France vs SAP Laps SAS, February 2019, Administrative Tribunal of Montreuil, Case No. 1801945

Posted on | By Courts of France | No comments
Category: Burden of Proof, Services and Fees | Tag: , , , ,
« | »

SAP Labs France SAS provided IT-related services to its German parent company, SAP AG, and received a cost-plus 6 % remuneration.

According to the R&D agreement all income taxes, including withholding tax, applied on the amount paid by the parent company pursuant to the agreement would be paid for by the French company.

However, the French tax administration held that the French company should have included the CVAE tax in the cost base on which it was remunerated, and by not doing so SAP Laps France had indirectly transferred profit to SAP AG. A tax reassessments under the French arm’s length provisions was then issued.

SAP disagreed with the assessment and brought the case before the Administrative Tribunal.

The Administrative Tribunal issued a decision in favor of the tax administration.

“6. The contribution on the added value of companies is a burden on the company. Consequently, this tax could not be disregarded when determining the transfer price of the services provided by SAP Labs France SAS to SAP AG. Even though it is based on contractual stipulations, the failure to take this taxation into account to determine the transfer price makes it possible, by itself and independently of the level of the transfer price to which this deduction leads by applying the contractual calculation method, to presume the existence of a transfer of profits abroad, within the meaning of Article 57 of the General Tax Code. The administration was therefore not required to compare the situation of SAP Labs France SAS with that of companies in a situation of arm’s length competition. In the present case, this company did not provide any justification likely to establish that this absence of re-invoicing was sufficient consideration for it and that it would thus have had the character of a normal act of commercial management. Furthermore, the guidelines on the free choice of accounting classification of the contribution on the added value of companies contained in the press release of the Conseil national de la comptabilité (French National Accounting Council) dated 14 January 2010 have no influence on the application of the tax law, whereas in any event it results from the instruction that SAP Labs France SAS has entered this tax in account 635111, which is an account of current management expenses, without even drawing up an appendix that could justify its choice to classify this contribution as income tax, despite the indications in the same press release.

7. As a result of the above, the tax authorities were right to consider that, in accordance with Article 57 of the French General Tax Code, SAP Labs France SAS had transferred profits for 2012 in an amount corresponding to the amount of the company value added tax, which is undisputed to be €600,301, increased by the contractual margin of 6%. As a result, Labs France is not entitled to request the discharge of the disputed taxes. Consequently, its conclusions regarding the costs related to the dispute must also be rejected.”

Click here for English translation

Click here for other translation

SAP Laps France 1801945

Related Guidelines

TPG2022 Chapter VIII Annex example 1 1. Example 1 illustrates the general principle that contributions should be assessed at value (i.e. based on arm’s length prices) in order to produce results that are consistent with the arm’s length 2. Company A and Company B are members of an MNE group and decide to enter into a...
TPG2022 Chapter VI Annex I example 23 83. Birincil acquires 100% of the equity interests in an independent enterprise, Company T for 100. Company T is a company that engages in research and development and has partially developed several promising technologies but has only minimal sales. The purchase price is justified primarily by the value of the...
TPG2022 Chapter VIII Annex example 2 Example 2 12. The facts are the same as Example 1, except that the per-unit value of Service 1 is 103 (that is, both Service 1 and Service 2 are low-value services). Assume, therefore, that the calculation of the costs and value of the services is as follows:   Cost to...
TPG2022 Chapter VIII Annex example 4 17. Company A and Company B are members of an MNE group and decide to undertake the development of an intangible through a CCA. The intangible is anticipated to be highly profitable based on Company B’s existing intangibles, its track record and its experienced research and development staff. Company A...
TPG2022 Chapter VI Annex I example 9 26. The facts in this example are the same as in Example 8, except as follows: Under the contract between Primair and Company S, Company S is now obligated to develop and execute the marketing plan for country Y without detailed control of specific elements of the plan by Primair....
TPG2022 Chapter VI Annex I example 29 104. Pervichnyi is the parent of an MNE group organised and doing business in country X. Prior to Year 1, Pervichnyi developed patents and trademarks related to Product F. It manufactured Product F in country X and supplied the product to distribution affiliates throughout the world. For purposes of this...
TPG2022 Chapter VI Annex I example 26 92. Osnovni is the parent company of an MNE Group engaged in the development and sale of software products. Osnovni acquires 100% of the equity interests in Company S, a publicly traded company organised in the same country as Osnovni, for a price equal to 160. At the time of...
TPG2022 Chapter II Annex II example 11 51.  The success of an electronics product is linked to the innovative technological design both of its electronic processes and of its major component. That component is designed and manufactured by associated company A; is transferred to associated company B which designs and manufactures the rest of the product; and is...
TPG2022 Chapter VI Annex I example 17 59. Company A is a fully integrated pharmaceutical company engaged in the discovery, development, production and sale of pharmaceutical preparations. Company A conducts its operations in country X. In conducting its research activities, Company A regularly retains independent Contract Research Organisations (CROs) to perform various R&D activities, including designing and...
TPG2022 Chapter II Annex II example 12 59. Company A, resident in Country A, Company B, resident in Country B, and Company C, resident in Country C, are members of an MNE group. Companies A and B undertake the design and manufacturing of products and their activities in this regard are highly integrated. Additionally, Company A and...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *