US Outbound: New updates to CAP focus on transfer pricing issue resolution

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

US Outbound: New updates to CAP focus on transfer pricing issue resolution

Sponsored by

sponsored-firms-kpmg.png

On August 27 2018, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) announced changes to the compliance assurance process (CAP) for future years. CAP is an IRS programme that allows select taxpayers to participate in advance resolution of issues with IRS personnel prior to filing their returns.

The programme began with 17 participants in 2005, and has grown to 169 in 2018.

The IRS announced in 2016 that new participants would not be accepted into the CAP, leaving the future of the programme uncertain. The 2018 news release, however, indicated that the IRS intends to maintain and expand the CAP. Doug O'Donnell, commissioner of the IRS's large business and international division, stated that "after extensive review, we believe this programme continues to provide benefit for taxpayers and tax administration". While applications for 2019 are restricted to current CAP taxpayers, the IRS announced that the programme would reopen to new participants in the future.

The changes, which are effective for the 2019 application season, require taxpayers applying for the CAP to provide the IRS with a preliminary list of material issues and, if applicable, specified transfer pricing and research credit information. Additionally, under the new procedures, taxpayers may be required to resolve certain transfer pricing issues using an advance pricing agreement (APA). Generally, the CAP procedures move quickly, since their duration is limited by the return filing date, and the recent news release announces a 90-day goal for issue resolution in the CAP. The requirement that some issues be resolved through APAs rather than the CAP seems to reflect the IRS's understanding that complex transfer pricing issues may not be suited to the timeframe and procedures of the CAP, and instead require more deliberate consideration by subject matter experts in the APA process.

Importantly, the requirement that APAs be used for certain issues also suggests that the IRS does not believe difficult transfer pricing issues should preclude taxpayers from participating in the CAP. Rather, it seems to contemplate a coordinated approach under which some transfer pricing issues may be severed from the normal CAP and addressed in a parallel, albeit longer, APA procedure. This should help the IRS reach its 90-day issue resolution goal for the CAP, while also opening the door to bilateral resolution of significant transfer pricing issues through the APA process. Since bilateral resolutions are not available in the CAP, this is a significant benefit to taxpayers.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The UK’s Labour government has an unpopular prime minister, an unpopular chancellor and not a lot of good options as it prepares to deliver its autumn Budget
Awards
The firms picked up five major awards between them at a gala ceremony held at New York’s prestigious Metropolitan Club
The streaming company’s operating income was $400m below expectations following the dispute; in other news, the OECD has released updates for 25 TP country profiles
Software company Oracle has won the right to have its A$250m dispute with the ATO stayed, paving the way for a mutual agreement procedure
If the US doesn't participate in pillar two then global consensus on the project can’t be a reality, tax academic René Matteotti also suggests
If it gets pillar two right, India may be the ideal country that finds a balance between its global commitments and its national interests, Sameer Sharma argues
As World Tax unveils its much-anticipated rankings for 2026, we focus on EMEA’s top performers in the first of three regional analyses
Firms are spending serious money to expand their tax advisory practices internationally – this proves that the tax practice is no mere sideshow
The controversial deal would ‘preserve the gains achieved under pillar two’, the OECD said; in other news, HMRC outlined its approach to dealing with ‘harmful’ tax advisers
Former EY and Deloitte tax specialists will staff the new operation, which provides the firm with new offices in Tokyo and Osaka
Gift this article