Categories
Customs & Trade Int'l Tax & Transfer Pricing

Just how spectacular are the new UAE Economic Substance Regulations for the UAE?

Just how spectacular are the new UAE Economic Substance Regulations for the UAE?

At a glance

On 30 April 2019, the United Arab Emirates (“UAE”) issued Cabinet Decision No. 31 concerning economic substance requirements (“Economic Substance Regulations”). UAE onshore and free zone entities that carry on specific activities mentioned in the regulations will need to examine whether they meet the economic substance requirements. Failing to meet those will trigger penalties. But why is this at first glance inane looking piece of legislation so important for the UAE?

Background

The introduction of a legal framework regulating the economic substance criterion in the UAE is a direct consequence of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (“OECD”) ongoing efforts to combat harmful tax practices under Action 5 of the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (“BEPS”) project. 

It also follows the increased focus by the European Union (EU) Code of Conduct Group (“COCG”) on companies established in jurisdictions with a low or no income tax regime, resulting in the publication of the first EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions, which currently includes the UAE (“EU Blacklist”). In response to the EU COCG initiatives, the governments of the Bahamas, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands (BVI), Cayman Islands, Guernsey, Isle of Man, Jersey, Mauritius and Seychelles introduced economic substance rules with effect from 1 January 2019.

There has also been growing interest and scrutiny from the public opinion as to whether entities established in such jurisdictions should be required to have sufficient economic substance before being able to benefit from beneficial tax regimes. 

The purpose of the Economic Substance Regulations is to curb international tax planning of certain business activities, which are typically characterised by the fact that they do not require extensive fixed infrastructure in terms of human and technical capital, in a way which allows profits to be shifted to no or nominal tax jurisdictions, as opposed to taxing profits where the company has actually created economic value. 

One of the reasons why the UAE has attracted so many businesses is because there is currently no income tax regime at a federal level. The economic substance legislation is specifically targeted at businesses that do not have genuine commercial operations and management in the UAE.

The main reason why the UAE has decided to introduce economic substance legislation lies in the country’s aim to further align its legislative framework with international tax practice and the standards set out in the OECD BEPS action plan.

What is economic substance?

Economic substance is a concept introduced to ensure that companies operating in a low or no corporate tax jurisdiction have a substantial purpose other than tax reduction and have an economic outcome that is aligned with value creation. In other words, economic substance requirements are used to analyze whether a company’s presence has a purpose besides the mere reduction of a tax liability. 

Which entities are in scope?

The Economic Substance Regulations apply to UAE onshore and free zone entities that carry out one or more of the following activities:

  • Banking
  • Insurance
  • Fund management
  • Lease-finance
  • Headquarters
  • Shipping
  • Holding company
  • Intellectual property (IP)
  • Distribution and service centre

Entities that are directly or indirectly owned by the UAE government fall outside the scope of the Economic Substance Regulations.

Economic Substance Test

Entities are required to meet the Economic Substance Test when they conduct any of the above activities.

For each Activity, the regulations have defined the so-called Core Income Generating Activities (“CIGA”). This is a list of activities that must be conducted in order to meet the Economic Substance Test. For example, for intellectual property the CIGA would consist of research and development.

In general, the Economic Substance requirements will be met:

  • If CIGA are conducted in the UAE;
  • If the activities are directed and managed in the UAE;
  • If there is an adequate level of qualified full-time employees in the UAE, 
  • If there is an adequate amount of operating expenditure in the UAE,
  • If there are adequate physical assets in the UAE.

In case the CIGA are carried out by another entity, these need to be controlled and monitored.

In accordance with EU recommendations, the regulations provide for less stringent requirements for Holding Company Businesses (“Holding Companies”).

Outsourcing

The CIGA may be outsourced, if there is adequate supervision and the outsourced activity is conducted in the UAE. Economic substance requirements will not be met if multiple Licensees outsource the same activity to the same service provider. There is no possibility for double counting the same service provider.

Reporting and compliance 

Licensees will need to prepare and submit an annual report to their Regulatory Authority (Free Zone Authority or DED), within a period of twelve months after the end of each financial year. The Regulatory Authority will then submit the report to the Ministry of Finance (“Competent Authority”).

Since the Economic Substance Regulations came into effect per 30 April 2019, for existing entities, the first report will have to be submitted in 2020. 

Administrative penalties and sanctions

– Failure to meet the economic substance test

AED 10,000 to AED 50,000 (First Financial Period)

AED 50,000 to AED 300,000 (Consecutive Financial Periods)

– Failure to provide information

AED 10,000 to AED 50,000

In case of continuous non-compliance, Regulatory Authorities may suspend, revoke or deny renewal of an entity’s license.

Exchange of information

If a Licensee fails to meet the Economic Substance Test for a financial year, the Regulatory Authority will inform the Minister of Finance for the financial year in question. 

The Minister of Finance will then inform the foreign competent authority where the parent company, ultimate parent company or ultimate beneficial owner is established of the non compliance. This may lead in these countries to denying treaty benefits. This requires that the UAE has entered into a Treaty or similar arrangement with that country.

Takeaway – much ado about?

UAE entities involved in banking, insurance, fund management, investment holding, financing and leasing, distribution and service center, headquarter companies and intellectual property (IP) activities should asses whether their current presence and activity level meets the newly introduced Economic Substance requirements. 

Where required, they make the necessary adjustments to ensure that their business is compliant with the UAE regulations which entered into force on 30 April 2019, in order to avoid  administrative penalties, and potentially deregistration.

Moving away from the dusty provisions of the law, what consequences does the Economic Substance law now really trigger?

Operational companies should be little worried. They will not be impacted. The very small companies should be slightly worried. The businesses that were attracted by 50 year tax holidays and other promises and failed to develop any substantial activity in the UAE should be more worried.

How much the UAE will be effectively policing this legislation remains to be seen. Merely taking the example of Switzerland, that country had signed up to multiple exchange of information obligations but dragged its feet for the longest time. 

