Meaning
Statutory provisions in the national tax code authorise tax administrations to adjust the taxable income of enterprises that engage in non-arm’s length transactions with related parties. Under the corporate income tax law article 41, the tax bureau holds the power to reconstruct transaction prices when related-party dealings reduce the taxable profit of a domestic enterprise. This article governs all transfer pricing practices, including product sales, service fees, asset transfers, and intercompany financing arrangements.
By codifying the arm’s length principle into primary law, this provision provides the foundation for the entire transfer pricing audit regime of the country. This statutory adjustment authority does not apply when the taxpayer can prove that the transactions were conducted on commercial terms identical to those between independent firms.
Adjustment Authority
The tax authority is empowered to make retrospective adjustments up to ten years from the tax year in which the non-compliant transaction occurred. If an enterprise fails to provide adequate documentation or operates at an artificially low profit level, the local tax bureau can initiate a formal audit. The law allows the administration to use various transfer pricing methods to determine the correct arm’s length price, such as the comparable uncontrolled price or the transactional net margin method.
In addition to the unpaid tax, the administration imposes an interest surcharge on the adjusted amount, which is calculated based on the central bank’s benchmark lending rate plus a penalty spread. This interest charge incentivises multinational companies to comply with the arm’s length standard and to maintain proper contemporaneous transfer pricing documentation.
Related Parties
Defining the relationship that triggers the application of this article involves assessing both equity ownership and operational control. Related parties include entities where one party directly or indirectly holds at least twenty-five percent of the shares of the other. The relationship also exists when a third party holds twenty-five percent or more of both entities, or when one enterprise exercises de facto control over the other through debt financing, technology licensing, or executive appointments.
If any of these conditions are met, all transactions between the entities are subject to the transfer pricing rules of this article. The law ensures that even if the formal equity threshold is not reached, any operational dependence that distorts transaction pricing can be scrutinized.
Compliance Burden
Taxpayers must manage their compliance risks by compiling and updating a three-tiered transfer pricing documentation set consisting of a master file, a local file, and a special file. The local file must contain a detailed functional and risk analysis, a comparison of the selected transactions, and the financial data of the comparable companies used to justify the pricing. Failure to submit this documentation within the statutory timeframe exposes the enterprise to penalties and increases the likelihood of a tax audit.
In cases where the enterprise cannot reach an agreement with the local tax bureau, it may seek administrative reconsideration or file a lawsuit in the people’s court. However, the high technical complexity of transfer pricing cases means that administrative resolution through negotiation is far more common than litigation.