Navigating rising transfer pricing disputes and evolving tax challenges in 2025

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

Navigating rising transfer pricing disputes and evolving tax challenges in 2025

Sponsored by

Sponsored_Firms_deloitte.png
Technology lines and particles

Shaun Austin and Alexander Duric of Deloitte UK introduce this year’s TP Controversy Guide, offering expert insights into global mutual agreement procedures, litigation trends, and sector-specific transfer pricing issues

Much has happened over the past 12 months since the last Deloitte ITR Controversy publication, both in terms of wider political and economic developments, and more specifically within the world of tax and transfer pricing.

Focusing on transfer pricing, the most recent OECD statistics show continuing increases in the number of cases brought to mutual agreement procedures (MAPs), with almost 1,000 new transfer pricing cases – just shy of the record-breaking preceding years. This is in addition to the more than 1,000 new advance pricing agreement (APA) requests made across a growing and diverse set of countries, as taxpayers continue to see real value in managing transfer pricing controversy upfront through proactive engagement, with the aim of avoiding audit and MAPs.

Across individual countries, the general trend of increased controversy and a higher number of court cases continues, where we are now consistently seeing over 150 cases globally a year.

These trends form the basis of three of our articles.

Firstly, we examine the overall tax litigation landscape, covering the broader environment and trends, as well as notable cases.

We then examine India and China, two geographies with interesting transfer pricing environments, put into sharper focus given their size and market importance.

Finally, we delve deeper into the automotive and pharmaceutical industries, examining how broader controversy trends interact with industry-specific nuances.

In our next two articles, we examine instances where transfer pricing has been particularly impacted by the broader political and economic developments, with a specific country focus on the US, given its changing landscape.

We then look at the very topical and increasingly important interaction between customs and transfer pricing, exploring their alignment and differences, and how to best consider duties in transfer pricing, both more broadly and with an eye to the developments during this year.

For our final three articles, we consider specific areas where there has been interesting activity and developments over the past couple of years from a transfer pricing perspective.

Firstly, financial transactions, where the addition of Chapter X to the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations in 2022, coupled with a higher interest rate environment, has accelerated a pre-existing trend of increased controversy and litigation in this area.

Secondly, the interaction between documentation and controversy, examining the role of documentation and its consideration and use in audits. Here we also consider recent developments in certain countries regarding the burden of proof, evidentiary standards, and penalty protection.

Lastly, the role of transfer pricing in the context of special purpose vehicles, which are frequently used for regulatory reasons or to ring-fence risk or liabilities but which may conflict with principles of substance and the role of people in a post-BEPS world.

We hope you enjoy the insights and perspectives shared throughout these articles and they help equip you as you navigate the challenges and opportunities in the evolving transfer pricing controversy landscape.

Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited (DTTL), its global network of member firms, and their related entities (collectively, the “Deloitte organization”). DTTL (also referred to as “Deloitte Global”) and each of its member firms and related entities are legally separate and independent entities, which cannot obligate or bind each other in respect of third parties. DTTL and each DTTL member firm and related entity is liable only for its own acts and omissions, and not those of each other. DTTL does not provide services to clients. Please see www.deloitte.com/about to learn more.

This communication contains general information only, and none of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited (“DTTL”), its global network of member firms or their related entities (collectively, the “Deloitte organization”) is, by means of this communication, rendering professional advice or services. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your finances or your business, you should consult a qualified professional adviser.

No representations, warranties or undertakings (express or implied) are given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information in this communication, and none of DTTL, its member firms, related entities, employees or agents shall be liable or responsible for any loss or damage whatsoever arising directly or indirectly in connection with any person relying on this communication. DTTL and each of its member firms, and their related entities, are legally separate and independent entities.

© 2025. For information, contact Deloitte Global.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

There is a shocking discrepancy between professional services firms’ parental leave packages. Those that fail to get with the times risk losing out in the war for talent
Winston Taylor is expected to launch in May 2026 with more than 1,400 lawyers across the US, UK, Europe, Latin America and the Middle East
They are alleging that leaked tax information ‘unfairly tarnished’ their business operations; in other news, Davis Polk and Eversheds Sutherland made key tax hires
Overall revenues for the combined UK and Swiss firm inched up 2% to £3.6 billion despite a ‘challenging market’
In the first of a two-part series, experts from Khaitan & Co dissect a highly anticipated Indian Supreme Court ruling that marks a decisive shift in India’s international tax jurisprudence
The OECD profile signals Brazil is no longer a jurisdiction where TP can be treated as a mechanical compliance exercise, one expert suggests, though another highlights 'significant concerns'
Libya’s often-overlooked stamp duty can halt payments and freeze contracts, making this quiet tax a decisive hurdle for foreign investors to clear, writes Salaheddin El Busefi
Eugena Cerny shares hard-earned lessons from tax automation projects and explains how to navigate internal roadblocks and miscommunications
The Clifford Chance and Hyatt cases collectively confirm a fundamental principle of international tax law: permanent establishment is a concept based on physical and territorial presence
Australian government minister Andrew Leigh reflects on the fallout of the scandal three years on and looks ahead to regulatory changes
Gift this article