The danger of non-arm’s-length management fees

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

The danger of non-arm’s-length management fees

Management fees present particular difficulties for taxpayers. Whenever an asset management service is performed by a resident of one jurisdiction for a recipient in another there are transfer pricing implications.

audit150.jpg

It is understandable that revenue authorities focus so intently on intra-group management fees considering the tax planning opportunities available to taxpayers to lower taxable income by increasing expenses in another jurisdiction.

However, as long as the compensation for these intra-group services can be well-justified on the company’s transfer pricing documentation, these intra-group arrangements can form part of a company’s legitimate tax planning tool box.

A company needs to consider the tax implications on both sides of a transaction because, if adverse tax implications were to arise on any side, group profits can be affected; and so implementing a management-fee policy is advised, ensuring arm’s-length payment at all times.

Designing a policy

The OECD recommends taxpayers determine whether the activities undertaken by a parent company or group services centre genuinely constitute intra-group services (as in whether the payer is receiving a benefit); and then work out how to determine an arm’s-length measurement for the service in light of the benefits received.

The OECD states that a service has been rendered only if the activity provides the respective group member with economic or commercial value that might conceivably enhance the recipient's commercial position. Justification can be brought if it is considered an independent enterprise and would be willing to pay for that service under the same circumstances.

Difficulties arise, however, when it comes to services rendered that are not necessarily chargeable. The OECD stipulates the following services that may fall into this bracket:

  • Shareholder / custodial activities;

  • Duplicative services;

  • Services that provide incidental benefits;

  • Passive association benefits; and

  • On-call services.

Getting answers

As revenue authorities organise and distribute their resources for revenue collection, particularly in terms of transfer pricing, different issues become more of a focus.

International Tax Review and TPWeek are hosting a Global Transfer Pricing Forum on September 24 & 25 in Paris where the issue of management fees, in BRICS and developed countries, is the focus of a panel debate.

Including speakers from GE India, Alstom in France, and advisers from Russia, the US and the Netherlands, the panel will discuss how taxpayers should charge management fees in BRICS countries; what the real global issues are; and what the particular focus of tax authorities is now.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The US president also unveiled a new 50% levy on copper imports; in other news, a UK wealth tax proposal has been criticised by the Institute for Fiscal Studies
Wim Wuyts, who had been head of the specialist tax network since 2017, is moving on to a new role with WTS’s Belgian member firm
MNEs are increasingly using algorithmic tools in TP. Sahasranshu Dash argues that data ethics should therefore plug directly into the TP design process
The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales also queried whether HMRC resources could be better spent scrutinising larger entities
Grant Thornton’s Austria tax head likens his practice to an escape room, shares his football coaching ambitions, and explains why tax is cool
Awards
ITR is delighted to reveal all the shortlisted nominees for the 2025 EMEA Tax Awards
Awards
ITR is delighted to reveal all the shortlisted nominees for the 2025 Asia-Pacific Tax Awards
The fates of pillars one and two hang in the balance after the US successfully threw its weight around in G7 and Canadian negotiations
Rafael Tena tells ITR about the ‘crazy’ Mexican market, ditching the hourly rate, and refusing to grow his fledgling firm in an ‘unstructured way’
It should be easy for advisers to be transparent about costs, Brown Rudnick partner Matthew Sharp said in response to exclusive ITR in-house data
Gift this article