárias têm fomentado um considerável aumento no número de grupos econômicos multinacionais. Devido à relação existente entre as empresas pertencentes a um mesmo grupo, é comum que as operações realizadas nesse contexto tenham características próprias, não observadas nas operações entre empresas não relacionadas. Tais divergências se dão, em grande parte, em razão do objetivo em comum das empresas relacionadas em obterem vantagens econômicas nas suas operações, como uma redução dos encargos tributários. Faz-se necessário, assim, um controle por parte da administração fiscal dos países envolvidos em tais operações intragrupo, tendo com objetivo o combate à evasão fiscal. As regras sobre preços de transferência se propõem a, através de uma série de critérios, fazer uma análise comparativa entre as transações realizadas entre entidades relacionadas e aquelas realizadas entre sujeitos não relacionados, de modo a avaliar se os preços praticados nas primeiras correspondem aos preços praticados no mercado, ou se se tratam de preços fictícios, destinados à obtenção de uma vantagem econômica. Quando tais operações dizem respeito a bens corpóreos, o controle dos preços de transferência tem uma maior base comparativa, uma vez que basta avaliar o preço pelo qual o mesmo ativo, ou um equivalente, está sendo negociado entre sujeitos não relacionados. Por outro lado, quando se trata de ativos intangíveis, como patentes e o know-how, a sua precificação é dificultada pelo caráter singular de tais bens, o que dificulta a análise do preço de transferência por métodos comparativos. Nesse sentido, o Plano de Ação 8 do BEPS (Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) busca lidar com a problemática, estabelecendo um conjunto de diretrizes destinadas a facilitar essa avaliação por parte das administrações fiscais ao redor do globo. A sua recomendação é de que seja adotada uma abordagem com base na substância econômica da transação e na contribuição para a criação de valor do intangível. Com isso, o que se busca é evitar a erosão da base tributária, ao impedir a transferência artificial de lucros como prática evasiva. Far-se-á, além disso, uma breve análise comparativa quanto ao cenário dos preços de transferência no Brasil e no âmbito da OCDE, diante do recente pedido de adesão do país à organização.
Globalization and it’s consequent downfall of both geographic and custom barriers has been promoting a considerable increase in the number of multinational enterprises. Due to the relationship between entities who belong to the same economic groups, it’s common that the transactions in which those partake, in this context, have their own characteristics, which are not observed in transactions carried out by non-related entities. Those differences exist, for the most part, due to the common interest shared by the related entities of obtaining an economic advantage, such as the reduction of the tax burden. This situation demands, therefore, a control by the tax authorities of the countries involved in such intragroup transactions, aiming to combat tax evasion. The transfer pricing rules commit to, through a series of criteria, make a comparative analysis between the transactions carried out by related entities and those carried out by unrelated ones, so they can determine if the prices charged in the former are equivalent to those commonly charged in the competitive market, or if they’re artificial prices, established with the intention of obtaining an economic advantage. When intragroup transactions involve tangible assets, the transfer pricing control has a bigger comparative basis, since it’s simple to assess the market price of an identical, or at least similar asset. On the other hand, when it involves intangible assets, such as patents and know-how, it’s pricing is hampered by the unique quality of such assets, which makes it harder to define their transfer price through comparative methods. In this regard, BEPS (Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) action plan 8 seeks to deal with this issue, establishing a collection of guidelines set out to make this evaluation easier for tax authorities around the globe. It’s recommendation is the adoption of an approach based on the economic substance of the transacion and on the contribution to the creation of value for the intangible. Thefore, the aim is to avoid the erosion of tax bases by stopping the artificial transfer of profits as an evasive practice. Besides that, a brief comparative analysis between the transfer pricing rules of Brazil and those of OECD will be done, following the recent request made by the brazilian government to join the organisation.
Globalization and it’s consequent downfall of both geographic and custom barriers has been promoting a considerable increase in the number of multinational enterprises. Due to the relationship between entities who belong to the same economic groups, it’s common that the transactions in which those partake, in this context, have their own characteristics, which are not observed in transactions carried out by non-related entities. Those differences exist, for the most part, due to the common interest shared by the related entities of obtaining an economic advantage, such as the reduction of the tax burden. This situation demands, therefore, a control by the tax authorities of the countries involved in such intragroup transactions, aiming to combat tax evasion. The transfer pricing rules commit to, through a series of criteria, make a comparative analysis between the transactions carried out by related entities and those carried out by unrelated ones, so they can determine if the prices charged in the former are equivalent to those commonly charged in the competitive market, or if they’re artificial prices, established with the intention of obtaining an economic advantage. When intragroup transactions involve tangible assets, the transfer pricing control has a bigger comparative basis, since it’s simple to assess the market price of an identical, or at least similar asset. On the other hand, when it involves intangible assets, such as patents and know-how, it’s pricing is hampered by the unique quality of such assets, which makes it harder to define their transfer price through comparative methods. In this regard, BEPS (Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) action plan 8 seeks to deal with this issue, establishing a collection of guidelines set out to make this evaluation easier for tax authorities around the globe. It’s recommendation is the adoption of an approach based on the economic substance of the transacion and on the contribution to the creation of value for the intangible. Thefore, the aim is to avoid the erosion of tax bases by stopping the artificial transfer of profits as an evasive practice. Besides that, a brief comparative analysis between the transfer pricing rules of Brazil and those of OECD will be done, following the recent request made by the brazilian government to join the organisation.
Description
Keywords
Preços de transferência Intangíveis OCDE BEPS Brasil Transfer pricing Intangibles OECD Brazil