Russia: Beneficial ownership concept in Russia: claiming treaty benefits becomes more complicated

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

Russia: Beneficial ownership concept in Russia: claiming treaty benefits becomes more complicated

Sponsored by

sponsored-firms-kpmg.png
Communicating cross-border mechanisms for DAC6 purposes in a TP adjustment

In April 2018 the Federal Tax Service of Russia issued a letter (Letter No. CA-4-9/8285@) containing guidelines for lower tax authorities on how to use the beneficial ownership concept when applying treaty benefits in Russia.

In April 2018 the Federal Tax Service of Russia issued a letter (Letter No. CA-4-9/8285@) containing guidelines for lower tax authorities on how to use the beneficial ownership concept when applying treaty benefits in Russia. This is the second comprehensive set of guidelines prepared by the tax authorities on this subject (the last set was published in May last year).

The key difference between these two letters is that the prevailing version of the guidelines sets out far more stringent criteria for confirming the beneficial ownership status of foreign companies.

In particular, the Russian tax authorities are requiring that foreign companies that seek to claim treaty benefits in Russia receive active income abroad, and that this income should be used to create an economic profit centre in its country of residence. Activities such as holding assets, intra-group financing, or the provision of services to related parties are specifically marked as not qualifying under the new guidelines.

In addition to confirming the beneficial owner status of a foreign company, withholding tax (WHT) agents (Russian income-paying companies) are required to provide the business justification for why they involved any such foreign company in their structure (or in the transaction), providing evidence of the commercial drivers and risks in the transaction as a whole.

The guidelines re-affirm the trend of the tax authorities to actively combat the use of double taxation agreement (DTA) benefits by foreign companies and structures that do not have sufficient actual and economic presence abroad. This affects primarily those companies with assets and income connected with Russia (foreign holdings, intragroup financial (treasury) centres, etc.), but may also have some negative impact on foreign investors coming to Russia (e.g. through joint venture (JV) structures).

As such, given the recent position of the Russian tax authorities, Russian companies are advised to 'stress test' their income payment structures when foreign companies are involved. If necessary, it might be recommended that the group consider restructuring and strengthening the beneficial owner status of the foreign recipient of income, as well as investigating the possibility of applying the 'look-through approach' when paying income from Russia (i.e. claiming another person in the cash flow as a beneficial owner of the income).

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