For now though, the UAE has an argument towards the EU and, more importantly, individual countries, to get the UAE off their blacklists. This is important, since some UAE headquarters are currently being denied double tax treaty benefits in a number of countries, because of its failure to comply with international norms.

The legislation may potentially become obsolete though, if the UAE introduces Corporate Income Tax at a rate considered high enough to no longer be considered as a low tax jurisdiction.

Read our previous article on the introduction of Economic Substance Requirements in the UAE here

Categories
Customs & Trade Int'l Tax & Transfer Pricing

UAE economic substance requirements to be implemented

UAE economic substance requirements to be implemented

With the impending publication of the drafting of an economic substance law in the UAE, it is important to anticipate the consequences of the introduction of such a law on the UAE and offshore structures in the UAE. The UAE currently has no such substance requirements but has been strongly encouraged by the European Union to implement them. The impact on offshore structures will be substantial.

Current lack of substance requirements

The UAE is a federation of seven emirates. There is currently no direct tax legislation on a federal level in the UAE. However, some Emirates (e.g. Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Sharjah,…) have introduced income tax regimes for oil and gas companies and foreign banks. These decrees only apply to companies which are established in one of the aforementioned Emirates. The Income Tax Decrees do not contain any substance criteria.

Partly as a result of the current lack of substance requirements in the UAE, it has become increasingly important for international companies established or operating in the UAE to prove that the entity or structure has not been set up solely for tax purposes. 

Tax residency certificate

Corporations established in the UAE can apply for a ‘tax residency certificate’ (‘TRC’) with the Ministry of Finance of the UAE. A tax residence certificate (‘TRC’) is a certificate issued by the UAE government to eligible government entities, companies and individuals to benefit from Double Tax Treaties signed by the UAE.

The following documents are generally required in order to apply for the tax residency certificate:

  • Valid Trade License.
  • Certified Articles or Memorandum of association.
  • Copy of identity card for the Company Owners or partners or directors.
  • Copy of passport for the Company Owners or partners or directors.
  • Copy of Residence Visa for the Company Owners, partners or directors.
  • Certified Audited Report.
  • Certified Bank Statement for at least 6 months during the required year.
  • Certified Tenancy Contract or Title Deed.

Please note that although the requirements do not expressly mention that the certificate can only be granted to local companies, the Ministry of Finance does not issue tax residence certificates to offshore companies (not to be confused with free zone companies). 

Although the TRC may be helpful to obtain benefits under double tax treaties, in itself it cannot be considered as proof of economic substance in the UAE.

Developments on substance requirements in the UAE

Background

On 1 December 1997, the EU adopted a resolution on a code of conduct for business taxation with the objective to curb harmful tax competition. Shortly thereafter, the Code of Conduct Group on Business Taxation (COCG) was set up to assess tax measures and regimes that may fall within the scope of the code of conduct for business taxation.

On 5 December 2017, the COCG published the (first) EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes, in cooperation with the Economic and Financial Affairs Council (ECOFIN).

The EU applies three listing criteria, which are aligned with international standards and reflect the good governance standards that Member States comply with themselves:

  1. Transparency: Jurisdictions should comply with the international standards on exchange of information, automatic (1.1) and on request (1.2). In addition, jurisdictions should sign the OECD’s multilateral convention or signed bilateral agreements with all EU Member States to facilitate such exchange (1.3).
  2. Fair Tax Competition: Jurisdictions should not have harmful tax regimes (2.1) nor facilitate offshore structures which attract profits without real economic activity (2.2).
  3. BEPS Implementation: Jurisdictions should commit to implement the OECD’s Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) minimum standards, starting with Country-by-Country Reporting.

The UAE was initially placed on the EU Black list. However, following commitments to take appropriate measures against the above criteria, the EU transferred the UAE to the EU Grey list. 

However, due to non-compliance with criterion 2.2, the UAE was subsequently put back on the Black list at the start of this year. Criterion 2.2 requires that a jurisdiction should not facilitate offshore structures or arrangements aimed at attracting profits which do not reflect real economic activity in the jurisdiction. 

Therefore, in order to fulfill its commitments to the EU, it is reasonable to expect that the substance requirements are likely to be introduced in the UAE in the foreseeable future. 

In accordance with the scoping paper on criterion 2.2 published by the COCG on 22 June 2018 and the associated work of the OECD’s Forum on Harmful Tax Practices (FHTP), the below describes how businesses may be impacted and what substance requirements could potentially be introduced in the UAE in the future.

Expected substance Law requirements

The scoping paper suggest to implement the substantial activities requirement in three key steps: 

(1) identify the relevant activities in their jurisdiction; 

(2) impose substance requirements; 

(3) ensure there are enforcement provisions in place. 

According to the Scoping Paper, the economic substance test would be met if:

a) Taking into account the features of each specific industry or sector, the concerned jurisdiction introduces requirements concerning an adequate level of (qualified) employees, adequate level of annual expenditure to be incurred, physical offices and premises, investments or relevant types of activities to be undertaken.

b) The concerned jurisdiction ensures that the activities are actually directed and managed in the jurisdiction. Any UAE substance requirements are likely to further specify when this condition would be met e.g., depending on frequency of board of director meetings, directors physically present, minutes recording strategic decisions and the knowledge and expertise of the directors.

c) The core income generating activities are performed in the jurisdiction. These substance requirements should mirror the requirements used in the FHTP in the context of specified preferential regimes. As per the scoping paper, the core income generating activities for banking could be: raising funds; managing risk including credit, currency and interest risk; taking hedging positions; providing loans, credit or other financial services to customers; managing regulatory capital; and preparing regulatory reports and returns.

Comparison with the other low tax jurisdictions which introduced the substance requirements

Following the EU blacklist of non-cooperative jurisdictions, many other low and nil tax jurisdictions have introduced economic substance requirements. Jurisdictions where substance compliance is required from 2019 include Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands (BVI), the Cayman Islands, Guernsey, and Jersey.

