Japanese companies fear the rise of the profit split method

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

Japanese companies fear the rise of the profit split method

fisherman-Japan 600 x 375

As Japan moves towards a new transfer pricing (TP) regime, companies fear the increasing use of the profit split method could erode the arm’s-length principle (ALP).

The Japan Business Federation, widely known as Keidanren, has been analysing the Shinzo Abe government’s ambitious plans to reform TP rules. The federation may not be known worldwide, but many of its members are household names, including Hitachi, Mitsubishi and Toyota.

With almost every major Japanese business being a member, Keidanren is the voice of industry . So when this association talks, the Japanese government listens closely.

“We are concerned by the proliferation of the profit split method, which involves the notion of allowing the prices of foreign controlled transactions to be determined without using comparables,” Hiroshi Makuuchi, who oversees tax policy at Keidanren, told TP Week.

Although the Japanese government has opted for the discounted cash flow (DCF) method as a fail-safe approach for transactions with few or even no comparables, Keidanren is concerned that the Asian trend towards the profit split method or formulary apportionment could influence policy in Japan.

“It appears that Japan’s neighbouring countries, many of which are emerging economies, are eager to use the profit split method more frequently,” Makuuchi said. “This is a very slippery slope.”

“This [profit split] notion, which is close to so-called formulary apportionment, could make TP rules based on the [ALP] very ambiguous,” he added, explaining that this is why businesses fear the ALP’s days may be numbered.

The profit split method is also gaining popularity as a means of dealing with taxation of the digital economy. However, the method risks double taxation as it could strengthen the taxing rights of countries where the value is created.

Nevertheless, the profit split method may soon be the norm in China, where it has been the tax authority’s preferred TP option for several years.

“This is being driven by globalisation and the booming digital economy,” said Wei Zhuang, former TP manager at Chevron China. “Taxing the value at its source is one way to approach cross-border transactions, especially digital transactions,” she explained.

Method in the madness

Going against the profit split method trend in East Asia, the Abe government has opted for the discounted cash flow (DCF) method as a fail-safe approach in transactions with few or even no comparables, but this approach doesn’t help companies used to more internationally harmonised methodologies or with intangibles.

Although Japan’s chosen DCF method might be a better option for some taxpayers than profit split, it has problems. For example, there are few real life examples of Japanese companies using this option as the best method to set a price. The preferred option is the transactional net margin method (TNMM), which focuses the comparison on profit margins.

The TNMM is used across sectors such as car manufacturing, pharmaceuticals and the IT industry.

This is especially true in cross-border, inter-group transactions involving intangible assets, which are a crucial point in the reform package – the rules on intangibles and methodology are now being defined.

“Japanese companies prefer to hold their important intangibles within their reach and rarely transfer them to foreign related parties,” Makuuchi explained. “Instead, they often conclude licence agreements with foreign affiliates and receive royalties deriving from the intangibles.”

This may be why much of the tax reform package focuses on how to define intangible assets, particularly hard-to-value intangibles (HTVIs). Tax policymakers have tried to pin down the category of HTVIs and force a new approach to pricing on taxpayers.

The new approach will take into account actual results (ex-post) as the basis for forecasting (ex-ante) transactions involving such intangible assets. But this could mean taxpayers will take a hit on past transactions.

Keidanren is concerned that the ex-post outcome will lead to retroactive taxation. Fortunately, the Abe government is taking this seriously and the application of the new approach will likely be limited once the proposals are finalised .

However, a tax manager at an IT company warned that the rules have been designed to make it much harder for Japanese multinationals to transfer their functions overseas as this is unlikely to change.

“Japanese companies are becoming more international than ever before,” he said. “Historically Japanese businesses ran everything domestically, including IP assets, but they are increasingly studying what functions they can move abroad.”

Although Japanese businesses are making sure their voices are heard, what the government does next will determine TP practices for decades to come.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The threat of 50% tariffs on Brazilian goods coincides with new Brazilian legal powers to adopt retaliatory economic measures, local experts tell ITR
The country’s chancellor appears to have backtracked from previous pillar two scepticism; in other news, Donald Trump threatened Russia with 100% tariffs
In its latest G20 update, the OECD also revealed tense discussions with the US where the ‘significant threat’ of Section 899 was highlighted
The tax agency has increased compliance yield from wealthy individuals but cannot identify how much tax is paid by UK billionaires, the committee also claimed
Saffery cautioned that documentation requirements in new government proposals must be limited if medium-sized companies are not exempted from TP
The global minimum tax deal is not viable without US participation, Friedrich Merz has argued
Section 899 of the ‘one big beautiful’ bill would have spelled disaster for many international investors into the US, but following its shelving, attention turns to the fate of the OECD’s pillars
DLA Piper’s co-head of tax for the US and Latin America tells ITR about her fervent belief in equal access to the law, loving yoga, and paternal inspirations
Tax expert Craig Hillier agrees with the comparison of pillar two to using a sledgehammer to crack a nut
The amount is reported to be up 57% from the £5.6bn that the UK tax agency believes was underpaid in the previous year
Gift this article