US vs Seagate Tech, 1994, US Tax Court 102 T.C. 149

« | »

In the Seagate Tech case the US Tax Court was asked to decide on several distinct transfer pricing issues arising out of a transfer pricing adjustments issued by the IRS.

  1. Whether respondent’s reallocations of gross income under section 482 for the years in issue are arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable;
  2. whether respondent should bear the burden of proof for any of the issues involved in the instant case;
  3. whether petitioner Seagate Technology, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as Seagate Scotts Valley), paid Seagate Technology Singapore, Pte. Ltd. (Seagate Singapore), a wholly owned subsidiary of Seagate Scotts Valley, arm’s-length prices for component parts;
  4. whether Seagate Scotts Valley paid Seagate Singapore arm’s-length prices for completed disk drives;
  5. whether Seagate Singapore paid Seagate Scotts Valley arm’s-length royalties for the use of certain intangibles;
  6. whether the royalty fee Seagate Singapore paid Seagate Scotts Valley for disk drives covered under a section 367 private letter ruling applies to all such disk drives shipped to the United States, regardless of where title passed;
  7. whether the procurement services fees Seagate Singapore paid Seagate Scotts Valley were arm’s length;
  8. whether the consideration Seagate Singapore paid Seagate Scotts Valley pursuant to a cost-sharing agreement was arm’s length; and
  9. whether Seagate Scotts Valley is entitled to offsets for warranty payments Seagate Singapore paid to Seagate Scotts Valley.

 

US-vs-SEAGATE-TECH-US-TC-149-1994


Related US regulations and OECD guidelines

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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