The Economic substance Law of BVI and Cayman Island are inspired by the core requirements in the scoping paper of the COCG and the FHTP requirements. The UAE is expected to follow the same path.

Conclusion

Currently, there are no substance requirements in the UAE. Corporations established in the UAE may apply for a ‘tax residency certificate’ with the Ministry of Finance of the UAE, when they qualify. Obtaining such a ‘TRC’ does not necessarily entail that a company has economic substance in the UAE.

Considering the efforts made by the UAE with respect to compliance with the fair tax competition criteria of EU, we anticipate that the UAE will issue economic substance requirements in the very foreseeable future, similar to the ones published recently by other low tax jurisdictions. 

The specific substance requirements in the UAE will likely depend on the type of activities conducted by the relevant business (e.g., banking, shipping and headquarter services would each require different substance requirements).

Businesses in the UAE should already assess their operations against the substance requirements in the light of the COCG and FHTP guidelines. 

Categories
GCC Tax Int'l Tax & Transfer Pricing

KSA Transfer Pricing obligations

KSA Transfer Pricing obligations

Early 2010’s, following the financial crisis and multiple tax scandals, such as the Panama papers and LuxLeaks, the BEPS initiative was launched by the OECD and the G20. The BEPS initiative is a set of international recommendations meant to prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (international tax avoidance).

As part of the BEPS initiative, Transfer Pricing (TP) rules were put on the agenda worldwide as a means to avoid tax evasion. The first detailed and comprehensive TP rules were designed in the 1990’s. The US published regulations in 1994 and the OECD published guidelines in 1995.

Saudi Arabia is member of the G20 and was expected to adopt a comprehensive set of rules to tackle tax avoidance through transfer pricing rules. Recently, it published these By-Laws on Transfer Pricing (GAZT Board Resolution No. [6-1-19] 25/5/1440H (31/12/2018 G). 

KSA’s Income Tax Law had already implemented general anti-TP avoidance measures and approved the arm’s length principle, similar to other GCC Member States. However, these new By-Laws are going a lot further in terms of defining the applicable transfer pricing principles and documentary requirements. The new obligations trigger important compliance obligations and require extensive preparation.  

What is a transfer price?

A transfer price is the price agreed between entities of a same group for their internal transactions (‘controlled transactions’). Transfer pricing legislation targets the relocation of profit within the Group: one entity located in a tax haven invoices its supplies (services or goods) at an artificially high price to another entity located in a high tax jurisdiction, successfully decreasing its taxable base.

In order to avoid this artificial profit shifting, the transfer price is required to comply with the arm’s length principle. This principle requests that the controlled transaction price is determined as if the transactions were made between unrelated parties.

Who needs to comply?

All taxable persons under the KSA Income Tax Law including mixed ownership entities subject to both Income tax and Zakat must comply with these By-Laws.

Exclusive Zakat payers are not subject to TP bylaws, but must comply with CbCR requirements if they meet the threshold.

What’s new?

The By-Laws determine the applicable methods and documentation inspired directly by the OECD guidelines and BEPS reports.

KSA has approved the 5 OECD transfer pricing methods:

  1. Comparable Uncontrolled Price Method
  2. Resale Price Method 
  3. Cost Plus Method 
  4. Transactional Net Margin Method 
  5. Transactional Profit Split Method 

A transfer pricing method other than the ones above can be adopted, provided the taxable person can prove that none of those methods provides a reliable measure of an at arm’s-length result.

Documentation

In line with the OECD recommendations, KSA requires:

  • A Master File and Local File to detail the Group and entities’ transfer pricing policy (notably an explanation of the applied transfer pricing method) to be prepared on an annual basis at the time of the income tax declaration (only for MNE Group with an aggregate arm’s length value of controlled transactions exceeding SAR 6,000,000 during any 12 month period);
  • The Country by Country Report (CbCR) to be submitted no later than 12 months after the end of the concerned reporting year for MNE groups with a consolidated turnover of more than SAR 3.2 billion.

In addition, it requires a ‘Controlled Transaction Disclosure Form’ to be submitted on an annual basis along with the income tax declaration (no threshold applies).

The By-Laws do not mention the language in which the documentation is to be maintained and filed. However, the FAQs mention that GAZT encourages to maintain and submit documentation in the official language. 

It is important to note that these obligations are already applicable to fiscal years ending on 31 December 2018. This implies that the concerned companies must start preparing the required documentation. The latter must be ready within 120 days following the end of the fiscal year, i.e. by the end of April 2019 for the first concerned MNEs. However, a 60 day extension has been provided for the purposes of maintaining the Local File and Master File.

Exceptions

The draft contains certain exceptions for maintaining the Local file and the Master file. Are exempt from these obligations:

  • Natural persons;
  • Small Size Enterprises;
  • Legal persons who do not enter into Controlled Transactions, or who are a party to Controlled Transactions where the aggregate arm’s-length value does not exceed SAR 6,000,000 during any 12 month period.

 Adjustments

Where the price is not at arm’s length, GAZT can adjust the tax base accordingly. This can result in a higher tax liability if part of a tax deduction is rejected or if it considered that the KSA entity should have charged a higher price to its foreign affiliate.

GAZT can also be informed of any TP adjustments made in another country, on a controlled transaction made with a KSA resident, if a treaty is in place with this country. GAZT can ensure the changes by the foreign authority are in line with the arm’s length principle. GAZT can subsequently make the appropriate adjustment to take into account the increase in the taxable base by the foreign tax authority.

In case GAZT disagrees with the adjustment, it can communicate and discuss with the respective foreign authority. An existing mutual agreement procedure (‘MAP’) with the foreign authority will be necessary.

Advance Pricing Agreements

An APA can safeguard companies against tax reassessments, as it provides for an agreed transfer price by the Tax Authority regarding specific transactions.

