Transfer pricing

4 MAP and domestic law - 4.1 Interaction between MAP and domestic recourse provisions

 

 
Return to index

previous page

next page

4. MAP and domestic law

4.1. Interaction between MAP and domestic recourse provisions

With respect to adjustments or actions by a tax administration, it is advisable for taxpayers to protect, for greater certainty, their rights of domestic appeal or redress and they should take note of the domestic processes for doing so.  Although in most cases the competent authorities reach agreement and relieve taxation not in accordance with the tax convention, there is no further recourse when a MAP agreement cannot be reached using all of the available mechanisms or programs of MAP (including possible avenues in MAP such as mediation, arbitration, advance pricing arrangements, etc., if available) if domestic rights have not been protected.

In most cases, tax administrations prefer to deal with an issue either via MAP or domestic recourse, but not both at the same time (with the exception of some countries offering a simultaneous MAP and domestic recourse program) to avoid duplication of effort.  Therefore depending upon which process is chosen, it is recommended that the other process be held in abeyance pending the outcome of the first, taking into consideration the consequences of doing so in each jurisdiction. 

Choosing domestic recourse such as court proceedings over MAP may in some jurisdiction result in a tax administration’s being bound by the decision of the court and prevented from providing relief through MAP.  Where a competent authority takes the position that it cannot, or will not, deviate from domestic court decisions in MAP, it should make this position public and duly explain the legal basis of its position.

Notwithstanding the above, a taxpayer may in many instances make a competent authority request regarding one issue of an adjustment, and independently pursue another separate issue with domestic recourse.

Competent authorities are not bound by a decision given by a foreign court or a foreign appeal settlement. The granting of any relief to a taxpayer by a competent authority in such situations will depend more on the merits of the case rather than on another country’s inability to provide relief.  Therefore, a country refusing access to, or relief via, MAP cannot genuinely expect the other country to provide unilateral relief for that reason alone. 

The Commentary (with proposed revisions) to the OECD Model Tax Convention provides for further guidance on the interaction of MAP and domestic recourse provisions. 

Return to index

previous page

next page

 

 

 

Countries list

  • Afghanistan
  • Albania
  • Algeria
  • Andorra
  • Angola
  • Anguilla
  • Antigua and Barbuda
  • Argentina
  • Armenia
  • Aruba
  • Australia
  • Austria
  • Azerbaijan
  • Bahamas
  • Bahrain
  • Bangladesh
  • Barbados
  • Belarus
  • Belgium
  • Belize
  • Benin
  • Bermuda
  • Bhutan
  • Bolivia
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina
  • Botswana
  • Brazil
  • Brunei Darussalam
  • Bulgaria
  • Burkina Faso
  • Burundi
  • Cambodia
  • Cameroon
  • Canada
  • Cape Verde
  • Cayman Islands
  • Central African Republic
  • Chad
  • Chile
  • China (People’s Republic of)
  • Chinese Taipei
  • Colombia
  • Comoros
  • Congo
  • Cook Islands
  • Costa Rica
  • Croatia
  • Cuba
  • Cyprus
  • Czech Republic
  • Côte d'Ivoire
  • Democratic People's Republic of Korea
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo
  • Denmark
  • Djibouti
  • Dominica
  • Dominican Republic
  • Ecuador
  • Egypt
  • El Salvador
  • Equatorial Guinea
  • Eritrea
  • Estonia
  • Ethiopia
  • European Union
  • Faeroe Islands
  • Fiji
  • Finland
  • Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM)
  • France
  • French Guiana
  • Gabon
  • Gambia
  • Georgia
  • Germany
  • Ghana
  • Gibraltar
  • Greece
  • Greenland
  • Grenada
  • Guatemala
  • Guernsey
  • Guinea
  • Guinea-Bissau
  • Guyana
  • Haiti
  • Honduras
  • Hong Kong, China
  • Hungary
  • Iceland
  • India
  • Indonesia
  • Iraq
  • Ireland
  • Islamic Republic of Iran
  • Isle of Man
  • Israel
  • Italy
  • Jamaica
  • Japan
  • Jersey
  • Jordan
  • Kazakhstan
  • Kenya
  • Kiribati
  • Korea
  • Kuwait
  • Kyrgyzstan
  • Lao People's Democratic Republic
  • Latvia
  • Lebanon
  • Lesotho
  • Liberia
  • Libya
  • Liechtenstein
  • Lithuania
  • Luxembourg
  • Macao (China)
  • Madagascar
  • Malawi
  • Malaysia
  • Maldives
  • Mali
  • Malta
  • Marshall Islands
  • Mauritania
  • Mauritius
  • Mayotte
  • Mexico
  • Micronesia (Federated States of)
  • Moldova
  • Monaco
  • Mongolia
  • Montenegro
  • Montserrat
  • Morocco
  • Mozambique
  • Myanmar
  • Namibia
  • Nauru
  • Nepal
  • Netherlands
  • Netherlands Antilles
  • New Zealand
  • Nicaragua
  • Niger
  • Nigeria
  • Niue
  • Norway
  • Oman
  • Pakistan
  • Palau
  • Palestinian Administered Areas
  • Panama
  • Papua New Guinea
  • Paraguay
  • Peru
  • Philippines
  • Poland
  • Portugal
  • Puerto Rico
  • Qatar
  • Romania
  • Russian Federation
  • Rwanda
  • Saint Helena
  • Saint Kitts and Nevis
  • Saint Lucia
  • Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
  • Samoa
  • San Marino
  • Sao Tome and Principe
  • Saudi Arabia
  • Senegal
  • Serbia
  • Serbia and Montenegro (pre-June 2006)
  • Seychelles
  • Sierra Leone
  • Singapore
  • Slovak Republic
  • Slovenia
  • Solomon Islands
  • Somalia
  • South Africa
  • South Sudan
  • Spain
  • Sri Lanka
  • Sudan
  • Suriname
  • Swaziland
  • Sweden
  • Switzerland
  • Syrian Arab Republic
  • Tajikistan
  • Tanzania
  • Thailand
  • Timor-Leste
  • Togo
  • Tokelau
  • Tonga
  • Trinidad and Tobago
  • Tunisia
  • Turkey
  • Turkmenistan
  • Turks and Caicos Islands
  • Tuvalu
  • Uganda
  • Ukraine
  • United Arab Emirates
  • United Kingdom
  • United States
  • United States Virgin Islands
  • Uruguay
  • Uzbekistan
  • Vanuatu
  • Venezuela
  • Vietnam
  • Virgin Islands (UK)
  • Wallis and Futuna Islands
  • Western Sahara
  • Yemen
  • Zambia
  • Zimbabwe
  • Topics list