US vs GlaxoSmithKline Holdings, September 2006, IR-2006-142

Posted on | By Courts of the US
Category: Intangibles - Goodwill Know-how Patents, Valuation - DCF and CUT/CUPs | Tag: , , ,
« | »

In September 2006 the Internal Revenue Service announced that it has successfully resolved a transfer pricing dispute with Glaxo SmithKline.

Under the settlement agreement, GSK will pay the Internal Revenue Service approximately $3.4 billion, and will abandon its claim seeking a refund of $1.8 billion in overpaid income taxes, as part of an agreement to resolve the parties’ long-running  transfer pricing dispute for the tax years 1989 through 2005.

See also the GlaxoSmithKlein decision from july 2001

The IRS announcement

US glaxosmithkline_no_5750-04_2006-irs__settlement

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 IV paragraph 4.31 Paragraph 5 of Article 25, which was incorporated in the OECD Model Tax Convention in 2008, provides that, in mutual agreement procedure cases in which the competent authorities are unable to reach an agreement within two years of the initiation of the case under paragraph 1 of Article 25, the...
TPG2022 Chapter VI Annex I example 13 42. The facts in this example are the same as those set out in Example 10 with the following additions: At the end of Year 3, Primair stops manufacturing watches and contracts with a third party to manufacture them on its behalf. As a result, Company S will import unbranded...
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 VI Annex I example 8 20. Primair, a resident of country X, manufactures watches which are marketed in many countries around the world under the R trademark and trade name. Primair is the registered owner of the R trademark and trade name. The R name is widely known in countries where the watches are sold...
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 VI Annex I example 12 39. The facts in this example are the same as in Example 9 with the following additions: By the end of Year 3, the R brand is successfully established in the country Y market and Primair and Company S renegotiate their earlier agreement and enter into a new long-term licensing...
TPG2022 Chapter VI Annex I example 6 14. In Year 1, a multinational group comprised of Company A (a country A corporation) and Company B (a country B corporation) decides to develop an intangible, which is anticipated to be highly profitable based on Company B’s existing intangibles, its track record and its experienced research and development staff....
Transfer Pricing in the Mining Industry Like other sectors of the economy, there are base erosion and profit shifting risks in the mining sector. Based on the ongoing work on BEPS, the IGF (Intergovernmental Forum on Mining) and OECD has released guidance for source countries on transfer pricing in the mining sector. The transfer pricing and...