US Outbound: US issues proposed CbCR regulations
International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX
Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

US Outbound: US issues proposed CbCR regulations


Sean Foley

Cameron Taheri

On December 21 2015, the US Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) released proposed regulations that are designed to coordinate with the model country-by-country reporting (CbCR) template and instructions set forth in Action 13 of the OECD/G20 BEPS Project.

However, some aspects of the proposed regulations represent a more detailed or slightly different approach from the approach delineated in Action 13. The preamble notes that the proposed regulations, while generally consistent with international standards, are tailored to be consistent with the information reporting requirements applicable to US persons under the relevant Code sections pursuant to which they were issued (sections 6001, 6011, 6012, 6031, and 6038).

The proposed regulations provide that US persons that are the ultimate parent entity of a multinational enterprise (MNE) group with annual revenue of $850 million or more for the immediately preceding annual accounting period would be required to file a country-by-country (CbC) reporting form. The CbC reporting form will be based on the Action 13 model template CbC report. The proposed regulations contain the operative provision, relevant definitions, the reporting period, contents of the return, method for reporting financial amounts, time and manner for filing, maintenance of records, exceptions to furnishing information, and effective/applicability dates.

The regulations are proposed to be applicable to tax years of ultimate parent entities of MNE groups beginning on or after the date of publication of the final regulations. Given the late publication date for the proposed regulations, final regulations would not be expected until sometime during 2016, pushing the first reportable period for calendar year MNE groups to 2017. The CbC reporting form is expected to be filed with the ultimate parent entity's timely filed income tax return. This is one year later than the anticipated reporting period. It is important to note that as each local jurisdiction adopts CbCR and issues local legislation/regulations, US MNE groups may have CbCR obligations for 2016 under various local rules, even though there might be no such obligation under US law. This could present important challenges to US MNEs.

The preamble to the proposed regulations echoes language in the OECD's BEPS Action 13 regarding the goals and limitations of CbCR, indicating that while the reports will help the IRS to perform high-level transfer pricing risk identification and assessment, transfer pricing adjustments will not be based solely on a CbC report. The preamble also addresses US taxpayer concerns regarding the confidentiality of information provided on the CbC reports shared around the globe, indicating that for US purposes, information reported pursuant to the proposed regulations constitutes return information under section 6103, which imposes strict confidentiality requirements, and allows the IRS to exchange information only to the extent provided in, and subject to the terms and conditions of, an information exchange agreement.

The preamble notes that the IRS and Treasury enter into such agreements only when they are satisfied with respect to the legal safeguards, enforcement, and penalties provided by the counterparty to the agreement, and that the US competent authority will not enter into a reciprocal automatic exchange of information relationship with another jurisdiction unless it has reviewed that jurisdiction's policies and procedures. Moreover, the IRS and Treasury will pause the automatic exchange of CbC reports with tax jurisdictions that are not meeting their obligations under the applicable information exchange or competent authority agreement.

The information contained herein is of a general nature and based on authorities that are subject to change. Applicability of the information to specific situations should be determined through consultation with your tax adviser.

This article represents the views of the authors only, and does not necessarily represent the views or professional advice of KPMG LLP.

Sean Foley ( and Cameron Taheri (, Washington, DC


Tel: +1 202 533 5588

Fax: +1 202 533 3384


more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Australian advisers should tread carefully when using new reporting obligations to complain about peers, Tax Practitioners’ Board chairman Peter de Cure tells ITR in an exclusive interview
As German clients attempt to comply with complex cross-border rules, local advisers argue that aggressive tax authorities are making life even harder
Based on surveys covering more than 25,000 in-house lawyers, the series provides insights into what law firms must score highly on when pitching to in-house counsel
The UK tax authority reportedly lost a case due to missing a deadline; in other news, Canada has approved pillar two legislation
There will always be multinationals trying to minimise tax by pushing the boundaries of their cross-border arrangements, Rob Heferen claimed
HMRC’s attempts to crack down on fraudulent tax relief claims are well-meaning, but the agency risks penalising genuinely innovative businesses, writes Katy Long of ForrestBrown
Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa are among the countries the OECD believes could benefit from the simplified TP rules
It comes despite an offshore enabler penalty existing in the UK throughout the entire period
It is extraordinary that tax advisers in the UK can offer their services without having to join a professional body. This looks like it is coming to an end, Ralph Cunningham writes
Meet the esteemed judges who are assessing the first-ever Social Impact Awards
Gift this article