Hong Kong SAR’s IRD issues guidance on tax issues arising from COVID-19

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


Hong Kong SAR’s IRD issues guidance on tax issues arising from COVID-19

Sponsored by

sponsored-firms-kpmg.png
The IRD guidance should be welcomed by many businesses

Lewis Lu and John Timpany of KPMG discuss the Inland Revenue Department’s views on COVID-19 and the potential tax implications for taxpayers.

COVID-19 has brought border closures and unprecedented disruption to the global business environment for more than 18 months.  

Many companies have had to change the way in which they operate, and employees have been forced to work in locations outside their usual place of employment.  On July 29 2021, the Inland Revenue Department (IRD) issued guidance examining certain tax issues arising from the COVID-19 pandemic (the IRD guidance). The IRD guidance outlines the IRD’s general views around tax issues relating to tax residence of companies and individuals, permanent establishment, employment income of cross-border employees and transfer pricing (TP).

The IRD’s views and approach in relation to the above tax issues are generally in line with the ‘Updated guidance on tax treaties and the Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic' (the COVID-19 tax treaty guidance) and ‘Guidance on the transfer pricing implications of the COVID-19 pandemic' (the COVID-19 TP guidance) released by the OECD in December 2020 and January 2021, respectively. 

It is worth noting, however, the IRD guidance is not legally binding and only represents the IRD’s general views. Each case will be assessed based on its own facts and circumstances. For a detailed discussion of our comments on the IRD guidance and the OECD Secretariat’s analysis of the impact of COVID-19, please refer to KPMG’s Hong Kong Tax Alerts Issue 8, August 2021 and Issue 6, April 2020 respectively.

The IRD guidance should be welcomed by many businesses as it provides a degree of reassurance for taxpayers that may have employees temporarily stranded overseas a result of these restrictions.

Whilst it is good to see the IRD generally following the OECD’s views, the guidance does not cover situations where potential tax liabilities may arise under domestic tax law due to a change in which businesses are being forced to operate or are managed or controlled during the pandemic. This is particularly relevant for cross-border workers who, habitually travel overseas to perform services or conclude contracts on behalf of their employers, are now being forced to work in Hong Kong SAR because of the travel restrictions. This is a situation commonly faced by many businesses during this period and such taxpayers may have treated part of or all of their profits as offshore sourced and non-taxable.

Given Hong Kong SAR’s territorial system of taxation, the territorial concept fundamentally requires taxpayers to determine the location where the profits are derived and profits which have an offshore source are generally not taxed in Hong Kong.  

Taxpayers with an offshore profits claim may therefore find themselves in a predicament and risk such profits being challenged and regarded as Hong Kong SAR sourced as a result of their employees performing profit generating activities in Hong Kong SAR during the pandemic. Further clarification from the IRD would be welcomed in this regard.

Nevertheless, the IRD Guidance should provide a degree of reassurance for taxpayers in determining their tax positions during the pandemic – if they can apply a double tax agreement. If a double tax agreement cannot apply, the guidance is only helpful in that it confirms that no concession or relaxation will be accepted by IRD.

Notwithstanding the guidance, employers who have employees that are temporarily dislocated should continue to monitor their circumstances and the government travel rules regulations closely to assess whether if it is really a temporarily dislocation as a result of COVID-19 or a matter of choice.

In particular, consideration should be taken that this guidance given by the IRD only applies to the interpretation of tax treaties and the application of transfer pricing principles. The IRD Guidance does not apply to the interpretation of domestic law nor where the dislocation of the employee is by choice, rather than being imposed by restrictions arising from external factors. Taxpayers should tread with caution and work closely with their tax advisors to carefully assess their tax positions during the pandemic. 

Lewis Lu

Partner, KPMG China

E: lewis.lu@kpmg.com

 

John Timpany

Partner, KPMG China

E: john.timpany@kpmg.com

 

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Opening doors for existing talent within Baker McKenzie and a desire for enhanced legal capabilities informed Ricardo Perera’s switch from KPMG
Boaz Goren’s move to the upstart PE-backed firm takes the number of senior UK tax professionals who have left EY this year to 13
The allegations against Deloitte Cyprus raise uncomfortable questions about how far the big four can distance themselves from misconduct at member firms
The UAE accounted for most Middle East promotions and new rankings, as A&M Tax, Baker McKenzie, Dhruva Consultants and DLA Piper breached the top tier
Spanish-headquartered multinationals lead on reporting quality, while US and Swiss groups lag in the Fair Tax Foundation’s expanded analysis
Former IRS commissioner Danny Werfel joins ITR for a must-listen conversation spanning his time leading the agency, his AI risk framework, and the future of the OECD
Tax and legal services was PwC’s fastest-growing business line last year, helping to put the firm back on a par with its big four rivals
Ex-EY and Hourani & Partners leader Zain Satardien is using flexible staffing and AI-enabled systems to test a leaner model for specialist legal and tax advice
The big four firm is rightfully prioritising transparency and accountability as it seeks to rebuild from its scandal, but a glaring structural issue remains
A recent hiring flurry has taken the firm’s number of partner appointments this year to 121 and put it on track to hit 160 partner target early
Gift this article