Share

Dispute resolution

Mutual Agreement Procedure Statistics for 2018

 

The report on BEPS Action 14 (Making Dispute Resolution Mechanisms More Effective) contains a commitment by jurisdictions to implement a minimum standard to ensure that they resolve treaty-related disputes in a timely, effective and efficient manner. All members of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS (IF) commit to the implementation of the Action 14 minimum standard which includes timely and complete reporting of mutual agreement procedure (MAP) statistics pursuant to an agreed reporting framework. The 2018 MAP statistics are reported under this new framework. They cover all the members that joined the IF prior to 2019.

 

2018 MAP Statistics at a glance

 

All cases* 2018 Start inventory Cases started in 2018 Cases closed End inventory
Cases received prior to 1 January 2016 or of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework 4586 0 1231 3355
Cases received on or after 1 January 2016 or of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework 2338 2385 1473 3250

* New cases (cases received on or after 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework) are counted using an agreed methodology that uses a common start date and allows for reconciliation of all MAP cases between members of the Inclusive Framework thus eliminating double counting. Old cases (cases received prior to 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework) were based on each reporting jurisdictions’ own methodology without a jurisdiction by jurisdiction breakdown and the possibility of reconciliation. Aggregate reporting for old cases therefore included double counting of cases reported by two reporting jurisdictions in their respective inventory. 

MAP Outcomes
(cases closed in 2018)


(Click to enlarge)

 

2018 MAP Statistics per reporting jurisdiction

The 2018 MAP statistics are also available per reporting jurisdiction.

 

Cases received prior to or after 1 January 2016 or 1 january of the year of joining the beps inclusive framework

In the MAP Statistics Reporting Framework, a distinction is made between the cases received before or as from 1 January 2016, which is the date as from when the reporting jurisdictions committed to the implementation of the Action 14 minimum standard. For the jurisdictions that joined the inclusive framework after 31 December 2016, the distinction is made between the cases received before or as from 1 January of the year of joining the Inclusive  Framework on BEPS (IF membership).


 

  • The cases received before 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the Inclusive Framework on BEPS (IF membership) are cases that were in the inventory of the jurisdictions before they committed to the implementation of the Action 14 minimum standard. The number of cases in such category will decrease over time.
  • The cases received as from 1 January 2017 or 1 January of the year of joining the Inclusive Framework on BEPS (IF membership) are cases that started after the jurisdictions committed to the implementation of the Action 14 minimum standard. The share of cases in such category will increase over time and eventually will cover all cases in a jurisdiction’s inventory.

 

The main differences between the two categories are the following: 

Cases received before 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the Inclusive Framework on BEPS   Cases received on or after 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the Inclusive Framework on BEPS
  • Each jurisdiction can follow its own computation rules
  • No reporting on a jurisdiction basis
  • No possibility to identify the cases that are reported twice by jurisdictions that have cases in common 
 
  • All reporting jurisdictions follow the computation rules set in the MAP Statistics Reporting Framework
  • Reporting on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis 
  • All cases initiated in one jurisdiction are also reported in the other jurisdiction involved
  • Possibility to avoid double counting by identifying the cases that the reporting jurisdictions have in common

 Transfer pricing cases and other cases

The agreed reporting framework now makes a distinction between "attribution/allocation" cases and "other" cases.

An attribution/allocation case (called here a "transfer pricing case") is a MAP case where the taxpayer’s MAP request relates to either:

  • the attribution of profits to a permanent establishment (see e.g. Article 7 of the OECD Model Tax Convention); or
  • the determination of profits between associated enterprises (see e.g. Article 9 of the OECD Model Tax Convention).

 

Any MAP case that is not an attribution / allocation MAP case is considered as an "other" MAP case.

Note: while these definitions belong to the set of rules applicable for cases started as from 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework (IF membership), the jurisdictions may have used different definitions for cases that started before 1 January 2016 and specify in the notes of their own statistics the definitions they have used. See also above for more details about the distinction between cases started before or as from 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework (IF membership).


 

Transfer pricing cases* Start inventory Cases started Cases closed End inventory
Cases received prior to 1 January 2016 or of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework  2599 0 754  1845
Cases received on or after 1 January 2016 or of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework   1132 930 394 1668
         
Other cases* Start inventory Cases started Cases closed End inventory
Cases received prior to 1 January 2016 or of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework  1987 0 477   1510
Cases received on or after 1 January 2016 or of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework  1206 1455 1079 1582

* New cases (cases received on or after 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework) are counted using an agreed methodology that uses a common start date and allows for reconciliation of all MAP cases between members of the Inclusive Framework thus eliminating double counting. Old cases (cases received prior to 1 January 2016 or 1 January of the year of joining the BEPS Inclusive Framework) were based on each reporting jurisdictions’ own methodology without a jurisdiction by jurisdiction breakdown and the possibility of reconciliation. Aggregate reporting for old cases therefore included double counting of cases reported by two reporting jurisdictions in their respective inventory. 

Further information is available: 

For transfer pricing cases For other cases
See the table that summarises the 2018 MAP caseload per jurisdiction for transfer pricing cases See the table that summarises the 2018 MAP caseload per jurisdiction for other cases
See also the graph that presents the evolution of MAP inventory per jurisdiction for transfer pricing cases See also the graph that presents the evolution of MAP inventory per jurisdiction for other cases

 

FURTHER INFORMATION

MAP statistics for reporting periods 2006 to 20152016 and 2017 are still available for OECD member countries and a number of non-OECD economies that have agreed to provide such statistics for these periods. Action 14 develops solutions to address obstacles that prevent countries from solving treaty-related disputes under MAP, via a minimum standard in this area as well as a number of best practices. It also includes arbitration as an option for willing countries.

·        

 

 

Also AvailableEgalement disponible(s)