International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

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

Luxembourg: Preliminary lessons learned from TP audits

Sponsored by

Sponsored_Firms_deloitte.png
Luxembourg launched a wave of tax audits with a focus on financial transactions in 2020

Balazs Majoros and Adam Wojewoda of Deloitte Luxembourg explain how taxpayers can better navigate future transfer pricing audits in Luxembourg.

In 2020, the Luxembourg tax authorities (LTA) launched a wave of tax audits with a focus on financial transactions. These audits are not yet closed but based on observations regarding how the audits are being conducted it is possible to describe some practical lessons learned that are relevant for taxpayers facing a tax audit in Luxembourg. 

Some of these lessons may appear to be rather basic to readers that are located in jurisdictions where tax audits are a common and recurring practice, but it is important to understand that, until recently, this often was not the case in Luxembourg. 

A Luxembourg tax audit starts with a long list of information that the taxpayer must submit to allow the LTA to carry out an extensive investigation of the taxpayer’s tax position. This part of the process tests the taxpayer’s ability to respond to such a request. 

The pace at which the taxpayer is able to gather and submit the information and the completeness and quality of the information submitted, especially with regards to the books and records of the company, provide an indication of the taxpayer’s operational capabilities to run its financing or holding business under genuine business conditions.  

Consistency between the profile of the taxpayer reflected in the transfer pricing (TP) documentation and the behaviour demonstrated through its board activities is a key initial test to pass when it comes to group financing operations under a tax audit in Luxembourg. As an example, the taxpayer may be requested to submit copies of the minutes of the board meetings that took place during the period under audit, which are expected to provide an indication of the level of management of the financing operations, with the focus on the risk of such business. 

A company engaged in a genuine lending business would not be expected to fail to monitor the risk of the borrower defaulting on its obligation. In other words, if the TP documentation reflects a genuine lender taking risk on its funding operations and seeking risk-weighted remuneration, the minutes of the board meetings should cover risk-monitoring and risk-mitigating activities. 

A further area of focus of the LTA is the completeness of the documentation with respect to the related party transactions under review. Lending transactions, even long-term ones, often evolve quickly. 

New loans may be extended and existing loans refinanced or completely or partially repaid, which calls for prompt adjustments to maintain documentation sufficient to support each of the lending transactions. 

Submitting documentation that covers only part of the operations or that is outdated could give the impression to the LTA of a lack of documentation capabilities with respect to related party operations. Depending on the facts and circumstances, the taxpayer could be in a better position by requesting a deadline extension from the LTA to allow it to close any such gaps, even if the request could be interpreted as a lack of preparedness.

The authorities generally seek direct contact with the taxpayer’s representatives (even though, during the COVID-19 situation, a live meeting often was not possible). Even for an initial ‘kick-off’ meeting, a company should not hesitate to invite tax specialists, whether they are the group’s tax director/manager or an external service provider. 

The management of the company is not expected to be able to address any technical questions that the authorities may have in light of the documentation already received. The presence of external tax specialists should not be viewed as a lack of internal capabilities (which often is referred to as “substance” in the field of international tax), but rather as a sign that the taxpayer is willing to address any technical questions that may arise in the conversation. 

Interactions with the authorities, including phone calls, should always be documented to ensure a common understanding of requests or of mutual positions expressed during calls and meetings. Correspondence still often occurs by mail, so a company should be proactive in ensuring that the post is being regularly collected. 

We hope the discussion provided allows taxpayers to better navigate any future TP audits in Luxembourg. The learning curve on both sides (tax authorities and taxpayers) may make the process rather challenging, but an awareness of the basics described above should help avoid unnecessary escalations that are unlikely to favour the taxpayer. 

 

 

Balazs Majoros

Partner, Deloitte Luxembourg

E: bmajoros@deloitte.lu

 

 

Adam Wojewoda

Manager, Deloitte Luxembourg

E: awojewoda@deloitte.lu

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Bartosz Doroszuk of MDDP offers insights on Poland’s new tax legislation on shifted profits, as the implementation deadline looms nearer.
Four tax specialists preview the UK’s transfer pricing requirements, which come into effect on April 1.
The rise of the QDMTT will likely change how countries compete on tax and transfer pricing policy, but it may not reverse decades of falling corporate tax rates.
ITR’s latest quarterly PDF is going live today, leading on the EU’s BEFIT initiative and wider tax reforms in the bloc.
COVID-19 and an overworked HMRC may have created the ‘perfect storm’ for reduced prosecutions, according to tax professionals.
Participants in the consultation on the UN secretary-general’s report into international tax cooperation are divided – some believe UN-led structures are the way forward, while others want to improve existing ones. Ralph Cunningham reports.
The German government unveils plans to implement pillar two, while EY is reportedly still divided over ‘Project Everest’.
With the M&A market booming, ITR has partnered with correspondents from firms around the globe to provide a guide to the deal structures being employed and tax authorities' responses.
Xing Hu, partner at Hui Ye Law Firm in Shanghai, looks at the implications of the US Uyghur Forced Labor Protection Act for TP comparability analysis of China.
Karl Berlin talks to Josh White about meeting the Fair Tax standard, the changing burden of country-by-country reporting, and how windfall taxes may hit renewable energy.