Meaning
Methodology used to distribute the costs of centralized services among different entities within a corporate group. These intragroup service allocations involve charging for shared functions such as human resources, legal support, information technology management and procurement. The state taxation administration requires that these charges reflect the arm’s length principle.
It ensures that profits are not shifted between jurisdictions through artificial service fees.
Allocation Method
Cost distribution typically relies on keys such as headcount, revenue, or specific usage hours for the provided service. An entity applying intragroup service allocations must choose a key that reflects the actual economic benefit received by the local subsidiary. Indirect methods are common for administrative overhead while direct methods apply to specific project work.
The chosen metric should be consistent across all participating affiliates to maintain tax transparency.
Benefit Evidence
Taxpayers must demonstrate that the service provided a commercial value that an independent party would be willing to pay for under similar circumstances. Documentation for intragroup service allocations must include service agreements, proof of delivery, a detailed breakdown of the cost pool and project reports. If the service is merely a shareholder activity that only benefits the parent company, the tax bureau will likely disallow the deduction.
Detailed logs serve as the primary evidence during an audit.
Regulatory Scrutiny
Chinese tax authorities pay close attention to management fees and technical support charges sent to offshore headquarters. Circular 16 provides the legal framework for evaluating whether intragroup service allocations are legitimate or constitute a hidden profit distribution. Deductibility is often challenged if the service is duplicative or provides no direct local advantage.
Companies must prepare a local file that justifies the pricing and the necessity of the services to avoid large tax adjustments.