The report on BEPS Action 14 (Making Dispute Resolution Mechanisms More Effective) contains a commitment by jurisdictions to implement a minimum standard to ensure that they resolve treaty-related disputes in a timely, effective and efficient manner. All members of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS (IF) commit to the implementation of the Action 14 minimum standard which includes timely and complete reporting of mutual agreement procedure (MAP) statistics pursuant to an agreed reporting framework. The 2017 MAP statistics are reported under this new framework. They cover all the members that joined the IF prior to 2018.

 

2017 MAP Statistics at a glance

 

^{(Click to enlarge)}

All cases*	2017 Start inventory	Cases started in 2017	Cases closed	End inventory
Cases received prior to 1 January 2016 or of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework	6313	0	1764	4549
Cases received on or after 1 January 2016 or of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework	1187	2076	981	2282

* New cases (cases received on or after 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework) are counted using an agreed methodology that uses a common start date and allows for reconciliation of all MAP cases between members of the Inclusive Framework thus eliminating double counting. Old cases (cases received prior to 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework) were based on each reporting jurisdictions’ own methodology without a jurisdiction by jurisdiction breakdown and the possibility of reconciliation. Aggregate reporting for old cases therefore included double counting of cases reported by two reporting jurisdictions in their respective inventory. 

MAP Outcomes
(cases closed in 2017)

^{(Click to enlarge)}

 

2017 MAP Statistics per reporting jurisdiction

2017 MAP statistics are also available per reporting jurisdiction. 

• See the table that summarises all the 2017 MAP caseload per jurisdiction where the specific file for each jurisdiction can be downloaded by clicking on a jurisdiction’s name.

• See also the graph that presents the evolution of MAP inventory per jurisdiction.

 

Cases received prior to or after 1 January 2016 or 1 january of the year of joining the beps inclusive framework

In the MAP Statistics Reporting Framework, a distinction is made between the cases received before or as from 1 January 2016, which is the date as from when the reporting jurisdictions committed to the implementation of the Action 14 minimum standard. For the jurisdictions that joined the inclusive framework after 31 December 2016, the distinction is made between the cases received before or as from 1 January of the year of joining the Inclusive  Framework on BEPS (IF membership).

Inclusive Framework Membership
Commitment to the Action 14 minimum standard

 

• The cases received before 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the Inclusive Framework on BEPS (IF membership) are cases that were in the inventory of the jurisdictions before they committed to the implementation of the Action 14 minimum standard. The number of cases in such category will decrease over time.
• The cases received as from 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the Inclusive Framework on BEPS (IF membership) are cases that started after the jurisdictions committed to the implementation of the Action 14 minimum standard. The share of cases in such category will increase over time and eventually will cover all cases in a jurisdiction’s inventory.

 

The main differences between the two categories are the following: 

Cases received before 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the Inclusive Framework on BEPS		Cases received on or after 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the Inclusive Framework on BEPS
Each jurisdiction can follow its own computation rules No reporting on a jurisdiction basis No possibility to identify the cases that are reported twice by jurisdictions that have cases in common		All reporting jurisdictions follow the computation rules set in the MAP Statistics Reporting Framework Reporting on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis  All cases initiated in one jurisdiction are also reported in the other jurisdiction involved Possibility to avoid double counting by identifying the cases that the reporting jurisdictions have in common

 

 

Transfer pricing cases and other cases

The agreed reporting framework now makes a distinction between "attribution/allocation" cases and "other" cases.

An attribution/allocation case (called here a "transfer pricing case") is a MAP case where the taxpayer’s MAP request relates to either:

 

• the attribution of profits to a permanent establishment (see e.g. Article 7 of the OECD Model Tax Convention); or
• the determination of profits between associated enterprises (see e.g. Article 9 of the OECD Model Tax Convention).

 

Any MAP case that is not an attribution / allocation MAP case is considered as an "other" MAP case.

Note: while these definitions belong to the set of rules applicable for cases started as from 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework (IF membership), the jurisdictions may have used different definitions for cases that started before 1 January 2016 and specify in the notes of their own statistics the definitions they have used. See also above for more details about the distinction between cases started before or as from 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework (IF membership).

 

(Click to enlarge)

Transfer pricing cases*	Start inventory	Cases started	Cases closed	End inventory
Cases received prior to 1 January 2016 or of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework	3561	0	984	2577
Cases received on or after 1 January 2016 or of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework	576	779	251	1104
Other cases*	Start inventory	Cases started	Cases closed	End inventory
Cases received prior to 1 January 2016 or of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework	2752	0	780	1972
Cases received on or after 1 January 2016 or of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework	611	1297	730	1178

* New cases (cases received on or after 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework) are counted using an agreed methodology that uses a common start date and allows for reconciliation of all MAP cases between members of the Inclusive Framework thus eliminating double counting. Old cases (cases received prior to 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework) were based on each reporting jurisdictions’ own methodology without a jurisdiction by jurisdiction breakdown and the possibility of reconciliation. Aggregate reporting for old cases therefore included double counting of cases reported by two reporting jurisdictions in their respective inventory. 

Further information is available: 

For transfer pricing cases	For other cases
See the table that summarises the 2017 MAP caseload per jurisdiction for transfer pricing cases	See the table that summarises the 2017 MAP caseload per jurisdiction for other cases
See also the graph that presents the evolution of MAP inventory per jurisdiction for transfer pricing cases	See also the graph that presents the evolution of MAP inventory per jurisdiction for other cases

 

Average time taken to close MAP cases

Note: the average time mentioned here only relates to cases that were closed in 2017. For cases started as from 1 January 2016, this means that maximum 24 months have elapsed from the start date to the end date of such cases.

• More information on average time and computation rules. 

 

FURTHER INFORMATION

MAP statistics for reporting periods 2006 to 2015 and for 2016 are still available for OECD member countries and a number of non-OECD economies that have agreed to provide such statistics for these periods. 

 

Action 14 develops solutions to address obstacles that prevent countries from solving treaty-related disputes under MAP, via a minimum standard in this area as well as a number of best practices. It also includes arbitration as an option for willing countries.

• Find out more about the peer review and monitoring process of the BEPS Action 14 Miniumum Standard.
• Learn more about OECD work on dispute resolution.
• Contact us by e-mail: [email protected]
• Follow us on Twitter: @OECDtax