Harmful Tax Practices – 2019 Peer Review Reports on the Exchange of Information on
Inclusive Framework on BEPS: Action 5
BEPS Action 5 is one of the four minimum standards which all members of the OECD/G20
Inclusive Framework on BEPS have committed to implement. One part of the Action 5
minimum standard is the transparency framework for compulsory spontaneous exchange
of information on certain tax rulings which, in the absence of transparency, could
give rise to BEPS concerns. Over 130 jurisdictions have joined the Inclusive Framework
and take part in the peer review to assess their compliance with the transparency
Specific terms of reference and a methodology have been agreed for the peer reviews
to assess a jurisdiction’s implementation of the minimum standard. The review of the
transparency framework assesses jurisdictions against the terms of reference which
focus on five key elements: i) information gathering process, ii) exchange of information,
iii) confidentiality of the information received; iv) statistics on the exchanges
on rulings; and v) transparency on certain aspects of intellectual property regimes.
The reviews of confidentiality of the information received defer to the work of the
Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes and the
outcomes of that work are not published. Recommendations are issued where improvements
are needed to meet the minimum standard.
This report reflects the outcome of the annual peer review of the implementation of
the Action 5 minimum standard and covers 124 jurisdictions. It assesses implementation
for the 1 January - 31 December 2019 period.
Discover the international state of play with this interactive map presenting key indicators and outcomes of the OECD's work on international tax matters.
The Action 5 minimum standard consists of two parts. One part relates to preferential tax regimes, where a peer review is undertaken to identify features of such regimes that can facilitate base erosion and profit shifting, and therefore have the potential to unfairly impact the tax base of other jurisdictions. The second part includes a commitment to transparency through the compulsory spontaneous exchange of relevant information on taxpayer-specific rulings which, in the absence of such information exchange, could give rise to BEPS concerns.