Transfer pricing and pre-audit analysis in Russia

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

Transfer pricing and pre-audit analysis in Russia

Sponsored by

sponsored-firms-kpmg.png
The RTA has focused more on pre-audit analysis

Ilya Ostrenin of KPMG Russia discusses transfer pricing audits in Russia, looking specifically at the importance of pre-audit analysis.

Despite transfer pricing (TP) legislation being introduced in Russia almost 10 years ago (in 2012), judicial practice in this area remains very limited. Indeed, there are not many actual TP audits, as in recent years the Russian Tax Authority (RTA) has focused more on pre-audit analysis (PAA).  

In the first nine months of 2020, 50% of the state’s budget revenues came from this pre-audit analytical work by the Federal Tax Service of Russia, with the remaining 50% from the use of classic control measures.

PAA provides the RTA with a flexible negotiation tool that allows them to significantly economise the performance of TP audits.  The idea of the PAA is to gain information about a controlled transaction without opening a full TP audit and, if required, to induce the taxpayer to voluntarily adjust its tax obligations without the cumbersome framework of a TP audit.  The procedure for a PAA is not directly set out in the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, but when making PAA requests, the RTA are referring to Articles 93 and 93.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. 

As a rule, during a PAA the RTA follow this scheme: 

  • Identify companies with a high-risk profile;

  • Submit requests for information, interview employees, discuss circumstances with the taxpayer;

  • Suggest that the company independently adjusts its tax obligations; and

  • In the absence of any agreement with the taxpayer, the RTA open a full TP audit.

Requests from the RTA as part of a PAA may be classified into the following three types.

Collecting general information about the company's intra-group operations

As part of their inquiry, the tax authorities may request a wide range of information about the controlled transactions of that taxpayer.  This type of request does not necessarily mean additional tax will be charged – receipt of such a request may simply mean that the RTA is collecting information about companies in a particular sector to identify companies or transactions that are high risk.

Obtaining detailed information and calculations for specific controversial transactions

The RTA may request details and clarifications about a particular transaction. This may mean that the RTA has done preliminary work and see the potential for additional charges in relation to a specific controlled transaction. This is an ideal time for a taxpayer to enter into substantive dialogue with the RTA.

Requests for calculations and clarifications of tax obligations

To assess whether the prices in the controlled transaction are at arm’s length, the RTA may independently select the applicable TP method, conduct a benchmarking study, and perform relevant calculations. As part of the PAA request, a taxpayer may receive these calculations with a suggestion that they voluntarily adjust their calculated tax liabilities. The taxpayer’s reply should contain a detailed answer with data from the TP documentation. Based on the results of the PAA, the taxpayer can then independently decide on whether to adjust the tax base.

Convenience of pre-audit analysis

PAA can be convenient for both the RTA and taxpayers. 

For the RTA, it gives the ability to encourage a taxpayer to voluntarily adjust its tax base without challenging the TP documentation and going through litigation.  

For a taxpayer, no fines or other sanctions are applied when a decision on an adjustment is made. It additionally gives the taxpayer the chance to get advance pricing agreements faster and easier, because the RTA has studied the transaction and already has an idea of the fair pricing for it.

Ilya Ostrenin

Director, KPMG Russia

E: Iostrenin@kpmg.ru

 

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Sucafina’s tax chief was speaking at the ITR Pillar 2 Forum in London alongside experts from HMRC and other organisations
India’s Supreme Court rattled cross‑border structuring with its Tiger Global ruling. Subsequent rule changes narrowed the impact, but significant risks around GAAR, substance and treaty access persist
The UK-based big four spin-off firm has hired Marc Lien, who declared that most AI in professional services today is ‘cosmetic’
Projected revenue losses and exemption requests are harming the project’s capability and viability
HMRC secured lengthy prison sentences in a major payroll VAT fraud case, while law firms announced tax promotions and hires
Significant changes include an update to profit markers and an alteration to how an ‘inbound distributor’ is defined
ITR sat down for a pre-event interview with Tim Zech, WTS Germany, and Jeff Soar, WTS UK, keynote speaker at next week’s ITR AI in Tax Forum 2026 in London
Brazil’s bid to seek US-style exemptions from pillar two is ‘highly advantageous’ for multinationals, ITR has also heard
India is signalling flexibility on expat taxation to attract foreign expertise, though employers will need to navigate disclosure, treaty and scope uncertainties
Brazil is trying to follow in the US’s footsteps and secure its own 'qualified side-by-side status', ITR understands
Gift this article