Working Paper 220

Advanced pricing agreements (APAs) aim to prevent transfer pricing (TP) disputes, increase certainty, and ultimately reduce the TP risk. This is achieved through taxpayers and tax authorities agreeing in advance on the criteria for determining the arm’s length pricing of transactions. These agreements are typically valid for several years, assuming that critical assumptions remain unchanged.

Interest in APAs has been steadily increasing, seemingly partly due to Action 14 of the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) project, which recommends the facilitation of effective dispute resolution mechanisms. This includes the use of Bilateral Advance Pricing Agreements (BAPAs) where feasible.

Many studies on APAs have largely focused on high-income countries – when they feature low- and lower-middle-income countries (LLMICs) it is mainly China and India. The challenges LLMICs face when enforcing TP legislation are different to those faced by high-income countries. This paper addresses this gap by presenting the findings of a study on four LLMICs – Indonesia and Vietnam, which have active APA programmes, and Nigeria and Uganda, which have APA provisions in their legislation but have yet to operationalise their regimes.

By examining the lived experience of these countries the study aims to interrogate the challenges faced, and provide recommendations for implementing APA regimes in LLMICs, which have not been as prominently featured in existing literature.

Based on interviews with various stakeholders in the case study countries, we reasonably conclude that a properly implemented APA regime can benefit LLMICs. It can increase tax certainty, and improve the relationship both between tax authorities and taxpayers, and tax authorities and treaty partners.

However, despite being beneficial, an APA regime should not be an automatic policy choice. A pragmatic approach should be taken, especially where a country’s TP regime is still in the early stages of implementation, or where, despite being present, the revenue authority has not built taxpayer confidence through consistent administration of TP regulations. Where a decision is made to implement an APA regime, investing in building the capacity of TP units plays a crucial role in developing and running a successful APA regime.

Authors

Mary Ongore

Mary Ongore is a Kenyan legal professional with extensive experience in taxation. She holds an LLB degree from the University of Leeds, and an LLM in Tax Law from Queen Mary University of London. She is a PhD candidate at the University of Nairobi, specialising in tax. Her research revolves around international tax, fiscal policy, and illicit financial flows. Mary worked as a Tax Advisor at KPMG in the UK, and an employment tax advisor at Zurich Insurance in the UK. She has since worked for Strathmore University as a Doctoral Fellow, at the University of Nairobi as a Tutorial Fellow, and at Dentons Hamilton Harrison & Mathews as a Tax Associate. She has conducted research on tax and gender, tax treaties, tax and human rights, and taxpayers’ rights as an independent consultant

Prisca Musibi

Prisca Musibi is an early career tax researcher. She has diverse experience in domestic and international tax law from her time at a leading Big 4 firm in Nairobi, as well as engagements with think tanks in Nairobi and Geneva. Prisca holds an LL.M specialising in International Taxation from the University of Cape Town, South Africa, and is an advocate of the High Court of Kenya.
Download
Read the 2-page brief
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.