BEPS is centre stage

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

BEPS is centre stage

The OECD's base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) project, commissioned by the G20, has now taken centre stage in global transfer pricing.

With a deadline of September 2014 for initial outputs, following a raft of public consultations, and a final deadline for completion set for September 2015, it's an ambitious project and nothing has yet been decided. But that hasn't stopped taxpayers and their advisers trying to forward plan as to how the final guidelines will impact their businesses and tax structures.

The project has also seen the first serious international discussion about country-by-country reporting, which before the public consultations had begun, was considered a fringe issue and the brainchild of left-wing tax campaigners; rather than something that would ever be accepted by multinational companies.

Tax directors still have a number of concerns about how country-by-country reporting will be adopted by tax authorities around the world, not least because they fear it will provide competitors with sensitive information that will put them at an economic disadvantage.

The OECD needs to iron out the grey areas of country-by-country reporting to ensure that all the information that taxpayers submit to revenue authorities will be crucial and, most importantly, understood and used by revenue officials.

BEPS is, therefore, a big theme in this year's Transfer Pricing supplement with articles looking at what it means for multinational companies, substance and transparency in the context of BEPS and a specific look at how it will impact certain jurisdictions, such as the UK and Germany.

The publication also features an article from Vineet Rachh, a multinational taxpayer, who focusses on the external changes that can impact a company's supply chain and how to manage these issues to promote efficiency in the tax department.

Readers will also benefit from advice about how to choose between the price-setting approach versus the outcome testing approach in Germany, from advisers at PwC; new developments in the Brazilian transfer pricing rules, in an article written by Felsberg Advogados; the Chilean tax reform, by PwC; documentation requirements in France, by LexCase Societe d'Avocats; compliance and reporting outsourcing in Russia, by EY; and US transfer pricing developments from Fenwick & West.

Sophie Ashley

Managing editor

TPWeek.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

With a stark divergence between MNEs that prepared early and those rushing to catch up, advisers must remain agile with all manner of compliance risks
The EU agreed new cooperative and investigative measures to tackle VAT fraud, while Hungary faced legal action and Lavez Coutinho expanded its indirect tax team
The arrival of a team from Brazilian rival Costa Tavares Paes Advogados brings SiqueiraCastro’s tax headcount to seven partners and 30 associates
CSR initiatives can sometimes venture into virtue signalling, but Ryan’s tax literacy event for schoolchildren was a genuine and necessary endeavour
Grant Thornton advanced plans to integrate its Australian firm into its US arm, as tax developments spanned law firm hires, aviation levies and digital services taxes
A new focus on early intervention and increased AI use is transforming how tax authorities are approaching TP audits, though capacity-constrained jurisdictions risk falling behind
The French administration has used AI to detect undeclared swimming pools and verandas but always includes a human in the loop, the AI in Tax Forum heard
The UK tax authority’s deputy director of large business also reassured taxpayers that HMRC will not ‘nitpick’ returns
Sucafina’s tax chief was speaking at the ITR Pillar 2 Forum in London alongside experts from HMRC and other organisations
India’s Supreme Court rattled cross‑border structuring with its Tiger Global ruling. Subsequent rule changes narrowed the impact, but significant risks around GAAR, substance and treaty access persist
Gift this article