OECD recognises the need for change 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 2025

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

OECD recognises the need for change in transfer pricing

The need to realign international tax and transfer pricing policy, to better integrate developing countries, has never been more apparent at the International Tax Review Global Transfer Pricing Forum.

Speakers including the OECD, the Canada Revenue Authority, the tax director for LVMH, and advisers from Baker & McKenzie and KPMG, focused on the role developing countries are playing in international business and tax policy, for their panel on changes and trends in global transfer pricing.

Caroline Silberztein, a partner at Baker & McKenzie and an ex-OECD official, said it was easier when people had never heard of transfer pricing because now it is synonymous with tax avoidance, which is not the correct conclusion.

The OECD is an obvious player in international tax policy and still holds the majority of influence. Marlies de Ruiter, head of the organisation ’s tax treaty, transfer pricing and financial transactions division, said the OECD is recognising the issues that drive transfer pricing debate: “Implementation can be subjective, however.”

De Ruiter said the purpose of the OECD’s inclusive meetings, which welcome non-members, is to promote dialogue between countries.

However “sharing thoughts to overcome problems doesn’t mean both parties always agree”.

The UN became an observer of the OECD’s Committee on Fiscal Affairs in June this year. “We are moving closer together,” said de Ruiter, “but we are not always on the same page.”

She refers to the debate, by OECD critics, that the OECD is an exclusive club that does not necessarily represent the interests of non-members.

On the development of a transfer pricing manual for developing countries, de Ruiter said she is happy that the UN states the manual is an interpretation of the OECD guidelines “but I am concerned if they are using the same standard and different words. People will interpret them differently”.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The EU has seemingly capitulated to the US’s ‘side-by-side’ demands. This may be a win for the US, but the uncertainty has only just begun for pillar two
The £7.4m buyout marks MHA’s latest acquisition since listing on the London Stock Exchange earlier this year
ITR’s most prolific stories of the year charted public pillar two spats, the continued fallout from the PwC Australia tax leaks scandal, and a headline tax fraud trial
The climbdowns pave the way for a side-by-side deal to be concluded this week, as per the US Treasury secretary’s expectation; in other news, Taft added a 10-partner tax team
A vote to be held in 2026 could create Hogan Lovells Cadwalader, a $3.6bn giant with 3,100 lawyers across the Americas, EMEA and Asia Pacific
Foreign companies operating in Libya face source-based taxation even without a local presence. Multinationals must understand compliance obligations, withholding risks, and treaty relief to avoid costly surprises
Hotel La Tour had argued that VAT should be recoverable as a result of proceeds being used for a taxable business activity
Tax professionals are still going to be needed, but AI will make it easier than starting from zero, EY’s global tax disputes leader Luis Coronado tells ITR
AI and assisting clients with navigating global tax reform contributed to the uptick in turnover, the firm said
In a post on X, Scott Bessent urged dissenting countries to the US/OECD side-by-side arrangement to ‘join the consensus’ to get a deal over the line
Gift this article