Japan-China supply chain efficiency valuation and 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

Japan-China supply chain efficiency valuation and transfer pricing

Effective tax rate (ETR) planning is critical for all multinational enterprises. From a business flow standpoint, supply chain efficiency is critical.

chain150.bmp

When ETR planning and supply chain rationalisation are combined, there is a fascinating range of issues under scrutiny by tax authorities in all countries.

Cym Lowell, of McDermott Will & Emery in the US, who will be speaking on the subject in more detail at the International Tax Review and TPWeek Global Transfer Pricing Forum in Singapore on November 28 & 29explains how taxpayers can approach the issue.

Deriving maximum cost efficiency from the supply chain is a critical operational issue for multinational enterprises (MNEs) in many regions.

MNE groups continuously seek to derive maximum cost efficiency from their design, production, distribution, servicing, administrative and other functions.

Because taxation is typically one of a group’s largest costs, supply chain structuring and restructuring processes typically include tax savings as an essential element of the overall process.

Successful supply chain rationalisations inevitably involve a rationalisation of the functions and risks performed by affiliates in the supply chain.

They also involve an increase or decrease in such functions and risks performed in each country, pertinent to the planning in question.

When a function or risk is moved from one affiliate to another, questions regarding valuation of the transferred assets or functions are likely to be raised.

Tax authorities in each country affected by supply chain rationalisation are vigilant in protecting their domestic tax base, and scrutinise transactions to determine whether the functions or risks of domestic companies are restructured in a manner consistent with arm’s-length criteria.

While the specific issues to be addressed depend upon the facts and circumstances of each situation, the illustration below is intended to facilitate a discussion of such points.

Case studyJCo is a Japanese parent of a group of companies engaged in the development, production, distribution and servicing of unique products. Its traditional supply chain process involves unique products being produced entirely in its Chinese factories, then sold to affiliates around the world for distribution and servicing. The competitive situation for unique products is intense, with JCo having many global competitors.

Because China can be a high-cost country, JCo is considering moving production of all component parts of unique products to Southeast Asia countries outside of China. JCo has inquired about the valuation, financial accounting, transfer pricing and potential tax authority controversy matters relating to its evolving plans.

mde-graph.jpg



At the present time, the supply chain process of unique products is as follows, including an overall comparison to JCo’s competitors, which have already undertaken material steps to decentralise their supply chains to drive costs out of their systems and perform critical functions in low-tax countries:

Function

Performed In

Effective Tax Rate (ETR)*

Problem/Opportunity

JCo Current

Design

Japan

41%

High op costs

Procurement/logistics

Japan

41%

High op costs

Parts production

China

25%

Increasing op costs

Final assembly

China

25%

High op costs

Sale to customers

Japan

41% average

High op costs

Central services

Japan

41%

High op costs

Overall:

36%

High op costs, increasing unit cost: 100

Competitors’ Composite

Overall:

22%

Low op costs and ETR

unit cost: 60

Competitive disadvantage

14%

40 per unit

JCo Plan

Design

Japan

41%

High op costs

Procurement/logistics

Singapore

17%

Fair op costs

Parts production

Indonesia/Other

10%

Low op costs

Final production

China

25%

Increasing op costs

Sale to customers

Singapore

17%

Fair op costs

Central services

Singapore

17%

Fair op costs

Overall:

26%

Lower op costs and ETR, more to do

The supply chain restructuring, at a minimum, should reduce the unit cost disadvantage.

In the context of the illustration, the following functions or risks have been transferred:

Procurement

Function/risk from Japan to Singapore

Parts production

Function/risk from China to Indonesia/Other

Final production

Function/risk remain in China

Sales

Function/risk from Japan to Singapore

Central services

Function/risk from Japan to Singapore

Issues to be addressed

· Valuation of the assets (including soft assts), functions, risks or liabilities transferred, which will depend in part on the form of the restructuring transaction, for example, sale, license, assignment, contribution or otherwise (valuations can be important for tax and book purposes) ;

· The financial accounting implications of valuations in all pertinent countries (including impairments or change from domestic to International Financial Reporting Standards)

· Transfer pricing considerations to be received by the transferor entity, or the entity that loses the function/risk in question (the focus of tax authorities is reflected in the OECD’s Transfer Pricing Guidelines 2010 amendments for business restructurings and proposed changes relating to intangible transfers) ;

· Documentation;

· Planning;

· Advance resolutions (unilateral or bilateral, advance pricing agreements or otherwise) in Japan, China or other countries;

· Attorney-client privilege;

· Income tax planning;

· Customs, duty or consumption taxes;

· Advance resolution of transfer pricing, income tax or other issues;

· Tax authority examination preparation and handling in each potential country; and

· Dispute resolution via domestic procedures, bilateral competent authority or domestic litigation.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

As ITR data reveals that 2025 saw more than double the amount of private client hires than 2024, it seems firms are jostling for position
The US multinational paid 20% more tax in 2025 than 2024, it said; in other news, more than 25,000 HMRC staff have been upskilled on AI
Belt and Road Initiative countries face tax incentive conundrums due to pillar two, but relatively few countries would seek to scrap the project, ITR has heard
Hany Elnaggar examines how the OECD’s global minimum tax is reshaping the GCC’s investment incentive landscape, shifting the region from rate-based competition toward substance-driven economic positioning
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
Gift this article