Tag: CUT method
A transfer pricing methodology used in the US, which determines an arm’s length royalty rate for an intangible by reference to uncontrolled transfers of comparable intangible property under comparable circumstances.
/ Comparability, Cost Contribution Arrangements, Cost sharing agreement, CUT method, Intangibles, Know-how, License agreement, Medtronic, Puerto Rico, Royalties, Transfer Pricing Methods
The IRS was of the opinion, that Medtronic erred in allocating the profit earned from its devises and leads between its businesses located in the United States and its device manufacturer in Puerto Rico. To determine the arm’s length price for Medtronic’s intercompany licensing agreements the comparable profits method was therefor applied by the IRS, rather than the comparable uncontrolled transaction (CUT) used by Medtronic. Medtronic brought the case to the Tax Court. The Tax Court applied its own valuation analysis and concluded that the Pacesetter agreement was the best CUT to calculate the arm’s length result for intangible property. This decision from the Tax Court was then appealed by the IRS to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeal found that the Tax Court’s factual findings were insufficient to enable the Court to conduct an evaluation of Tax Court’s determination. Specifically, the Tax Court failed to: address whether the circumstances of the Pacesetter settlement was comparable to the licensing ... Continue to full case
/ Akin to a sale, Cost Contribution Arrangements, Cost sharing agreement, CSA regs, CUT method, DCF model, Delaware, Digital Economy, Indefinite useful life, Intangibles - Goodwill Know-how Patents, Ireland, Luxembourg, Platform Contribution Transaction, Pre-existing intangibles, Relief from Royalty method, Stock-based compensation, Tax Avoidance Schemes, Transfer Pricing Methods, Valuation, Valuation - DCF and CUT/CUPs
Amazon is an online retailer that sells products through Amazon.com and related websites. Amazon also sells third-party products for which it receives a commissions. In a series of transactions in 2005 and 2006, Amazon US transferred intangibles to Amazon Europe, a newly established European HQ placed in Luxembourg. A Cost Sharing Arrangement (“CSA”), whereby Amazon US and Amazon Europe agreed to share costs of further research, development, and marketing in proportion to the benefits A License Agreement, whereby Amazon US granted Amazon Europe the right to Amazon US’s Technology IP An Assignment Agreement, whereby Amazon US granted Amazon Europe the right to Amazon US’s Marketing IP and Customer Lists. For these transfers Amazon Europe was required to make an upfront buy-in payment and annual payments according to the cost sharing arrangement for ongoing developments of the intangibles. In the valuation, Amazon had considered the intangibles to have a lifetime of 6 to 20 years. On that basis, the buy-in payment for pre-existing ... Continue to full case
/ CUT method, Intangibles, Intangibles - Goodwill Know-how Patents, Know-how, License, Pharmaceutical, Profit potential, Puerto Rico, Royalties, Royalty and License Payments, Transfer Pricing Methods
The IRS argued that Medtronic Inc failed to accurately account for the value of trade secrets and other intangibles owned by Medtronic Inc and used by Medtronic’s Puerto Rico manufacturing subsidiary in 2005 and 2006 when determening the royalty payments from the subsidiary. In 2016 the United States Tax Court found in favor of Medtronic, sustaining the use of the CUT method to analyze royalty payments. The Court also found that adjustments to the CUT were required. These included additional adjustments not initially applied by Medtronic Inc for know-how, profit potential and scope of product. The decision from the United States Tax Court has been appealed by the IRS in 2017. US-Memo-2016-112-Medtronic-v.-Commissioner ... Continue to full case