Italy: Preventing and resolving double taxation in transfer pricing

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

Italy: Preventing and resolving double taxation in transfer pricing

Sponsored by

Sponsored_Firms_crowe_valente.jpg
Office room with map of Italy on the wall

The Italian framework for tax certainty has been reinforced through advance pricing agreements, mutual agreement procedures, and other dispute resolution tools, explain Federico Vincenti and Carola Valente of Valente Associati GEB Partners/Crowe Valente

In recent years, the Italian tax regime has strengthened the tools available to taxpayers for effectively managing tax risks – particularly through cooperative compliance – and for preventing and resolving cases of double taxation.

APAs and tax certainty

Specifically, companies engaged in international activities can access the ruling procedure (Article 31-ter of Presidential Decree No. 600/1973) to enter into a pre-agreement with the Italian tax authorities regarding:

  • The determination of transfer pricing (advance pricing agreements, or APAs);

  • The transfer of tax residence;

  • The allocation of profits or losses to a permanent establishment; or

  • The payment of dividends, interest, and royalties.

APAs are increasingly being utilised in Italy, particularly by large multinational groups seeking tax certainty.

The agreement is binding for the tax year in which it is concluded and for the subsequent four tax years, unless there are changes in the relevant facts or legal circumstances that formed the basis of the agreement. The taxpayer is granted the option to apply the effects of the agreement retroactively, provided that:

  • The factual and legal circumstances underlying the agreement existed in one or more tax years preceding its conclusion;

  • For those tax years, the statute of limitations for assessments has not expired, and no audits, inspections, verifications, or other administrative assessment activities have been initiated, of which the taxpayer has received formal notice.

Bilateral and multilateral APA procedures

Bilateral or multilateral agreements can also be used to involve the countries of residence of foreign counterparts, ensuring consistent treatment in both jurisdictions. In such cases, the taxpayer may apply the effects of the agreement retroactively to tax periods prior to the period during which the application is submitted, provided that:

  • The taxpayer requests this in the application for the advance agreement;

  • The competent authorities of the foreign countries agree to extend the agreement to prior tax years;

  • The same factual and legal circumstances underlying the agreement are present in those periods;

  • For those periods, the statute of limitations for assessments has not expired, and no audits, inspections, verifications, or other administrative assessment activities have been initiated, of which the taxpayer has received formal notice.

For bilateral and multilateral advance agreements, the admissibility of the request is contingent on the payment of a fee based on the total turnover of the group to which the taxpayer belongs:

  • €10,000 if the group’s total turnover is below €100 million;

  • €30,000 if the group’s total turnover is between €100 million and €750 million;

  • €50,000 if the group’s total turnover exceeds €750 million.

The fees are halved for requests to renew a bilateral or multilateral agreement. Additionally, if multiple requests are submitted for bilateral or multilateral agreements concerning the same transactions with different countries, the company must pay the fee for each bilateral request or for each foreign counterparty in the multilateral request.

Resolving disputes through MAPs

Recent experience has also highlighted an increased use of tools for resolving double taxation and disputes, such as mutual agreement procedures (MAPs). Legislative Decree No. 49/2020, which transposes EU Directive 2017/1852 into Italian law, establishes a robust mechanism for resolving international tax disputes.

Compared to the framework of the earlier Convention No. 90/436/EEC, several new elements have been introduced, including an expansion of the scope, which now goes beyond transfer pricing and the allocation of profits to permanent establishments to cover other issues addressed by bilateral double taxation treaties.

A MAP application must be submitted within three years, either from the completion of the notification of the act (or other equivalent document) or from the date on which the measure that originated (or could have originated) the disputed issue was adopted.

Unlike previous instruments, the application can now also be submitted in the case of a settlement with the Italian tax authorities, allowing taxpayers to request corresponding adjustments in the foreign jurisdiction.

Recognition of downward transfer pricing adjustments

Finally, the Italian tax regime permits the recognition of decreases in taxable income (Article 31-quater of Presidential Decree No. 600/1973) following a final upward transfer pricing adjustment made by a country with which Italy has a tax treaty that ensures adequate information exchange.

The application can be submitted by a taxpayer resident in Italy when the transfer pricing adjustment is final and in compliance with the arm’s-length principle.

Italy’s framework to address double taxation: summary

In conclusion, Italy has put in place a comprehensive framework to prevent double taxation arising from differing interpretations of transfer pricing methodologies and to resolve double taxation cases resulting from tax audits conducted both in Italy and abroad.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The acquisition of a two-partner practice from Stephenson Harwood means that Charles Russell Speechlys has the largest private client team in Asia, the firm claimed
Complex and constantly shifting rules on global mobility mean ‘the risk is too great’ for staff to work abroad on personal time, EY’s Maureen Flood tells ITR
While it’s great that the OECD is alive to multinationals’ fears of being caught in a compliance trap, the ‘common understanding’ illustrates a worrying lack of readiness
Rising demand for specialist expertise has fuelled the growth in tax partner headcounts, Cain Dwyer found; in other news, Switzerland has been urged to reconsider pillar two
An OECD report on the taxation of the digital economy is expected by the end of 2026, according to the group of nations
Trophy assets are evolving from personal indulgences to structured investments, prompting family offices to prioritise tax efficiency, governance discipline, and cross-border compliance
As demand for complex, cross-border private client counsel spikes, Patrick McCormick sees opportunity in starting from scratch
As part of an exclusive global alliance, KPMG will become one of Anthropic’s ‘preferred consultants’ for private equity
In the second part of this series, the focus shifts to how taxpayers can manage ongoing risks across the lifecycle of cross-border structures
Jurisdictions have moved to ensure that multinationals are not punished for late GIR filings due to a lack of available filing portals or exchange relationships
Gift this article