The By-Laws do not currently provide for an Advance Pricing Agreements (APA) procedure.

Tax Audit and penalties

GAZT has been working on TP for many years and is well prepared to enforce the new TP requirements. A specific tax unit, with experienced auditors, has been created to guarantee the correct implementation of these laws.

The By-Laws do not foresee penalties in case of non-compliance. However, the common penalties relating to corporate income tax apply.

Impact on the GCC

Any GCC company performing controlled transactions with a KSA company will have to comply with the KSA TP rules. The valuation of its intra-group sales must comply with the valuation methods recommended by the KSA TP rules. 

In addition, GCC affiliates with a KSA headquarter will have to prepare a local file describing their own transfer pricing policy for the transactions with their KSA related parties. Important accounting information will also have to be gathered and transmitted to the KSA headquarter to be compiled in the CbCR. 

Concerned entities must start to plan immediately. Practically this does not only encompass preparing the documentation. Companies must also keep evidence of the invoiced work, especially when intangible (e.g. management fees might be requested to be evidenced by proof of rendered services: announcements of internal seminars, memoranda, presentations, emails…). This implies to retain all data regarding intra-group transactions and to draft and maintain the required documentation or information and keep it up to date.

Finally, these new KSA By-Laws open the door to the implementation of TP rules in the other GCC countries, and notably in the UAE. The UAE committed to introducing a CbCR by joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework earlier in 2018.

Categories
Customs & Trade Int'l Tax & Transfer Pricing

KSA publishes long awaited DTT with UAE

KSA publishes long awaited DTT with UAE

The Double Tax Treaty (“DTT”) between the UAE and the KSA provides a significant tax incentive for businesses operating in the two contracting states. A positive impact on investment and trade between the two contracting States is expected in the aftermath of its entry into force. 

This is the first DTT signed between two GCC countries. KSA is a member of the G20 and a key player in the GCC economy and on the global oil markets. It is keen to reinforce its promising investment environment. On the UAE side, the signing of this DTT reinforces its status as a regional hub for foreign investments and shows its commitment to its continued attractiveness and excellence. 

Both contracting countries are members of the BEPS inclusive framework and signed the Multilateral Instrument (“MLI”). Signing such a bilateral DTT is a new step towards compliance with BEPS minimum standards – notably regarding transparency and tax avoidance. It goes hand in hand with the extensive TP legislation recently published in KSA. 

This article highlights the key features of the DTT and analyses its tax implications for businesses operating in the two contracting states.

1. About the Treaty

Due to lengthy negotiations, the treaty is based on the 2014 OECD Model Tax Convention, even though the model was updated in 2017. 

However, the KSA has already included this DTT in the list of its Covered Tax Agreements (“CTA”) in the MLI. It is yet to be included by the UAE, since the UAE signed the MLI shortly after the treaty.

The treaty will enter into force on the second month of the official notification between the two contracting countries. It is expected that the treaty will apply as of 1 January 2020.

2. Key Features 

Persons covered

Only the “residents” of the contracting states shall benefit from this treaty. 

This residence principle is generally adopted by the KSA in most of its recent treaties, contrary to the UAE which has recently opted for a citizenship criterion, such as for its recent DTT with Brazil. 

Residence

As a primary definition for “resident”, the treaty uses the standard language of the OECD Model Tax Convention.

An additional interesting provision is that the DTT expressly qualifies as resident, any legal person established, existing and operating in accordance with the legislations of the contracting states and generally exempt from tax:

•     if this exemption is for religious, educational, charity, scientific or any other similar reason; or 

•     if this person aims at securing pensions or similar benefits for employees.

Although the treaty does not specify whether the residence concept is applicable to businesses established in the Free Zones (UAE) or the Special Economic Zones (KSA), the competent tax authorities are required to coordinate to determine the requirements and conditions to be satisfied to be entitled to any tax benefit granted by this treaty.

Permanent Establishment “PE” Clause

The PE clause is largely based on the OECD Model Tax Convention, but features two elements inspired by the UN Model. It notably qualifies:

•      As a PE: a building site, construction or installation project after 6 months (12 in the OECD Model)

•      As a service PE: providing services, including consultancy services, by an enterprise through employees or other personnel engaged by the enterprise for such purpose if their presence lasts for a period or periods aggregating more than 183 days in any 12-month period

Taxes covered, rates and double taxation elimination

The DTT covers income tax and Zakat in the KSA and income tax in the UAE, inspite of the absence of a federal income tax law in the UAE.

No withholding tax regime applies in the UAE. The table added to this article shows the impact on the withholding tax rates in the KSA and the consequences of the treaty.

The DTT will not apply for royalty payments in case the beneficiary has a PE in the source country (exceptions apply). Similarly, excessive interest payments made between related parties shall not benefit from the DTT exemption.

The treaty provides for source country taxation only on income from natural resources exploration and development. The elimination of double taxation is performed through the tax credit method.

Zakat and the Treaty

Zakat is covered by the treaty (for the KSA). An interesting provision, introduced in several DTTs concluded by Saudi Arabia (e.g. Georgia, Mexico and Kazakhstan), states that “In the case of the KSA, […] the methods for elimination of double taxation will not prejudice the provisions of the Zakat collection regime.” 

This provision may have an impact on Zakat for UAE businesses, considering the recent update of the Zakat implementing regulations. This notably impacts PE headquarters that might be subject to Zakat in the KSA, if specific criteria are met.

3. MAP and other provisions

The treaty provides for a Mutual Agreement Procedure (“MAP”) which can be requested to the competent authority in any of the contracting states within 3 years from the first notification of the action resulting in taxation not in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. 

Investments owned by Governments (e.g. investments of Central Banks, financial authorities and governmental bodies) shall be exempt from taxes in the other contracting state. The income from such investments (including the alienation of the investment) is also exempt. The exemption does not include immovable properties or income derived from such properties.

