+ Word must be in search result. - Words must not be in search result. * Word start/end on characters before/after symbol. ""Words in quotes will be searched as phrase.

 

New changes in Ukrainian transfer pricing rules in 2019

authors: Ivan Shynkarenko, Kateryna Utiralova

source: WTS Transfer Pricing Newsletter, #1/2019

24 June, 2019 Press

As of 1 January 2019 the Tax Code of Ukraine has been supplemented with new provisions in Article 39, which sets forth TP rules for Ukrainian entities. Some of these rules in fact represent the implementation of TP-related BEPS Actions into Ukrainian tax law. The most important changes are as follows:

The substance-over-form principle

Since 2019 the substance-over-form principle has been introduced into TP rules. This means that from now on taxpayers/tax authorities must analyse the functions performed by the parties of controlled transactions based on:

1) Concluded agreements

2) Accounting data

3) Actual actions of the parties and the circumstances of transactions

Should actual actions of the parties and their non-documented agreements differ from those declared in the contract, actual actions and conditions shall prevail.

If transactions are actually performed but not arranged by any documents and not reflected in the accounting data of the taxpayer or its counterparty, such transactions may still be subject to TP rules if the tax authority finds evidence of the actual conduct of these transactions.

We understand that such new rules are in line with the recommendations of BEPS Actions 8–10. These rules should encourage actual agreements between parties to be examined, to determine their actual contributions to transactions and the non-recognition of transactions which make no commercial sense to be authorised.

New criteria for the selection of the tested party

The Tax Code of Ukraine provides that when a taxpayer opts to apply the TP method, based on comparison of profitability, the taxpayer should also select the tested party, namely the party to the transaction whose profit margin would be analysed according to the TP Method. The rules stipulate that a taxpayer shall select the party for whom the TP method with the most accurate results should be applied, and for whom the most reliable comparable transactions can be found. A new criterion for selecting the tested party was added in 2019: the party for which the most comprehensive financial information and accounting data is available must be selected. The wording of this rule may be interpreted in the way that it can usually be met only by parties to transactions with residence in Ukraine. Hence, this rule
may significantly limit the possibility to choose a non-resident of Ukraine as a tested party. In turn, this could bring a massive change in general approach to TP analysis of large numbers of transactions where a non-resident party was usually tested.

Controlled transactions with involvement of “unrelated” intermediaries

The Tax Code of Ukraine provides that transactions between a Ukrainian entity and its related non-resident shall fall under TP control even if an intermediary is placed between such entities, provided that such an intermediary does not perform significant functions and does not use significant assets and/or does not bear significant risks. Starting from 2019, the rule will be applied not only to transactions between related parties but also between Ukrainian entities and special kinds of non-resident entities registered in “low tax” jurisdictions according to the list adopted by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine (CMU), and with non-resident entities with special legal form included in another list adopted by the CMU.

Download pdf-file of the article (300 Kb)

Views 1948

SIMILAR POSTS

Better late than never: Legislators have finally decided to improve the rules on liability for correction of TP Reporting 12 March, 2025    1376

The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine has updated the list of low-tax jurisdictions 20 January, 2025    2207

The Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement on the Exchange of Country-by-Country Reports has entered into force for Ukraine: Implications for participants of MNE groups in Ukraine 07 November, 2024    878

Changes in the characteristics of non-resident counterparties for recognising transactions as controlled or making a 30% adjustment for corporate profit tax purposes 02 August, 2024    2138

Ukrainian Court Denies Characterization As Stewardship Expenses 10 July, 2024    951

Comparables Selection Was Correct After All, Ukrainian Court Says 11 April, 2024    514

The case Olympex Coupe International v. State Tax Service: the Supreme Court of Ukraine has finally decided to disallow the tax office’s “creative” application of the transactional net margin method 01 March, 2024    1549

Important transfer pricing court practice: the cassation appeal of the tax office has been (partially) satisfied again by the Supreme Court – why is the case important and what significant nuances have not been taken into account? 13 November, 2023    2015

Comparables Analysis Insufficient; Ukrainian Court Remands Case 18 September, 2023    1200

“Massive” requests regarding application of the 30% adjustment on corporate income tax. What is wrong and what to do? 03 August, 2023    2865

Ukraine: The War is not an excuse to ignore Transfer Pricing Compliance 06 February, 2023    1191

Finally! Ukraine has joined Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement on the Exchange of Country-by-Country Reports 09 November, 2022    1899

Comment