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 2026

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 UK has confirmed its approach to the OECD’s side-by-side deal, but US-parented groups may find pillar two compliance remains far from straightforward
Fragmented pillar two taxation and increased use of AI by tax authorities have left clients fearful of heightened disputes exposure
Grant Thornton Advisors’ latest acquisition has produced the fifth-largest US advisory firm by revenue, but there’s still a clear gulf between it and the big four
Crowe joins Grant Thornton, WTS and Ryan in attracting PE investment, suggesting that dealmakers remain bullish on the tax advisory sector
HMRC expects advisers to meet ever-higher compliance criteria. After 24 consecutive qualified audit opinions, many will ask whether HMRC should hold itself to the same standards
The purchase of Marosa represents the second major tax tech consolidation this week, raising questions of a broader industry trend
Peru’s approach to TP is increasingly at odds with OECD-style profitability policies, exposing multinational groups to asymmetric tax adjustments
Hany Elnaggar examines how the region's legacy economic substance regimes and the OECD's pillar two framework are converging on the same underlying test
The deals for TP Accurate and Intra Pricing Solutions will enhance Alphatax’s ability to support clients with the full TP lifecycle, the tax tech provider claimed
The DS Advocates partner discusses career reinvention, tax disputes and why advisory and litigation experience should complement one another
Gift this article