There is no provision in the treaty for non-discrimination, assistance in the collection of taxes or territorial extension.

The entitlement to the benefits of the treaty will not be granted in case the main purpose of the transactions or the arrangements at stake is proved to be the enjoyment of such a benefit. 

4. Conclusion

Even though this DTT between the KSA and the UAE is largely based on the OECD model 2014, the PE definitions it provides adopted from the UN model, broadens the scope of the activities taxable in the source countries, and will require specific attention.

The relief of withholding tax on royalties and interests, along with the MAP will reinforce the business relationships between these two countries. It is regretful that there is not a clear framework for Free Zone or Special Zone companies.

Finally, it is to be expected that the treaty will soon be notified by the UAE as a CTA under the MLI. In such case, businesses willing to benefit from this DTT will have to satisfy the Principal Purpose Test for the concerned transactions or other investment arrangements.

Categories
Int'l Tax & Transfer Pricing

KSA releases draft Transfer Pricing regulations for consultation

KSA releases draft Transfer Pricing regulations for consultation

Early 2010’s, following the financial crisis and multiple tax scandals, such as the Panama papers and LuxLeaks, the BEPS initiative was launched by the OECD and the G20. The BEPS initiative is a set of international recommendations meant to prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (international tax avoidance).

As part of the BEPS initiative, Transfer Pricing (TP) rules were put on the agenda worldwide as a means to avoid tax evasion. The first detailed and comprehensive TP rules were designed in the 1990’s. The US published regulations in 1994 and the OECD published guidelines in 1995.

Saudi Arabia is member of the G20 and was expected to adopt a comprehensive set of rules to tackle tax avoidance through transfer pricing rules. Recently, it published draft By-Laws on Transfer Pricing. This draft remains available for public comments till 9 January 2019.

KSA’s Income Tax Law had already implemented general anti-TP avoidance measures and approved the arm’s length principle, similar to other GCC Member States. However, these new By-Laws are going a lot further in terms of defining the applicable transfer pricing principles and documentary requirements. The new obligations trigger important compliance obligations and require extensive preparation.  

What is a transfer price?

A transfer price is the price agreed between entities of a same group for their internal transactions (‘controlled transactions’). It targets the relocation of profit within the Group: one entity located in a tax haven invoices its supplies (services or goods) at an artificially high price to another entity located in a high tax jurisdiction, successfully decreasing its taxable base.

In order to avoid this artificial profit shifting, the transfer price is required to comply with the arm’s length principle. This principle requests that the controlled transaction price is determined as if the transactions were made between unrelated parties.

What’s new?

The draft determines the applicable methods and documentation inspired directly by the OECD guidelines and BEPS reports.

Transfer Pricing Methods

KSA has approved the 5 OECD transfer pricing methods:

  1. Comparable Uncontrolled Price Method
  2. Resale Price Method 
  3. Cost Plus Method 
  4. Transactional Net Margin Method 
  5. Transactional Profit Split Method 

A transfer pricing method other than the ones above can be adopted, provided the taxable person can prove that none of those methods provides a reliable measure of an arm’s-length result.

Documentation

In line with the OECD recommendations, KSA requires:

  • A Master File and Local File to detail the Group and entities’ transfer pricing policy (notably an explanation of the applied transfer pricing method) to be prepared on an annual basis at the time of the income tax declaration (only for MNE Group with an aggregate arm’s length value of controlled transactions exceeding SAR 6,000,000 during any 12 month period);
  • The Country by Country Report (CbCR) to be submitted no later than 12 months after the end of the concerned reporting year for MNE groups with a consolidated turnover of more than SAR 3.2 billion.

In addition, it requires a ‘Controlled Transaction Disclosure Form’ to be submitted on an annual basis along with the income tax declaration (no threshold applies).

The draft By-Laws draft do not mention the language in which the documentation is to be maintained and filed. However, since the documents are to be submitted together with the income tax declaration, it is likely that TP documentation will have to be in Arabic as well.

It is important to note that these obligations are already applicable to fiscal years ending on 31 December 2018. This implies that the concerned companies must start preparing the required documentation. The latter must be ready within 120 days following the end of the fiscal year, i.e. by the end of April 2019 for the first concerned MNEs.

Exceptions

The draft contains certain exceptions for maintaining the Local file and the Master file. Are exempted from these obligations:

  • Natural persons;
  • Small Size Enterprises;
  • Legal persons who do not enter into Controlled Transactions, or who are a party to Controlled Transactions where the aggregate arm’s-length value does not exceed SAR 6,000,000 during any 12 month period.

Adjustments

Where the price is not at arm’s length, GAZT can adjust the tax base accordingly. This can result in a higher tax liability if part of a tax deduction is rejected or if it considered that the KSA entity should have charged a higher price to its foreign affiliate.

GAZT can also be informed of any TP adjustments made in another country, on a controlled transaction made with a KSA resident, if a treaty is in place with this country. GAZT can ensure the changes by the foreign authority are in line with the arm’s length principle. GAZT can subsequently make the appropriate adjustment to take into account the increase in the taxable base by the foreign tax authority.

In case GAZT disagrees with the adjustment, it can communicate and discuss with the respective foreign authority. An existing mutual agreement procedure (‘MAP’) with the foreign authority will be necessary.

Advance Pricing Agreements

An APA can safeguard companies against tax reassessments, as it provides for an agreed transfer price by the Tax Authority regarding specific transactions.

The draft By-Laws do not currently provide for an Advance Pricing Agreements (APA) procedure. We may expect some guidelines from GAZT concerning this matter.

Tax Audit and penalties

GAZT has been working on TP for many years and is well prepared to enforce the new TP requirements. A specific tax unit, with experienced auditors, has been created to guarantee the correct implementation of these laws.

The draft By-Laws do not foresee penalties in case of non-compliance. However, it is highly likely that the common penalties relating to corporate income tax would apply. We expect more guidelines soon.

