Tag: Management services

See: Intra-group services

France vs Rayonnages de France, February 2022, CAA of Douai, No 19DA01682

France vs Rayonnages de France, February 2022, CAA of Douai, No 19DA01682

Rayonnages de France paid royalties and management fees to a related Portuguese company. Following an audit for FY 2010 – 2012 the French tax authorities denied tax deductions for the payments by reference to the the arm’s length principle. The court of first instance decided in favor of the tax authorities and Rayonnages de France then filed an appeal with the CAA of Douai. Judgement of the CAA The Court of appeal upheld the decision of the court of first instance and decided in favor of the tax authorities. Excerpt “However, as the Minister points out, in order to be eligible for deduction, the management services invoiced by VJ Trans.Fer to SARL Rayonnages de France must necessarily cover tasks distinct from those relating to the day-to-day management of the latter company, which were the responsibility of Mr B. as statutory manager of SARL Rayonnages de France, it being for the latter to determine, where appropriate, the remuneration to be paid ... Read more
Panama vs "Construction S.A.", December 2021, Administrative Tax Court, Case No TAT- RF-111 (112/2019)

Panama vs “Construction S.A.”, December 2021, Administrative Tax Court, Case No TAT- RF-111 (112/2019)

“Construction Service S.A.” is active in Design, Repair and Construction of buildings. During the FY 2011-2013 it paid for services – management services and construction services – rendered from related parties. Following an audit the tax authorities issued an assessment where payments for these services had been adjusted by reference to the arm’s length principle. According to the authorities the benchmark studies in the company’s transfer pricing documentation suffered from comparability defects and moreover it had not been sufficiently demonstrated that the services had been effectively provided. The tax authorities pointed out that since the company is not considered comparable to the taxpayer, the interquartile range would be from 5.15% to 8.30% with a median of 5.70%; therefore, the taxpayer’s operating margin of 4.07% is outside the interquartile range. Not satisfied with the adjustment “Construction Service S.A.” filed an appeal with the Tax Court Judgement of the Tax Court The court ruled in favour of “construction S.A” and revoked the ... Read more
Romania vs A. Romania S.R.L., April 2021, Supreme Administrative Court, Case No 2644/2021

Romania vs A. Romania S.R.L., April 2021, Supreme Administrative Court, Case No 2644/2021

A. Romania S.R.L. had purchased services from A. Nederland BV and A. CZ Holding sro, and the costs of the services had been deducted for tax purposes. At issue was whether these services had actually been provided to the benefit of A. Romania S.R.L. and if so whether the costs were deductible under Romanian tax provisions. According to the tax authorities it was not possible to identify the services actually provided, as the documentation provided was only general data on the types of services invoiced, such as: group services, taxes and contributions, other group services. No supporting documents had been submitted to show that the services were actually provided. Furthermore, according to Romanian tax provisions – paragraph 41 of H.G. no. 44/2004 – the costs of administration, management, control, consultancy or similar functions are borne by the parent company and no remuneration can be claimed for these activities from the affiliated persons, thus the expenses are not deductible for tax ... Read more
Romania vs S.C. A., March 2021, Supreme Administrative Court, Case No 1955/2021

Romania vs S.C. A., March 2021, Supreme Administrative Court, Case No 1955/2021

S.C. A. had paid for intra group services in FY 2013 and 2014 and deducted the costs for tax purposes. The purchases of services were made on the basis of a management services contract concluded with related party C. S.A. and a production service contract, logistics service contract, product management service contract and service contract concluded with related party B. The tax authorities had issued an assessment where deductions for the costs had been denied. The court of first instance set aside the tax assessment. Judgement of Supreme Administrative Court The Supreme Administrative Court upheld the decision from the court of first instance and decided in favor of S.C. A. Excerpts “As regards the necessity of providing the services The High Court finds that the expert held, with regard to that aspect, that by the contracts concluded, C. S.A. and B. undertook to carry out for the applicant multiple and complex activities requiring the allocation of a large amount of ... Read more
Russia vs Ashin Steel Trading House, February 2019, Court of Appeal, Case No. A76-19287/2018

Russia vs Ashin Steel Trading House, February 2019, Court of Appeal, Case No. A76-19287/2018

A group company, PI, purportedly provided management services to the Ashin Steel Trading House. During the audit for FY 2013-2015 the tax authority came to the conclusions that Ashin Steel Trading House and the PI had “deliberately created a management relationship scheme so that service providers are listed on the staff of an entrepreneur who pays tax on the ONS with the object of taxation “income””. Significant sums of money was transferred to PIs in the form of payments for the provision of management services for their subsequent withdrawal and to the accounts of an individual (from the accounts of the PI), which allowed the Company to minimize tax revenues. The tax authority recalculated the Company’s expenses for the management services, using a combination of transfer pricing methods – cost plus and comparable profitability. The Decision of the Court of Appeal: The CUP method has priority, but in cases where it is not subject to application, the tax authority has ... Read more
Italy vs Alfa Gomma Sud s.r.l. July 2014, Supreme Court 16480

Italy vs Alfa Gomma Sud s.r.l. July 2014, Supreme Court 16480

The tax authorities had issued an assessment where deductibility of service costs charged to an Italien company had been disallowed for tax purposes, as the Italien company – according to the tax authorities – had not provided sufficient proof of the benefits from the purported services received (marketing, telephone, EDP and legal, accounting and tax consultancy services). Judgement of the Supreme court. The Court dismissed the appeal of Alfa Gomma and ruled in favor of the tax administration.. Excerpts from the Judgement “By the second ground, alleging infringement of Article 2697 of the Civil Code, the appellant criticises the judgment of appeal in so far as it finds that Alfa Gomma Sud did not discharge its burden of proof, since the documentation produced does not make it possible to carry out an adequate check as to the existence, relevance and usefulness of the costs of the services charged by the parent company Alfa Gomma SpA. It submits that, in so ... Read more
Bulgaria vs X EOOD, May 2012, Supreme Administrative Court, Case No 6788

Bulgaria vs X EOOD, May 2012, Supreme Administrative Court, Case No 6788

In 2010 the tax authorities issued an assessment, in the part concerning a service contract entered by X EOOD with a related party. In regards of the service contract, the tax authority established that some of the services were actually performed as X EOOD did not have the necessary staff and resources to perform them. The dispute was related to management services allegedly performed by the related party. An appeal was filed by X EOOD The Administrative Court referred to the provision of Article 16(2)(4) of the Income Tax Act, according to which the payment of remuneration or benefits for services without those services having actually been rendered is also regarded as an evasion of taxation, and therefore held that the complaint in that part was unfounded. An appeal was then filed with the Supreme Administrative Court Judgement of the Supreme Administrative Court The Supreme Administrative Court upheld the decision of the Administrative Court and decided in favour of the ... Read more

Korea vs Levi’s, September 2006, Supreme Court, Case no 2004두7955

Korea vs Levi’s – Supreme Court case No. 2004두7955 Management support services Click here for translation Korean-TP-case-Levis-2004두7955 ... Read more