All material subject to strictly enforced copyright laws. © 2022 ITR is part of the Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC group.

Technical Update from Korea - latest

akor.jpg

TP Week correspondent DJ Yeo, of Kim & Chang, explains recent changes to thin capitalisation rules in Korea

akorin.jpg

The changes to the the thin capitalisation rules were proposed by the Ministry of Finance and Economy and were enacted late last year. The new rules, found in the Presidential Decree to the International Tax Coordination Law, are applicable to taxable years beginning on or after January 1 2008 with no grandfathering provisions.

Korea’s thin capitalisation rules, introduced in 1996 and effective from January 1 1997, are triggered if debt borrowed from a foreign controlling shareholder (FCS), as defined, and/or from a third party under a guarantee extended by a FCS exceeds, generally, 300% of the net FCS equity in the Korean party.

Under the previous law, 600% exceptionally applied to certain financial institutions. In addition, although very rarely used, the law also provides that, if a taxpayer can show that the conditions and amount of borrowing from an FCS are reasonable as compared to borrowing by an independent third party or that the debt to equity ratio prevailing in the relevant industry is higher than 3:1, such ratio could also be acceptable.

If the relevant ratio is exceeded, interest and discount expenses attributable to the debt exceeding the threshold amount will not be deductible. For this purpose, equity was measured at the Korean company’s fiscal year end. There are since 2005 no similar rules and limitations applicable to domestic transactions, that is, borrowings between residents, raising the question whether these rules violate the non-discrimination provisions of many double tax treaties in that the rules effectively regulate a Korean company’s borrowing from foreign shareholders (or under their guarantees) only.

The new rules include two main changes to the previous law. First, the beneficial debt to equity ratio of 6 to 1 applicable to companies engaged in a financial business (banks, ABS SPCs) has been abolished, making such companies subject to the same debt to equity ratio of 3 to 1 as all other taxpayers. Reportedly, one reason for the proposal was the Ministry of Finance and Economy’s concern that financial institutions have taken advantage of the appreciation of the Korean Won by borrowing excessively from foreign affiliates (based on the 6:1 ratio) and investing short-term into government bonds, which has been viewed as accelerating the Korean Won’s further appreciation.

ak.jpg

The change is also expected to have significant implications to certain special purpose vehicles created for investments in Korea who typically fully utilise the 6:1 debt to equity ratio.

Second, in computing the debt to equity ratio, equity is under the new rules measured by the accumulated daily balance of net equity. Previously, equity was measured by the year-end balance of the equity, making it possible to avoid thin capitalisation issues by injecting an additional amount of capital before year end.

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The European Parliament raises concerns over unanimity in voting on pillar two, while protests break out over tax reform in Colombia.
Ramesh Khaitan speaks to reporter Siqalane Taho about tax morality, transfer pricing regulations, Indian tax developments, and the OECD’s two-pillar solution.
Join ITR and KPMG China at 10am BST on October 19 as they discuss the personal, employment, and corporate tax-related implications of employees working from overseas.
Tricentis and Boehringer Ingelheim, along with a European Commission TP specialist, criticised the complexity of pillar one rules and their scope at an ITR event.
Speakers at ITR’s Managing Tax Disputes Summit said taxpayers can still face lengthy TP audits, despite strong documentation preparation
Gig economy companies in New Zealand will need to fully account and become liable for the goods and services tax of underlying suppliers on their platforms, under new proposals.
Join ITR and Thomson Reuters at 2pm (UAE) / 11am (UK) on October 13 as they discuss how businesses can prepare for Tax Administration 3.0 and future-proof against changes such as e-invoicing and increasing digitisation.
ITR has partnered with global TP leaders from Deloitte to discuss transfer pricing controversy around the globe, and to share advice on how to navigate an increasingly uncertain and risky TP landscape.
Sources say they are not satisfied with pillar one protections in the marketing and distribution safe harbour, even though it was designed to give businesses greater tax certainty.
Political support for qualified majority voting is at a peak as unanimity rules continue to block the European Council from passing a directive on pillar two.
We use cookies to provide a personalized site experience.
By continuing to use & browse the site you agree to our Privacy Policy.
I agree