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

Australia’s Department of Finance will also commission an independent review of KPMG’s governance, culture, ethics and integrity frameworks, it has revealed.
In the second instalment of this two-part series, Jayne Stokes takes a practical approach to navigating the capital v revenue question for UK R&D claims for software development, and shares pointers for businesses
ITR's latest podcast considers how transformational the buyout could be in Ryan's quest for global advisory reach and analyses a recent boom in demand for private client advisory services
The event comes at an important moment for professionals dealing with practical realities related to this practice area
Germany’s dogmatic restriction of third-party investment in tax advisory firms will only serve to slow down innovation and access to justice
The Irish government has been told that it’s spending too much of its corporation tax receipts and should instead focus on running bigger surpluses; plus, the IRS is set to merge tax practitioner offices
A company risks double taxation, penalties and inquiry cost if it submits a form with anomalies under the new system, Asker Ali also tells ITR
Arindam Mitra and Robin Hart examine how aggregate TP rules clash with transaction-level customs rules, creating compliance risks and requiring granular, SKU-level pricing strategies
The scandal has come just three years after the PwC tax leaks controversy and has prompted KPMG’s Australian chief executive to resign
In the first of a two-part series on capital v revenue in R&D, Jayne Stokes explores these key concepts and where UK companies need to tread carefully
Gift this article