France vs. Sté Amycel France, 16 March 2016, CE, No 372372),

Posted on | By Courts of France
Category: Arm's Length Principle, Comparability Analysis, Transfer Pricing Methods | Tag: , ,
« | »

In Sté Amycel France the Court held that the Tax Administration must use an “appropriate” comparable when making transfer pricing adjustments.

The French company was selling goods to both group companies and unrelated final customers. The tax administration had used a transaction with the third party customers as an internal comparable.

However, as the related companies were acting as distributors, the comparison with the pricing applied to a third party customers was considered inappropriate for the purposes of assessing an arm’s length dealing.

The court found that the pricing difference actually reflected the fact that the contractual relationship in the two situations was not comparable.

Click here for other translation

Related Guidelines

TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.15Following the principles in Chapter I, an uncontrolled transaction is comparable to a controlled transaction (i.e. it is a comparable uncontrolled transaction) for purposes of the CUP method if one of two conditions is met: a) none of the differences (if any) between the transactions being compared or between the...
TPG2022 Chapter III paragraph 3.28On the other hand, internal comparables are not always more reliable and it is not the case that any transaction between a taxpayer and an independent party can be regarded as a reliable comparable for controlled transactions carried on by the same taxpayer. Internal comparables where they exist must satisfy...
TPG2022 Chapter III paragraph 3.27Step 4 of the typical process described at paragraph 3.4 is a review of existing internal comparables, if any. Internal comparables may have a more direct and closer relationship to the transaction under review than external comparables. The financial analysis may be easier and more reliable as it will presumably...
TPG2022 Chapter III paragraph 3.24A comparable uncontrolled transaction is a transaction between two independent parties that is comparable to the controlled transaction under examination. It can be either a comparable transaction between one party to the controlled transaction and an independent party (“internal comparable”) or between two independent enterprises, neither of which is a...
TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.64The transactional net margin method examines the net profit relative to an appropriate base (e.g. costs, sales, assets) that a taxpayer realises from a controlled transaction (or transactions that are appropriate to aggregate under the principles of paragraphs 3.9-3.12). Thus, a transactional net margin method operates in a manner similar...
TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.17In considering whether controlled and uncontrolled transactions are comparable, regard should be had to the effect on price of broader business functions other than just product comparability (i.e. factors relevant to determining comparability under Chapter I). Where differences exist between the controlled and uncontrolled transactions or between the enterprises undertaking...
TPG2022 Chapter II paragraph 2.16It may be difficult to find a transaction between independent enterprises that is similar enough to a controlled transaction such that no differences have a material effect on price. For example, a minor difference in the property transferred in the controlled and uncontrolled transactions could materially affect the price even...
TPG2022 Chapter X paragraph 10.95Whereas it is unlikely that an MNE group’s average interest rate paid on its external debt meets the comparability requirements to be considered as an internal CUP, it may be possible to identify potential comparable loans within the borrower’s or its MNE group’s financing with an independent lender as the...
Iceland vs Íslenska kalkþörungafélagið ehf., February 2026, Court of Appeal, Case No 213/2025Íslenska kalkþörungafélagið ehf. ("the Icelandic Limestone Algae Company") operated a calcified algae factory in Iceland, harvesting seaweed from the seabed, cleaning, drying and exporting it almost entirely to its Irish parent company, Marigot Ltd. Marigot Ltd. further processed the raw material in...
Chile vs Nissan Chile SpA, March 2026, Tax Court, Case No RUC 20-9-0000334-0Nissan Chile SpA, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. (Japan), was incorporated in Chile in August 2014 to take over the direct distribution of Nissan-branded vehicles and spare parts previously handled by an independent distributor, Distribuidora Automotriz Marubeni Limitada. Operati...

Supplemental Guidance

Copyright 2026 TPcases