Impact on the GCC

Any GCC company performing controlled transactions with a KSA company will have to comply with the KSA TP rules. The valuation of its intra-group sales must comply with the valuation methods recommended by the KSA TP rules. 

In addition, GCC affiliates with a KSA headquarter will have to prepare a local file describing their own transfer pricing policy for the transactions with their KSA related parties. Important accounting information will also have to be gathered and transmitted to the KSA headquarter to be compiled in the CbCR. 

Concerned entities must start to plan immediately. Practically this does not only encompass preparing the documentation. Companies must also keep evidence of the invoiced work, especially when intangible (e.g. management fees might be requested to be evidenced by proof of rendered services: announcements of internal seminars, memoranda, presentations, emails…). This implies to retain all data regarding intra-group transactions and to draft and maintain the required documentation or information and keep it up to date.

Finally, these new KSA By-Laws open the door to the implementation of TP rules in the other GCC countries, and notably in the UAE. The UAE committed to introducing a CbCR by joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework earlier this year.

Categories
Int'l Tax & Transfer Pricing

The impact of the US tax reform on the GCC

The impact of the US tax reform on the GCC

In order to boost job opportunities in the US, to increase US tax revenue, and capital and profits, support the growth of the US economy, and to prevent companies from shifting their revenue to foreign countries, the US Tax Cuts and Jobs Act entered in force on 1 January 2018. 

It represents a major change to the US tax system, holding high significance particularly to multinational companies and the US economy as a whole.

In the long term, the reform is predicted to raise the US GDP and wages, assuming that the tax cuts will provide increased stimulus for investment and activities, thereby increasing labor demand. These new incentives and deterrents have consequences on the foreign investments of US companies, including in the GCC region.

WHAT’S HAPPENED?

The US Tax Cuts and Jobs Act entered into force on 1 January 2018 is meant to significantly positively impact businesses. 

Through this reform, along with an important reduction of the corporate income tax rate, another major change in the US taxation system appeared: the worldwide US taxation system has been switched to one that is very close in nature to a territorial system. This shift is accompanied by a “transition tax” and implies that corporations doing business abroad will no longer be taxed by the US on the profits they generate overseas. 

While the reform brings restrictions on interest and loss deductions, related party payments and movements of intangible property (IP), it also introduces favorable dividend exemptions, capital investmentand exportincentives. This will ideally provide the necessary push to repatriate reserves of cash held overseas.

The reform also introduces new anti-avoidance and incentive tax measures, namely the Base Erosion and Anti-Abuse Tax (BEAT), the Global Intangible Low Taxed Income (GILTI) and the Foreign Direct Intangible Income (FDII).

IMPACT ON US BUSINESSES

1.    Corporate Income Tax Rate Reduction

The main feature of the US tax reform is definitely the reduction of the Federal Corporate Income Tax (CIT) from 35% to 21%, starting from tax years beginning after 1 January 2018, with an average drop from 39% to 26%, including state income taxes. 

This 26% CIT rate will be in line with the average among Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) member nations.

2.    Interest Expense Deduction Limitation

This new provision provides for a limitation of the interest deduction for all business interest expenses paid by the taxpayer, namely interest paid or accrued on debt which can be traced back to a trade or business.

This new restriction applies to all businesses, regardless of entity type, at the legal entity level. This includes “C corporations” which are taxed separately from their owners and subject to corporate income taxation, and “S corporations” which’ shareholders are directly subject to tax on their pro-rata shares of income based on their shareholdings (e.g. sole proprietorship).

However, this restriction does not affect small businesses since it applies only if the taxpayer’s average annual gross receipts for the three tax year period ending with the prior tax period do not exceed $25 million. Certain regulated public utilities, real estate and farming businesses that use the alternative (generally straight line) depreciation system for particular properties are allowed to elect for an exemption of this limitation. 

This new measure, subject to some exceptions, limits the deductibility of interest to 30% of the “adjusted taxable income”. This “adjusted taxable income” can be largely compared to earnings before interest, depreciation, depletion, interest income, interest expense and amortization (EBITDA) for the first four years till 2022. From 2022 onwards, the limitation will be applied on an amount closer to the EBIT of the company. Any disallowed business interest deduction can be carried forward indefinitely.

This restriction on interest expense deduction was designed to deter companies from shifting debt financing to foreign subsidiaries, thereby discouraging cross company loans and borrowing for tax avoidance.

3.    Loss restriction

The treatment of the Net Operating Losses (NOLs), the carry back and carry forward provisions were notably modified by the reform. The NOLs deduction is now limited to 80% of the taxable income of the year.

Previously, the NOLs offset was not limited and could be carried forward up to 20 years and carried back up to two years for corporate income tax purposes. With the reform, the carry back is eliminated while the carry forward is allowed indefinitely. 

The reform only applies to NOLs generated in taxable years ending after 31 December 2017. Subject to limitations, NOLs generated earlier will be subject to the former rules. Therefore, taxpayers have to track NOLs depending on the year of their generation.

This reform aims at dissuading companies from bringing losses to the US to artificially reduce their profit and shift costs including interest to foreign affiliates to make better use of loss deductions.  

4.    Foreign Participation Exemption:

US parent companies who own at least 10% of a foreign group or affiliates are exempt from tax on dividends received from these companies. The ownership criterion can alternatively be the number of voting shares or their value. 

The objective is to encourage US multinationals to shift their foreign profits onshore, since they can now bring cash back without heavy tax liabilities. 

This exemption will not apply to any “hybrid dividend”, defined as any dividend for which the foreign affiliate received a deduction for local income tax purposes. This might notably happen when the capital provided to the foreign affiliate is deemed as a loan and grants the right to interest deduction to the foreign company, while the return on the same capital would classify as dividends in the US and be exempt. This would result in a double tax deduction on these amounts.  

5.    Transition Tax: 

The inclusion of a transition tax is a strong signal that the US tax reform will confer many benefits from the territorial tax system but comes with compensation. 

Current overseas untaxed earnings still accumulated and held abroad since 1986 will be subject to a one-time transitional tax payable over 8 years. This applies to controlled foreign corporations (CFC) or any other foreign companies with a 10% US corporate shareholder. The law refers to them as “Specified Foreign Corporations” (SFC). 

The untaxed earnings would be charged at a lower rate of 15.5% for earnings held in cash or specified asset. Such items include: 

–       net accounts receivable, 

–       actively traded personal property, and 

–       obligations with a term of less than a year. 

Any remainder will be taxable at 8%.

US shareholders are allowed to opt to pay the transition tax over eight years: 

–       8% each year during the first five years, 

–       15% the 6th year, 

–       20% the 7th year, 

–       25% the 8th year.

In case the US corporation does not pay this tax within 10 years of the Act’s enactment, a safety net ensures that the full amount of untaxed earnings is subject to the transitional tax to a 35% tax rate.

This is directed at increasing the amount of corporate cash available for M&A transactions and overall increasing the liquidity levels in the US.

This computation may present extreme complexity as there is a need to determine post-1986 earning pools and historic tax payments to substantiate any foreign tax credit attributable to post-1986 earnings. This would potentially require companies to arrange significant cashflow needed to pay tax.

6.    Capital investment: 

The previous bonus depreciation percentage which qualified property could benefit from has been increased, following the reform, from 50% to 100%, from September 2017 up to the end of 2022. 

Accordingly, a company that acquires assets may be able to immediately deduct a significant portion of the purchase price as compared to the acquisition of the equity interests.

Beginning 2023, this bonus depreciation will be phased-out till 2026 (i.e. 80% for qualified property placed in service before 1 January 2024, 60% before 1 January 2025; 40% before 1 January 2026; and 20% before 1 January 2027).

The bonus depreciation is also applicable to non-original first use property as long as it is the tax payer’s first use.

This provision encourages structuring investments in new ways to take advantage of the deductions in the US along with the reduced effective tax rate as compared to other regions like Europe, Asia and Latin America.

7.    Base erosion and anti-avoidance tax (BEAT):

The BEAT is introduced amid a global crackdown against companies which have used the world’s tax regimes and deprived governments of a large chunk of corporate revenue, estimated at USD 100-240 billion.

According to the BEAT, if a large multinational, operating in the US makes related-party payments that are potentially part of aggressive profit shifting, they will be subject to a new minimum tax.

BEAT only applies to companies:

– with average annual gross receipts of at least $500 million for the most-recent three year period, and

– with related-party deductible payments of 3% (2% for banks) or more of their total deductions for the year (the “base erosion percentage”).

These related party disallowed payments include royalties, interest, rent, high-margin service payments to a foreign related party for the purposes of avoiding tax but exclude most cost of goods sold, payment for services at cost and certain qualified derivative payments.

Computation is done by using a minimum rate of tax a company should be paying on income without disallowed payments (Modified Taxable income or MTI), comparing this to the regular tax liability of the taxpayer arising at the federal corporate tax rate. If the regular tax liability is lower than the minimum computation, the excess is the BEAT amount to be paid as an additional tax. 

The minimum rate of tax to be used for this calculation is 5% of the MTI for year one, 10% thereafter and increasing to 12.5% from 2025 (additional 1% for banks and broker-dealers).

The BEAT is of major concern to foreign subsidiaries and could lead to a significant increase in US tax liability. Companies may find it beneficial to establish contracts in such manner that cost-sharing contracts between parents and subsidiaries are used instead of transactional payments in order to avoid the profit shifting arrangement. 

8.     Global intangible low tax income (GILTI):

This regime taxes the intangible low taxed income received from CFCs in the hands of the US shareholders. 

This tax is charged on an accrual system where the US parent includes in their income the GILTI value to be fully taxed regardless of whether it is remitted back to the US or not. This decreases the benefit for US companies to shift their IP in foreign low tax jurisdictions.

The GILTI amount is calculated on a net deemed tangible return based on the CFC’s tangible assets, which equal 10% of the shareholder’s aggregate pro rata share of the CFC’s qualified business asset investment (QBAI). The QBAI can be defined as the CFC’s quarterly average tax basis in depreciable tangible property used in the CFC’s trade or business to produce tested income or loss. 

The GILTI requires also to determine the US shareholder’s aggregate pro rata shares of its CFCs’ “net tested income”, which corresponds to the difference between the “tested income” (Gross income of a CFC excluding several listed incomes) and the specific “tested losses”. 

The portion of the CFC’s net tested income that exceeds the deemed tangible return on tangible assets is then included in the U.S. shareholder’s GILTI amount. 

For C corporations only, a deemed deduction of 50% will be applied to the GILTI amount but subject to a taxable income limitation. 80% of certain foreign income taxes paid by the CFCs will be deductible from the GILTI tax amount.

If the foreign effective tax rate on GILTI is at least 13.125% the US residual tax on the GILTI can be eliminated. If no foreign tax applies on the GILTI, US will tax this amount at a default rate of 10.5%.

9.     Deduction for foreign derived intangible income (FDII): 

While the tax reform uses GILTI to penalize taxpayers that have migrated IP offshore, it simultaneously incentives companies that leave their valuable IP in the U.S. using the FDII. 

This provision grants a preferential effective tax rate of 13.125% to eligible income of C companies. This is relevant to US headquartered companies and non-US companies doing business in the US.

FDII can be defined as the net domestic income earned thanks to operations in the US but only related to export (sales, services, lease…).

Similarly to GILTI, the FDII is the part of the income of the US company that exceeds the deemed tangible return amount calculated with reference to the QBAI.

IMPACT ON BUSINESSES IN THE GCC

In the aftermath of the US reform, companies around the world will look to alter their policies to maintain their corporate revenue and tax advantages.

