Harmful Tax Practices – 2024 Peer Review Reports on the Exchange of Information on Tax Rulings

Fiji

Fiji is taking steps to implement the aspects of the terms of reference (OECD, 2021[1]) (ToR) for the transparency framework and to commence administrative preparations to ensure that it establishes an information gathering process (ToR I.A) and that information on rulings will be identified and exchanged in a timely manner (ToR II.B).Fiji receives two recommendations on these points for the calendar year 2024 (year in review).

This is Fiji’s first review of implementation of the transparency framework.

The Fiji can legally issue four types of rulings within the scope of the transparency framework.

In practice, Fiji issued no rulings within the scope of the transparency framework.

As no exchanges took place, no peer input was received in respect of the exchanges of information on rulings received from Fiji.

Information gathering process (ToR I.A)

1. Fiji can legally issue the following four types of rulings within the scope of the transparency framework: (i) preferential regimes; (ii) cross-border unilateral APAs and any other cross-border unilateral tax rulings (such as an advance tax ruling) covering transfer pricing or the application of transfer pricing principles; (iii) permanent establishment rulings; and (iv) related party conduit rulings.

Past rulings (ToR I.A.1.1, I.A.1.2, I.A.2.1, I.A.2.2)

2. For Fiji, past rulings are any tax rulings issued prior to 1 September 2024. However, there is no obligation for Fiji to conduct spontaneous exchange information on past rulings.

Future rulings (ToR I.A.1.1, I.A.1.2, I.A.2.1)

3. For Fiji, future rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued on or after 1 September 2024.

4. Fiji does not have a process to identify future rulings and all potential exchange jurisdictions. Therefore, Fiji is recommended to put in place its information gathering process on future rulings as soon as possible.

Review and supervision (ToR I.A.3)

5. Fiji does not yet have a review and supervision mechanism under the transparency framework. Therefore, Fiji is recommended to put in place a review and supervision mechanism as soon as possible.

Conclusion on section A

6. Fiji is recommended to put in place an effective information gathering process for identifying all past and future rulings and all potential exchange jurisdictions, with a review and supervision mechanism, as soon as possible (ToR I.A).

Exchange of information (ToR II.B)

Legal basis for spontaneous exchange of information (ToR II.B.1, II.B.2)

7. Fiji has the necessary domestic legal basis to exchange information spontaneously. Fiji notes that there are no legal or practical impediments that prevent the spontaneous exchange of information on rulings as contemplated in the Action 5 minimum standard.

8. Fiji has international agreements permitting spontaneous exchange of information, including bilateral agreements in force with 11 jurisdictions.1

Completion and exchange of templates (ToR II.B.3, II.B.4, II.B.5, II.B.6, II.B.7)

9. Fiji does not yet have a process to complete the templates on all relevant rulings, to make them available to the Competent Authority for exchange of information, and to exchange them with relevant jurisdictions.

10. During the year in review, no exchanges were required to take place and no data on the timeliness of exchanges is reported.

Conclusion on section B

11. Fiji is recommended to develop a process to complete the templates for all relevant rulings and to ensure that the exchanges of information on rulings occur in accordance with the form and timelines under the transparency framework going forward (ToR II.B).

Statistics (ToR IV.D)

12. As there was no information on rulings exchanged by Fiji for the year in review, no statistics can be reported.

Matters related to intellectual property regimes (ToR I.A.1.3)

13. Fiji does not offer an intellectual property regime for which transparency requirements under the Action 5 Report (OECD, 2015[3]) were imposed.

Summary of recommendations on implementation of the transparency framework

 

Aspect of implementation of the transparency framework that should be improved	Recommendation for improvement
Fiji does not yet have an effective information gathering process in place to identify all relevant future rulings and all potential exchange jurisdictions.	Fiji is recommended to put in place an effective information gathering process for identifying all past and future rulings and all potential exchange jurisdictions, with a review and supervision mechanism, as soon as possible.
Fiji does not yet have a process to complete the templates on all relevant rulings, to make them available to the Competent Authority for exchange of information, and to exchange them with relevant jurisdictions.	Fiji is recommended to develop a process to complete the templates for all relevant rulings and to ensure that the exchanges of information on rulings occur in accordance with the form and timelines under the transparency framework going forward.

Note

← 1.  Participating jurisdictions to the Convention are available here: www.oecd.org/tax/exchange-of-tax-information/convention-on-mutual-administrative-assistance-in-tax-matters.htm. Fiji also has bilateral agreements with Australia, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Qatar, Singapore, United Arab Emirates and United Kingdom.