Some GCC countries have almost no corporate tax (i.e. UAE, Bahrain) and are, similar to other jurisdictions, being affected by the aforementioned measures. It would prove beneficial for US subsidiaries in the GCC to assess the extent to which costs have been shifted to them from the US. It is also expected that lower budgets will now be allocated to these subsidiaries, to hold cash within the US, impacting the available cash in the GCC.

Adversely, GCC headquarters with US affiliates will be impacted by the BEAT, as a transfer pricing inter-company loan component. Any major cash remittances back to the GCC parent will be under scrutiny for anti-tax avoidance purposes. 

Categories
Customs & Trade Int'l Tax & Transfer Pricing

BEPS MLI enters into force today

BEPS MLI enters into force today

Tax avoidance and profit shifting have resulted in an estimated annual loss of USD 100 to 240 billion of tax revenue worldwide, effectively 4-10% of global corporate tax revenue. 
 
The Base Erosion and Profit Shifting initiative was endorsed by the OECD and the G20 and aims to address and tackle the shortcomings of the international tax system.

In order to achieve more quickly the objectives of the BEPS project, in November 2016 the Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (also known as “MLI”) was adopted by over 100 jurisdictions.
 
The MLI is aimed at bridging the gap between international tax rules and the anti-BEPS measures. It simplifies the previously cumbersome process of renegotiation and amending tax treaties by allowing the MLI to supersede any existing treaties.

Once a bilateral tax treaty has been listed under the MLI, it does not need to be renegotiated for the MLI to have effect, thus avoiding any need for bilateral negotiations. The MLI notably contains a general anti-avoidance principle and specific provisions tackling the circumvention of treaty limitations or treaty shopping.  
 
The MLI will have a worldwide tax impact as its signatories include jurisdictions from all continents. On 29 June 2018 82 jurisdictions had signed the MLI, with a further 6 expressing their intent to sign. The current signatories have listed over 2,500 treaties, already leading up to over 1,200 matched treaties.
 
The MLI has now achieved the minimum number of ratifications to enter into force. As of today 1 July 2018, the MLI has entered into force in the ratifying countries. As from today, any jurisdiction ratifying the MLI will see it applying as from the date chosen for its entry into force. This will notably be the case on 1 October 2018 in the United Kingdom which ratified the MLI on 29 June 2018.

Direct impact on the GCC
 
The BEPS Inclusive Framework (“IF”) obliges committed countries to ratify the MLI or to meet its objectives. Being a member of the IF, the UAE, KSA and Bahrain have been working on modifying their tax policies. No GCC State however has ratified the MLI but they are expected to do so in the short run.
 
With the date of ratification yet undetermined, the consequences for GCC companies might seem far from their concern. However, examining each tax treaty with ratifying and non-ratifying countries and planning for necessary changes to be made is necessary to avoid its adverse effects. 
 
Leading up to the ratification of the MLI, businesses need to estimate costs of compliance, consider possible restructuring in order to continue benefiting from the double tax treaties and assess impacts on future cash flow. 
 
Indirect impact on the GCC
 
The jurisdictions ratifying the MLI are more likely to scrutinize the treaties and their benefits to ensure there is no abuse, even if the treaty is not covered by the MLI. Therefore, even in absence of ratification of the MLI by any GCC state, the application of its tax treaties might be altered by countries with whom treaties are signed and have ratified the MLI. 
 
Companies within the GCC with subsidiaries or parents in jurisdictions ratifying the MLI should assess all transactions to and from these countries in the light of the tax treaties impacted by the MLI. 
Categories
GCC Tax Int'l Tax & Transfer Pricing

Identifying indirect tax hurdles for your supply chain

Identifying indirect tax hurdles for your supply chain

When setting up or reviewing their supply chain, businesses seek the most (cost) efficient and lean way for the cross-border movement of their goods. However, when performing this exercise, the indirect tax and regulatory requirements should be duly taken into account in order not to create any unforeseen or hidden (financial) risks.

For example, companies and supply chain experts continuously needs to ask themselves the following questions. Are all the required documents and certificates in place to import goods into a certain country? Are my products classified correctly for customs purposes? How is the taxable base for customs and import VAT calculated? Are there any related-company transactions and have these been taken into account for customs valuation? Are the incoterms in line with the contractual agreements and supply chain reality? How is the preferential and non-preferential origin of my product managed? Are there international sanctions and restrictions related to my products, my business partners or the country of destination? Etc. Non-compliance with the applicable regulations and formalities could lead to severe financial penalties imposed by the Customs and VAT Authorities. But next to the direct cost, companies should also be aware for the indirect financial implications as the cost of supply chain disruptions due to blocked or seized goods cannot be underestimated.  In the world of international and cross-border trade, one catch phrase sums it up quite nicely: “if you think compliance is expensive, try non-compliance!”

Luckily, local legislations and international agreements have foreseen in various possibilities and legal tools not only to mitigate the risks, but also to establish an efficient customs and supply chain setup. With sufficient in-depth knowledge of the business combined with legal expertise, asking the right questions allows you to seize short term opportunities.

Are there optimizations possible through product classification or valuation of the import transaction? Am I using the full potential of international free trade agreements? Can I shift costs and responsibilities to my business partner through the use of Incoterms? Are there special customs procedures and arrangements foreseen enabling me to optimize customs duties (e.g. customs warehouse, free zones, temporally import, etc.)? Are there any simplification procedures foreseen enabling me to streamline and optimize my supply chain? Etc. 

As the complex and ever-changing legislation brings both risks and opportunities, we would recommend to take a close look at the impact indirect tax requirements and other regulatory formalities have on your supply chain, and how these are currently managed. A good understanding of your business setup combined with a thorough knowledge of the various legal requirements will enable you to mitigate risks and spot opportunities and optimizations. This holds true especially now that VAT will be introduced in the GCC. A mapping of the current supply chain is therefore very important to further determine the appropriate strategies.